45 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

So I was feeling a bit masochistic this weekend and repeatedly solo dropped in my DDC & Boar's Head, trying several builds to get these two mechs to perform in a way that I'd like them to.


Consistently the biggest frustration came from all of the, non-missile, weapon mounts being so damned low.


And I thought "if only the ballistic mount was placed the same way it is on the Shadowhawk".


But then I went to sarna, and saw this:

http://www.sarna.net...3025_Atlas1.jpg


Well, MWO stayed pretty true to what that (and other iterations) looked like.


Do we fault PGI for when they stay true to this stuff, because the makers of that game didn't really need to worry about those mounts making no sense in an action/fps style game?

They didn't have to worry about boulders preventing you from firing on enemies that have no problem firing on you.


The reason I made this thread is because yes, JJs are very strong and allow mechs that have them to do things that other mechs can't - but after playing Jagers and Stalkers I feel those mechs are at least closer in overall playability without JJs in that they aren't outright penalized by their physical design/hardpoint location.


JJs mechs/poptarts would still have an advantage, but at the very least it wouldn't be painful to play knuckle dragging mechs like the Cataphract 4X or DDC - and maybe, just maybe, the gap would at least be a little bit closer.



How true do you fans of BT think PGI has to stay to those old (awful) pictures from TT/Sarna, etc?

Would it be OK for PGI to deviate from that artwork for better playability (unlikely to see changes to existing mechs, I'm a realist, but I like to dream sometimes)?

Edited by Ultimatum X, 19 May 2014 - 10:02 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Just put some lrms on it stand in the back until the end of the game and the walk around killing everyone with a fresh 100ton mech like most assault players do.

[Karl Streiger]

You mean madness like this one?


Before placing weapons at other positions we my think how we can change that "Mech art" has such impact on the game.

Although the inability of the Atlas to use vertical cover - means you need other kinds of movement? Its no sniper. The best results on Atlas Mechs i have when played as Anchor. You have Mechs on your side, before and behind you. Trade blows at any ranges.

You can have Gauss and PPCs but also have a decent punch at short range - so that you can dictate the range you want to fight at

Edited by Karl Streiger, 19 May 2014 - 06:56 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Please note the Atlas has arms straight down not bent at the Elbow. It could raise its arm at the shoulder and fire from a much better elevation!

[Flyby215]

I've always felt that mechs with high mounted weapons certainly have an advantage with ridge humping, but that's about it. Thinking about high-mounted weapons, there'd be the Jagermech, Catapult, Stalker, Blackjack, maybe Jenner and Raven... Maybe Battlemaster (the torso lasers).

The Jagermech tends to be pretty wide, with easy to knock out arms and side-torsos. The Catapult is basically a walking CT, and the Blackjack has relatively little armour. The lights can't really do much with the high-mounted weapons because if they stand still and attempt to ridge-hump they'll get one-shotted. Even the Hunchback's high-mounted weapons in the hunch are just begging to be destroyed with that absurdly huge hunch and the low armour of a medium class.

Things considered, I would think all these mechs with the high-mounted weapons have significant disadvantages (except maybe the Stalker, but perhaps that is why it has bad torso-twist).

Not sure the disadvantage to a Shadowhawk's high-mounts yet... and indeed JJ's sort of eliminate the problem altogether.

[Bilbo]

Monkey Lover, on 19 May 2014 - 06:51 AM, said:

Just put some lrms on it stand in the back until the end of the game and the walk around killing everyone with a fresh 100ton mech like most assault players do.

I should try this approach. Sounds pretty effective.

[Ultimax]

Monkey Lover, on 19 May 2014 - 06:51 AM, said:

Just put some lrms on it stand in the back until the end of the game and the walk around killing everyone with a fresh 100ton mech like most assault players do.

I've done that a few times, it's boring as all hell.

So usually I just hop into my Misery instead, snipe at enemies with 2x PPCs on my approach without exposing me entire body to return fire and then when I get to close quarters the real fun starts.

Karl Streiger, on 19 May 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

You mean madness like this one?

Exactly like that!

Joseph Mallan, on 19 May 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Please note the Atlas has arms straight down not bent at the Elbow. It could raise its arm at the shoulder and fire from a much better elevation!

If only...


You mean those actuators are supposed to do something other than take up critical space that could let me cram more DHS in?

Flyby215, on 19 May 2014 - 06:58 AM, said:

I've always felt that mechs with high mounted weapons certainly have an advantage with ridge humping, but that's about it. Thinking about high-mounted weapons, there'd be the Jagermech, Catapult, Stalker, Blackjack, maybe Jenner and Raven... Maybe Battlemaster (the torso lasers).

The Jagermech tends to be pretty wide, with easy to knock out arms and side-torsos. The Catapult is basically a walking CT, and the Blackjack has relatively little armour. The lights can't really do much with the high-mounted weapons because if they stand still and attempt to ridge-hump they'll get one-shotted. Even the Hunchback's high-mounted weapons in the hunch are just begging to be destroyed with that absurdly huge hunch and the low armour of a medium class.

Things considered, I would think all these mechs with the high-mounted weapons have significant disadvantages (except maybe the Stalker, but perhaps that is why it has bad torso-twist).

Not sure the disadvantage to a Shadowhawk's high-mounts yet... and indeed JJ's sort of eliminate the problem altogether.

The difference in this case is that the Atlas' arms would still be where they were and the 1x or 2x ACs would be on it's shoulder as in Karl's photo.

That's how the Shadowhawk has them, and it's fantastic - plus you still get to block body blows with your Right angle arms.

[Karl Streiger]

Ultimatum X, on 19 May 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

Exactly like that!

Heretic... we need more Infernos...burn him burn him

[Trauglodyte]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 May 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Please note the Atlas has arms straight down not bent at the Elbow. It could raise its arm at the shoulder and fire from a much better elevation!

I made a post probably over a year ago about how "Free Look" should be more viable. 99% (abritrary statistic) of the people that even know about it, which aren't many, think that it is just a "cool" way of looking around your cockpit when, in reality, it is a means of moving your arms independently from your torso. Would be awfully nice if, instead, it actually straightened your arms out OR, if it is necessary to keep Free Look, they added a functionality like that. The arm weapons on the Atlas and many other mechs don't hold the bulk of the fire power but it is enough to allow me to fight when terrain/range otherwise prevents me from doing so.

[Ultimax]

Karl Streiger, on 19 May 2014 - 07:12 AM, said:

Heretic... we need more Infernos...burn him burn him

I'm happy to be labelled a heretic in the name of playability.

There's probably a good reason why the main gun on tanks aren't mounted on the mid/lower glacis with poor ability to swivel...

[Pjwned]

Monkey Lover, on 19 May 2014 - 06:51 AM, said:

Just put some lrms on it stand in the back until the end of the game and the walk around killing everyone with a fresh 100ton mech like most assault players do.

I love it when I plant a UAV down and it spots the entire enemy team around a big corner (on Tourmaline Desert) with our team clumped up right nearby, so I move to flank only to find half the team (mostly assaults & heavies) is still hiding behind cover in hopes of spamming LRMs despite no way of landing them.

True story, we lost that match too.

[Ultimax]

Pjwned, on 19 May 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

I love it when I plant a UAV down and it spots the entire enemy team around a big corner (on Tourmaline Desert) with our team clumped up right nearby, so I move to flank only to find half the team (mostly assaults & heavies) is still hiding behind cover in hopes of spamming LRMs despite no way of landing them.

True story, we lost that match too.

Indeed.

On the other hand, 9/10 times this weekend there were clear moments when it was time to push.

So I'd let the team know I was doing that, they'd either:

A: Not push. At all.
B: Push, but as soon as someone farted in their general direction - turn tail and run.
C: Push!



So I'm not sure if the whole thing is chicken / egg, people don't want to push because people don't push.


Nothing is more fun than committing to a push in a 100 ton mech, only have 2 or 3 full lances of teammates run away while everyone is shooting you.

It's kind of satisfying at least to watch them (often, but not always) slowly die, one by one, afterwards.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 19 May 2014 - 07:52 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Quote

here's probably a good reason why the main gun on tanks aren't mounted on the mid/lower glacis with poor ability to swive

as a WoT Hetzer AC20 lover i have to disagree again ;-)

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Scaling and weapon mounts are a very important feature that I think gets glossed over when they are creating the models/artwork for the mechs.

It really starts to be an issue when you start boating too.

That and jump jets are two of my very major pet peeves with the game.

[Ultimax]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Scaling and weapon mounts are a very important feature that I think gets glossed over when they are creating the models/artwork for the mechs.

It's definitely a big impact on performance.

Unfortunately this isn't the only game I've where art design has impact performance.

It often seems that the art team just does their thing and may or may not be getting/taking into consideration balance/gameplay effects.

In the case of the Atlas, they are even working off of source material that is often defended by some pretty surly grognards.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 19 May 2014 - 08:42 AM.

[Ultimax]

Karl Streiger, on 19 May 2014 - 08:23 AM, said:

as a WoT Hetzer AC20 lover i have to disagree again ;-)

I knew I should have said "most".


Besides that tank would be totally useless in this game, unless your goal is to destroy the rocks at the feet of mechs.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 19 May 2014 - 08:47 AM.

[Diablobo]

The Clan mechs will be the biggest problems with weapon mounts and designs. All of them have a bunch of weapons in low slung arms that will have very low firing arcs. They might look cool, but in practice they will suck.

[Agent of Change]

Actually I'm going to say the issue is not necessarily with the design of the mechs (though it may be in part), the problem as i see it is that due to a number of factors (*cough* stupid convergence *cough* bad weapon balance *cough*) the average "Time To Kill" is way too freaking fast, to the point where a 100 Ton god of the battlefield like an Atlas feels the need to hide behind a boulder like a scared little princess soiling her pretty pink dress instead of striding across the battlefield unleashing the destruction contained within like a god damned unstoppable force of nature.

So yeah the problem is not "Why can't my Atlas effectively fight from behind cover?" and more " Why the **** does my goddamned Atlas need cover to fight effectively?"

Edited by Agent of Change, 19 May 2014 - 09:50 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Agent of Change, on 19 May 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

Actually I'm going to say the issue is not necessarily with the design of the mechs (though it may be in part), the problem as i see it is that due to a number of factors (*cough* stupid convergence *cough* bad weapon balance *cough*) the average "Time To Kill" is way too freaking fast, to the point where a 100 Ton god of the battlefield like an Atlas feels the need to hide behind a boulder like a scared little princess soiling her pretty pink dress instead of striding across the battlefield unleashing the destruction contained within like a god damned unstoppable force of nature.

So yeah the problem is not "Why can't my Atlas effectively fight from behind cover?" and more " Why the **** does my goddamned Atlas need cover to fight effectively?"

Because on TT using Concentrated Fire even an Atlas can die in 30 seconds.

[Merrick]

Agent of Change, on 19 May 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

Actually I'm going to say the issue is not necessarily with the design of the mechs (though it may be in part), the problem as i see it is that due to a number of factors (*cough* stupid convergence *cough* bad weapon balance *cough*) the average "Time To Kill" is way too freaking fast, to the point where a 100 Ton god of the battlefield like an Atlas feels the need to hide behind a boulder like a scared little princess soiling her pretty pink dress instead of striding across the battlefield unleashing the destruction contained within like a god damned unstoppable force of nature.

So yeah the problem is not "Why can't my Atlas effectively fight from behind cover?" and more " Why the **** does my goddamned Atlas need cover to fight effectively?"

100% this^^