#161
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:37 AM
#162
Posted 01 March 2016 - 05:53 PM
#163
Posted 02 March 2016 - 05:54 PM
zudukai, on 01 March 2016 - 05:53 PM, said:
Yes. It has the most updated hitboxes, as the CPLT has had several updates over the last 6 months.
I am interested in how the rescaling will affect hitboxes. I've heard nothing about that.
#164
Posted 02 March 2016 - 07:28 PM
Tamerlin, on 02 March 2016 - 05:54 PM, said:
Yes. It has the most updated hitboxes, as the CPLT has had several updates over the last 6 months.
I am interested in how the rescaling will affect hitboxes. I've heard nothing about that.
cool, thanks for the reply.
yeah i imagine they might tweak those afterwords.
#165
Posted 03 March 2016 - 05:25 AM
Tamerlin, on 02 March 2016 - 05:54 PM, said:
Yes. It has the most updated hitboxes, as the CPLT has had several updates over the last 6 months.
I am interested in how the rescaling will affect hitboxes. I've heard nothing about that.
What we're hoping for is tinier "ears", or at least making them modular like the other mechs.
#166
Posted 04 March 2016 - 10:43 AM
Making those STs smaller, from the front, side, or a 45-degree angle in-between, can only benefit the poor beast.
#167
Posted 24 March 2016 - 05:25 AM
#168
Posted 30 March 2016 - 06:26 AM
#169
Posted 30 March 2016 - 12:52 PM
#170
Posted 30 March 2016 - 02:00 PM
#171
Posted 04 April 2016 - 01:22 AM
Edited by Joey Tankblaster, 04 April 2016 - 01:22 AM.
#172
Posted 04 April 2016 - 03:09 AM
Appreciate this would add to all your hard work but it would be great to see the side profile for the humanoids to get a read on just how "shield" like the arms are.
I was looking at the Crab in profile and it made me realise how futile torso twisting really would be as the arms don't protect the ST/CT at all. Got me thinking of the other mechs to see to see how well the arms protect the body. Is this something you're thinking of looking at?
#173
Posted 10 April 2016 - 06:07 PM
Not many changes from their IS versions, the for some mechs the geometry is different enought that I thought mapping was worth it. Note the "CT Pocket" on the Orion-IIC
Re- Colonel Clunge - No, I do not plan to go back and add side profile image for mechs just for the sake of showing how "shield-like" they can be. You can see that in the mech bay. I'm focusing on just the hit boxes, as the mech bay does not show that to us.
#174
Posted 11 April 2016 - 10:30 PM
edit:
OK, problem solved! was just puzzled because it was not marked as CT in the pictures
Edited by Cyrilis, 28 April 2016 - 04:02 AM.
#175
Posted 27 April 2016 - 05:52 AM
#176
Posted 22 May 2016 - 02:16 PM
#177
Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:23 AM
Tamerlin, on 22 May 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:
Nice, very interested in the Marauder hitboxes, I can't figure out where to hit that damn thing to bring it down before it gets to like 9% armor, lol...
#178
Posted 10 June 2016 - 12:34 AM
@ Tamerlin : Really Nice work btw, but I think you forget to indicateurs the jenner IIC cockpit on frontview, Just in case ,)
Edited by Uan Harox, 10 June 2016 - 12:39 AM.
#179
Posted 17 June 2016 - 09:02 PM
God. Damn. It.
I'm a big fan of the rescale, but I actually just realized I may need to re-hitbox map all the mechs.
I'll compare the classic mechs before and after, and then make a decison.
#180
Posted 18 June 2016 - 09:15 PM
Tamerlin, on 17 June 2016 - 09:02 PM, said:
God. Damn. It.
I'm a big fan of the rescale, but I actually just realized I may need to re-hitbox map all the mechs.
I'll compare the classic mechs before and after, and then make a decison.
I think (don't quote me on this), they only changed the size. No hitboxes were really changed, except in the case of the STs of the Awesome.
6 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users