Fix Lasers On Raven
#1
Posted 23 September 2014 - 08:19 PM
I did put together a quick pic to demonstrate what I mean, its pretty rough but gets the point across.
#2
Posted 23 September 2014 - 08:26 PM
#3
Posted 23 September 2014 - 08:35 PM
Praetor Knight, on 23 September 2014 - 08:26 PM, said:
True the Raven did just get its pass, I suppose I mean for this to be a system for all mechs. The Raven is just the one I think it makes the most difference on (I might be bias bit )
Edited by Clint Steel, 24 September 2014 - 05:12 AM.
#4
Posted 24 September 2014 - 02:44 PM
#5
Posted 24 September 2014 - 02:53 PM
#6
Posted 24 September 2014 - 03:27 PM
MATRAKA14, on 24 September 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:
I would be fine with that too, though I was under the impression they are trying to standardise the looks of the weapons, so at a glance you know what they are using. But ya, they looked a lot better before.
#7
Posted 05 October 2014 - 07:54 AM
#9
Posted 05 October 2014 - 08:01 AM
#10
Posted 05 October 2014 - 08:26 AM
#11
Posted 05 October 2014 - 08:29 AM
#12
Posted 06 October 2014 - 11:04 AM
#13
Posted 06 October 2014 - 11:06 AM
#14
Posted 07 October 2014 - 05:48 AM
Rouken, on 06 October 2014 - 11:06 AM, said:
I really don't think they will revert them since they want the weapons to look the same on each mech. (next up is the Centurion, I'm a little scared about what they do with his arm, since it looks pretty cool right now but thats another subject)
They can tweak them a little and make them look better though (maybe even keep the old design, and just square off the barrels to make them lasers), look at the Shadow Hawk when he mounts lasers in his side torso, they stick out as far as ac5s do and look pretty decent, I'm not sure why the Raven didn't get the same treatment.
#15
Posted 07 October 2014 - 05:50 AM
Clint Steel, on 07 October 2014 - 05:48 AM, said:
Nah, they make exceptions. The lasers on the Orion and the CPLT-K2 arms look different than the regular cube lasers, for example.
They could make an exception for the Raven too.
#16
Posted 07 October 2014 - 07:14 AM
#17
Posted 13 October 2014 - 10:40 AM
#18
Posted 22 October 2014 - 08:41 PM
Drop in a 3L now and the arm-mounted 2xERLL look significantly less menacing than the torso-mounted TAG. Seriously, the new torso laser hard point representation makes the TAG sort'a look like it's ready to mess you up. But the once-iconic main lasers... not so much.
It's just so not Raven.
If I may go on a tangent here: The last big change they made to the Raven after Beta was already a disappointment; making it so you can't apply camo to the laser casing on the right arm. The left arm ended up looking "okay" across the ballistic and missile hard points after the change, but the right arm looked way worse with so many places the camo suddenly didn't cover. Many of the newly updated 'Mechs with their standardized hard points don't have such distracting bald spots, so the Raven was already getting the short end of the stick there. Now with the stunted lasers... It's definitely not an improvement. Some of us do value the look of specific 'Mechs, and there was no real need to make this change for the worse.
Here's an old (way back in Beta) Raven, Sherman camo scheme with no bald spots; looks quite nice. Behold the fully camo-able right arm that so many of us miss so dearly! When they attempted the first wave of "visual standardization of weapons", they made it so you couldn't apply any camo to the guns or the gun barrels, along with a few of the other random parts, which really ruined a lot of the camo schemes. So this older shot really emphasizes how the visual changes (to the right arm, specifically) have not actually been improvements...
"Before" said:
I don't have my beta shots anymore, sadly. pic pulled from this thread:
http://mwomercs.com/...ame-paint-jobs/
And here's a recent CapCon Raven with bright Phranken camo, now complete with detracting camo bald spots and stunted lasers. I mean the bald spots were bad enough (if the missile/ballistic hard points on the left side could still have camo applied -- why not the right side, too?)... but now taking away the lasers? ...Why?
"After" said:
Seriously, take a gander at this other screenshot, and imagine how much worse it'd look were it taken now, with all those spots no longer having camo applied:
http://pumpgasracing...its/5-4/032.jpg
The Raven has always been my favourite 'Mech and aesthetic-related items are generally the only things I purchase in any F2P game. So when I was finally able to drop some cash on the game, I put it towards making my Raven cute. The new "visual standardization of weapons" is definitely making me regret the purchases though, I mean c'mon, this looks like they just stopped halfway through! It would've been significantly better to have done nothing...
Lately I was dropping with a camo scheme I was rather fond of that at least tried to incorporate the many bald spots... Considering the lasers and their casing could no longer have camo applied, I was doing okay with this blue/gray palette. You can see how the 'un-camo-able' laser barrels don't quite match the camo, and would better if they could have camo applied. But those lasers still really complete the Raven's look.
The Raven said:
...nevermore...?!
But camo aside, I have always hoped some sort of distinction would be made between the laser sizes on the Raven in the future. The LL and the SL could visually benefit from the distinction. If that's the end-game plan, I do think it's a good idea, and I understand what this latest change was trying to achieve as far as "standardizing" the weapons across all 'Mechs goes. But this latest change to the Raven's right arm just doesn't look good. Can we at least revert it to it's previous iteration in the meantime, please?
Ravens are losing a big part of their charm... They're no longer looking super cute in screenshots. This must be fixed!
#19
Posted 22 October 2014 - 08:47 PM
Also the camo needs to come back to its right arm as well, I have no idea why it was removed to begin with.
I suppose one could argue for hitbox balancing that the barrels gave the arm too big of a profile (if they even HAD hitboxes), but you know what? I don't care. I doubt anybody else does either, in this case especially I'm willing to sacrifice a superficial balance issue that only even exists if you make it in favor of superior aesthetics.
#20
Posted 22 October 2014 - 08:51 PM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users