20517 replies to this topic

[Brenden]

I'd love to see the Ost-series. Not through anyone's filter, just as they are. I think MWO needs more circular things in-game. Everything feels blocky.

[Virlutris]

Urbie wouldn't mind a round-ish battlefield buddy, I'm sure.

Unless Urbie is jealous ...

... nah, Urbie's a mech of the people.

[Marauder3D]

Ostsol from Project Phoenix is a good looker, IMO. Unfortunately, not everyone digs the Lasers only route. Also, they make mech packs boring. (see Wolfhound, Crab, Black Knight packs)



Edit: Resized the gigantic image down to a more reasonable size.

Edited by Marauder3D, 17 July 2018 - 02:18 PM.

[Odanan]

Marauder3D, on 17 July 2018 - 11:25 AM, said:

Ostsol from Project Phoenix is a good looker, IMO. Unfortunately, not everyone digs the Lasers only route. Also, they make mech packs boring. (see Wolfhound, Crab, Black Knight packs)

Ostroc has more diverse hardpoints (energy + missiles).

[Marauder3D]

True, but Ostroc rubs me wrong somehow?

Here is the Liao Ostroc with Stealth Armor from the Civil War era:



I think my problem with this art is that he has jump jet feet, and yet....he can't jump.

Ostsol art says to me "I'm charging in, shooting as I go, to punch you in the face."

Ostroc art says to me"Why the hell do I have 3 fingers?"

[Odanan]

Marauder3D, on 17 July 2018 - 01:06 PM, said:

True, but Ostroc rubs me wrong somehow?

The Alex Iglesias' design wouldn't be completely based on the Reseen. Maybe it's even very similar with the original art:

[Brenden]

They don't have to keep just an Energy loadout with the Ost series. Look at the Ostroc, they could use both styles for different load-outs!


They could put two missile hardpoints, one on each arm, for the Ostroc to use.
As for the Ostscout, I'd love it if they kept the original way it looked. Nice, rounded, no arms. Head in the torso.

I imagine its just a little bigger than a Spider, considering its class. They could give it ECM and Targeting/Sensor Quirks.

[Marauder3D]

Such Eggy! Much wow!

[Odanan]

Brenden, on 17 July 2018 - 01:20 PM, said:

As for the Ostscout, I'd love it if they kept the original way it looked. Nice, rounded, no arms. Head in the torso.

I imagine its just a little bigger than a Spider, considering its class. They could give it ECM and Targeting/Sensor Quirks.

Oh God, the Ostscout is awful in every sense.

(but the new official art is kite good)

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 17 July 2018 - 04:26 PM, said:

Oh God, the Ostscout is awful in every sense.

(but the new official art is kite good)

except the new official art looks nothing even reminiscent of the old. I'm all for updated, but when did symmetrically proportioned Ostscouts that have been hitting the gym? Meh. Anthony has done a lot of cool updates, the Ostscout I feel missed the mark entirely.

a few proportional tweaks, and I feel the Ost series can be just fine without total re-imaginings. I actually like mechs to be recognizable for what they are supposed to be.. not random robot with canon name tagged on (like the Arctic Cheetah here in MWO)

[Brenden]

Odanan, on 17 July 2018 - 04:26 PM, said:

Oh God, the Ostscout is awful in every sense.

(but the new official art is kite good)

I ought to beat you over the head with those stubs.

Bishop Steiner, on 17 July 2018 - 04:39 PM, said:

except the new official art looks nothing even reminiscent of the old. I'm all for updated, but when did symmetrically proportioned Ostscouts that have been hitting the gym? Meh. Anthony has done a lot of cool updates, the Ostscout I feel missed the mark entirely.

a few proportional tweaks, and I feel the Ost series can be just fine without total re-imaginings. I actually like mechs to be recognizable for what they are supposed to be.. not random robot with canon name tagged on (like the Arctic Cheetah here in MWO)

See that? That's the kind of update I'm talking about. I want to be sprinting in that.

[Marauder3D]

Ostscouts would be a tough sell in MWO. They are essentially a 35 ton Spider. I think one undergunned, superfast light mech is enough for the IS side in MWO. Two would probably be overkill?

[Requiemking]

Marauder3D, on 18 July 2018 - 08:29 AM, said:

Ostscouts would be a tough sell in MWO. They are essentially a 35 ton Spider. I think one undergunned, superfast light mech is enough for the IS side in MWO. Two would probably be overkill?

Depends on what they do with it. Some of the later variants are actually kinda scary, such as as the OTT-11J, which is a hyper mobile(seriously, 315 XL and 8 JJs) light sniper with twin LPPCs.

[Virlutris]

I've got a lore question, before I go post something in another forum.

Shouldn't the Hellfire's MASC2 actually be a MASC3? By the general rules, divide the chassis tonnage by 20, and round up, so ... 3.

Is there an exception to the rule here in canon, for Reasons™?

Like, if the record sheets and lore sources have that MASC in the CT, it can't be bigger than a MASC2. But the problem remains, so if it's supposed to be a MASC 3 it would be mounted elsewhere.

Did they just decide to use an underpowered MASC on it because they wanted it in the CT, Because™?

Non-table-top inquiring minds want to know.


Edit:
It's been brought to my attention elsewhere that, despite the wording of the rule requiring the math be rounded up, in practice things use regular rounding.

In that scenario, 60/20=2.4, round down to 2.

Lanner would be functionally the same, but I didn't do the preorder so I never noticed.

Anybody willing to confirm?

Ed2: spelling derp

Edited by Virlutris, 18 July 2018 - 06:59 PM.

[FLG 01]

I am not a native speaker so I cannot say much about the exact wording, but here it is:

Spoiler

TechManual, p.52

Also, it might be interesting to know that "the rate of MASC failure in the Hellfire is 15 percent greater than the baseline" (TRO:3067), but that's pure fluff.

[Horseman]

Hellfire's record sheets and TRO entry all give it a two-ton, two-crit MASC in CT.

[FLG 01]

Some thoughts on the canon background of the Champion-Hero.

The Champion was a well-liked, even prestigious Mech with a long history in BattleTech (both in-universe and out-of-universe). So it is not surprising to find a number of notable pilots.
But it is somewhat surprising that most of them actually were active during the 3050ies and 60ies. (Not that PGI cares, their selection of hero Mechs is not restricted by the time-line).


So who are they?

Captain Daniel Brewer: Duke of Hesperus II, CEO of Defiance Industries, member of the GDL, 3060ies. He is also a major character in the novels Operation Excalibur and The Dying Time. During the FCCW, the loyalist GDL defended Hesperus II against Skye Seperatists and Brewer was one of the few survivors of the GDL.
Mech: definitely a standard CHP-1N. ...which is strange, to say the least. Being one of the richest men in the galaxy and having the largest arms manufacturer at his complete disposal you'd think he had at least the field upgrade with DHS (CHP-1N2).

Force Commander Pasi Irin: 1st Free Worlds Legionnaires, FWLM, 3050ies.
Mech: modified CHP-2N. Originally supplied a downgraded Champion by the Word of Blake in 3052, Irin restored most of the advanced weaponry but not the SRM-6 and its Artemis FCS. He opted for two SSRM2 launchers and increased armour.

Force Commander Bors Krepky: Lesnovo Planetary Militia, FWLM, 3030ies (?)
Mech: modified CHP-2N. His Mech was heavily damaged and he rebuild it, changing the configuration. He tried replacing the Mydron AC/10 with an Imperator AC/20. It is implied but never confirmed that he failed.

Sir Gavin Ellis: 1st Knights of the Inner Sphere, FWLM, 3050ies. He was one of the original Knights and participated in Operation Serpent.
Mech: probably a standard CHP-1N2. The Knights had the best possible equipment of the FWL and this would be the best Champion available to the FWLM, unless the WoB supplied a CHP-3N. ...and that is extremely unlikely given the history between the Knights and WoB.

Demi-Precentor Vanye Highfield: ComGuards, 3040-3060ies. He was a regular training partner of Hohiro Kurita on Luthien prior to the Clan Invasion, a veteran of the Battle of Tukayyid and Operation Bulldog. It seems he did not survive Case White.
Mech: probably a standard CHP-1N or CHP-1N2, but perhaps an upgraded CHP-3N or even CHP-3P

Captain Aristotle Crandall: notorious Gunslinger during the Hidden War
Mech: probably a standard CHP-1N or CHP-1N2

Acolyte Aristoxenos Crandall: descendent of the Gunslinger, ComGuards, 91st Division, 3030ies (?)
Mech: probably a standard CHP-1N or CHP-1N2


As far as we know, none of them had paintschemes similar to that of Invictus, but PGI is known to take some creative liberties.
Obviously Brewer would be the best choice since he had a direct and important connection to the FCCW and it is not like PGI cares about his Mech being stock (see Grinner...). But Irin, Ellis, and Vanye would work, too.

Anyway I am afraid PGI simply made up the hero, which would be a shame considering the wealth of options.

Edited by FLG 01, 24 July 2018 - 06:26 PM.

[Sereglach]

FLG 01, on 24 July 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

As far as we know, none of them had paintschemes similar to that of Invictus, but PGI is known to take some creative liberties.
Obviously Brewer would be the best choice since he had a direct and important connection to the FCCW and it is not like PGI cares about his Mech being stock (see Grinner...). But Irin, Ellis, and Vanye would work, too.

Anyway I am afraid PGI simply made up the hero, which would be a shame considering the wealth of options.

It's not surprising that PGI makes up so many heroes, though. The Champion is a perfect example of that. Based on your own list, only two of those people ever fielded modified mechs; and in MWO mechs are pretty much guaranteed to not be a standard chassis (I think the Street Cleaner and Dao Breaker are the only heroes that match a stock mech variant in base loadout). Now of course, I agree that in cases like Grinner, PGI could give a red rats arse about modifying a traditionally stock "hero". However, they only seem to do that when the hero is a "must have" like Grinner and Tempest; and even then they tend to play to lore a little bit to create a slight modification to the mech (ECM hardpoints in both cases).

That said, I honestly think that the reasons PGI scraps so many choices for the sake of making their own hero are that...
1: They can take more liberties in creating a custom configuration without making anyone upset.
2: For some mechs, that have so many options with no extreme standouts, almost any selection is going to upset people with "why didn't you make my preferred hero?!"
3: Most canon heroes, that actually use some form of customization, tend to use something that's derived from the stock mech they piloted, retaining the stock variant's weapon locations, which doesn't give PGI much to work with. Creating their own hero allows them to do something completely unique to the chassis.

[FLG 01]

Let me explain:

I do not mind PGI using canon rumours to create hero Mechs. I actually like it. Tempest is a good example of a well used canon rumour; you know, the old Phantom Mech debate. PGI even included a phantom as hanging item. That's great.

But there are hero Mechs which simply don't make sense. I don't mind the fact that PGI creates hero Mechs, but why do they have to be so stupid? There is not one variant of the Crab using ammunition-based weaponry, and Florentine does violate the very idea of the design. At least they could have stayed in-character and use the Clan Busters of ComStar as a guideline. That means a refit centered around the XL 300, and perhaps long range weapons.

Lastly there are wasted opportunities. For example, if you have to create your non-canon Uziel-hero - and you have to due to the lack of (pre-Jihad) lore - use what little lore you have. The one shining moment of the Uziel in the FCCW was the defence of the Defiance plants on Hesperus II. So just give us an Uziel of the Defiance Self-Protection Force. It comes with a distinctive paint scheme, the huge Defiance facilities explain any modification you want, and it uses the FCCW-lore.
And yet, we got some fantasy Uziel that does none of that. How is that not a wasted opportunity?

The same applies, I am afraid to say, to the Champion. I just want some connection to the lore and a sensible hero variant. That should be possible.

Edited by FLG 01, 24 July 2018 - 07:48 PM.

[Sereglach]

FLG 01, on 24 July 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

*snip*

For one, I'm all for sensible lore-based hero variants. However, I'm going to play devil's advocate here over some likely reasons why PGI doesn't do it all that often.

1. Using the Crab as an example . . . if they stuck to all energy for the hero, it'd be boring. Lets face it, there'd be very little they could do to differentiate it from the other already-existing variants. The Crab already had a jumper, a speed demon, an AMS carrier, and a "standard" variant . . . there's not much else that they could do. ECM? It was created during a time when giving the hero ECM with no standard ECM variants was often decried as PTW. For some chassis the only way to make a hero that's going to really stand out is to do something completely different from the typical variant. The Quickdraw IV is another good example of this, as Quickdraws have almost no differentiation until the more "extreme" 8P, 8X, and 9M.

*As a note, I'll fully admit that I'm all for PGI making heroes that wildly deviate from lore in order to provide a unique hero to an otherwise homogeneous chassis or a chassis where all the notable pilots aka "heroes" pilot either stock versions or versions where the customization sticks within the MWO hardpoint confines of the stock variant.

2. Sometimes PGI likes to take the same creative liberties that they do when creating their own in-house chassis when creating their heroes. I'm sure the art team appreciates the occasional deviation from, "make another (insert faction here) paint scheme". It also allows PGI to throw a bone to people who might not like a particular faction that a mech is associated with, but like the mech.

3. PGI really hasn't done much in the way of hero write-ups and lore tie-ins, outside of their in-house chassis, for quite some time. Call it lazy . . . call it shameful . . . call it a wasted opportunity . . . call it whatever you want, but the fact of the matter is that PGI/Russ is dead set on creating an e-sports scene for MWO over a game that engages in the lore. The gradual shift from "MWO: A Battletech Game" to "MWO" to "MWO: Solaris 7" makes their intent very clear. Expect more and more in-house heroes that look more at home in a Solaris 7 arena, or e-sports tournament, instead of a inter-faction battlefield. This situation for the hero mechs is rather ironic, considering that the rules prohibit base variants that cannot be purchased for c-bills.

4. For every person who is willing to let PGI bend the canon of a lore hero to create something truly unique, there's someone else who will be upset at PGI for daring to deviate from lore. After the release of the Phoenix heroes (around the time of Sparky, I believe) PGI had run a poll about pure lore heroes, or pre-optimized heroes (endo, DHS, etc., even if the lore hero didn't have it). "Pre-optimized" eked out a win, but it wasn't by a huge margin. That's another possibility why PGI has been less inclined to make lore themed heroes . . . they can make a "pre-optimized" purely PGI hero and not set off the lore friendly/unfriendly hero debate.

Who knows, maybe MW5 will have skin packs or built in camo patterns that are just chock full of lore unit paint schemes. Maybe if they make something like that for MW5 they'd eventually make their way into MWO. Maybe PGI will focus on more lore-related heroes on more keynote chassis, like if they get around to doing the remaining classics. Maybe hoping for a concerted focus on lore in MWO has just become a pipe-dream that will never happen (or happen again, if you consider the early days of lore posts with mech releases as being lore rich).

In the mean time, I won't be holding my breath for lore-rich, canon-based heroes for the foreseeable future.