20517 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

SgtMagor, on 17 July 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

i'm really surprised that this mech hasn't been seen yet!

Because the AXM-6X (the variant pictured) doesn't exist in-universe until 3074, and because every variant other than the AXM-1N and AXM-2N requires technologies that aren't due to be implemented until at least 3057 - which prevents the Axman from having the three variants needed to work under the XP system.
Also, because melee isn't in, so the Axman's primary weapon would be unusable.

[CDLord HHGD]

Strum Wealh, on 17 July 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

Because the AXM-6X (the variant pictured) doesn't exist in-universe until 3074, and because every variant other than the AXM-1N and AXM-2N requires technologies that aren't due to be implemented until at least 3057 - which prevents the Axman from having the three variants needed to work under the XP system.
Also, because melee isn't in, so the Axman's primary weapon would be unusable.

And that makes me sad. I cannot wait until we get melee combat and open the door for mechs like the hatchetman and axman...

[Strum Wealh]

cdlord, on 17 July 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

I knew those were very similar, easily combined with additional/mix and match hardpoints, which is why I expanded my search. I still think the comment about the timeline applies, I mean, what is a mech release if not an event? In the strictest sense..... There's still the "creative license" argument which cannot be discounted. If it'll make PGI more money, then they'll devote resources to it.

A 'Mech announcement on the forums isn't an "in-game event" (and yes, I did previously specify "in-game") in the same sense as, say, the Battle of Tukayyid, the Battle of Luthien, the Annihilation of Clan Smoke Jaguar, or the FedCom Civil War would be such.

As for creative license... the only point at which it's been applied to loadouts is the Hero 'Mechs and the one Cicada variant where the Machine Guns would otherwise have been in the legs.
There are ~70-80 individual 'Mech variants currently in-game, and less than a dozen of those (where only one of that not-quite-dozen isn't a Hero 'Mech) start anything other than what is printed on the BT record sheets (where applicable).
Until that changes, that would seem to be a rather fair indicator of PGI's policies regarding 'Mech and variant selection and implementation.

[Colddawg]

Strum Wealh, on 17 July 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

A 'Mech announcement on the forums isn't an "in-game event" (and yes, I did previously specify "in-game") in the same sense as, say, the Battle of Tukayyid, the Battle of Luthien, the Annihilation of Clan Smoke Jaguar, or the FedCom Civil War would be such.

As for creative license... the only point at which it's been applied to loadouts is the Hero 'Mechs and the one Cicada variant where the Machine Guns would otherwise have been in the legs.
There are ~70-80 individual 'Mech variants currently in-game, and less than a dozen of those (where only one of that not-quite-dozen isn't a Hero 'Mech) start anything other than what is printed on the BT record sheets (where applicable).
Until that changes, that would seem to be a rather fair indicator of PGI's policies regarding 'Mech and variant selection and implementation.

They've gone on record before stating that if there is a very popular chassis, something they want in the game at least, then they will design canon style variants for it in order to do so, but they will be following the rules of BT and the design must have enough variation to it to be deemed a viable variant for the chassis. That means they won't create a variant that is only marginally different from the current designs available nor any designs not released yet in the timeline.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 17 July 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

A 'Mech announcement on the forums isn't an "in-game event" (and yes, I did previously specify "in-game") in the same sense as, say, the Battle of Tukayyid, the Battle of Luthien, the Annihilation of Clan Smoke Jaguar, or the FedCom Civil War would be such.

As for creative license... the only point at which it's been applied to loadouts is the Hero 'Mechs and the one Cicada variant where the Machine Guns would otherwise have been in the legs.
There are ~70-80 individual 'Mech variants currently in-game, and less than a dozen of those (where only one of that not-quite-dozen isn't a Hero 'Mech) start anything other than what is printed on the BT record sheets (where applicable).
Until that changes, that would seem to be a rather fair indicator of PGI's policies regarding 'Mech and variant selection and implementation.

and mechs with Extra JJs, ala VTR-9K w6, SDR w12, and the Heavy metal with 5. All well above canon capacity.

[General Taskeen]

I still see no reason for a Hatamoto-Chi to be written off in the original OP psot. I'm getting that Mech or else. Don't get made when an 80 ton Samurai ruins your day. What matters is a Mech's profile is different, or its weapons are totally different. A Dervish, for example, for 55 tons, has entirely different weapons than a Shadow Hawk. A Hoplite, like wise is a different, looks different (low profile), etc. So most of those ones that were crossed off don't make sense for the reasoning. What matters is if there are enough variants of each Mech that are slightly different.

Edited by General Taskeen, 17 July 2013 - 10:33 AM.

[Odanan]

General Taskeen, on 17 July 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

I still see no reason for a Hatamoto-Chi to be written off in the original OP psot. I'm getting that Mech or else. Don't get made when an 80 ton Samurai ruins your day. What matters is a Mech's profile is different, or its weapons are totally different. A Dervish, for example, for 55 tons, has entirely different weapons than a Shadow Hawk. A Hoplite, like wise is a different, looks different (low profile), etc. So most of those ones that were crossed off don't make sense for the reasoning. What matters is if there are enough variants of each Mech that are slightly different.

If you don't see the reason for the Hatamoto-Chi to be crossed, I won't argue with you.

[Phoenix Branson]

I understand they are two separate games, but the mech list for MWT and MWO are almost identical...

http://www.mechwarri...Warrior_Tactics

Having said that, maybe the next light and medium mechs are as follows:

[CDLord HHGD]

Maverick01, on 17 July 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

http://www.mechwarri...Warrior_Tactics

I was invited to play the MWT beta. I liked MechCommander and strategy type star-crafty games. But when I saw the art, I deleted the invite. I hate to say it, but if MWO had similar art, I am not sure if I'd be here. I certainly wouldn't have spent ~$400 on this game for sure. Alex and the PGI art department have won my eternal gratitude for "keeping it real" and not turning this war-torn gritty combat sim into the next anime.

[Bishop Steiner]

cdlord, on 18 July 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

I was invited to play the MWT beta. I liked MechCommander and strategy type star-crafty games. But when I saw the art, I deleted the invite. I hate to say it, but if MWO had similar art, I am not sure if I'd be here. I certainly wouldn't have spent ~$400 on this game for sure. Alex and the PGI art department have won my eternal gratitude for "keeping it real" and not turning this war-torn gritty combat sim into the next anime.

art is crap and it is way lacking in content, but it's core mechanics ain't bad.

[SgtMagor]

should be getting close to announcing the August Hero, Champion, and mech of the month!... almost forgot the Early Bird Special yes/no?

Edited by SgtMagor, 18 July 2013 - 05:56 AM.

[Belorion]

Probably not till next week at the earliest. They seem to have shortened up their announcement windows as of late. They seem to be concentrating their effort on the push for release. We never did get a July developers update.

[Strum Wealh]

General Taskeen, on 17 July 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

I still see no reason for a Hatamoto-Chi to be written off in the original OP psot. I'm getting that Mech or else. Don't get made when an 80 ton Samurai ruins your day. What matters is a Mech's profile is different, or its weapons are totally different. A Dervish, for example, for 55 tons, has entirely different weapons than a Shadow Hawk. A Hoplite, like wise is a different, looks different (low profile), etc. So most of those ones that were crossed off don't make sense for the reasoning. What matters is if there are enough variants of each Mech that are slightly different.

Odanan, on 17 July 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

If you don't see the reason for the Hatamoto-Chi to be crossed, I won't argue with you.

Strum Wealh, on 12 January 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

IMO, if the Hatamoto-Chi were to be added in the near term, they would(/should) likely implement the following variants:

• HTM-27T (energy/missile model; basic variant, and can duplicate both the HTM-26T (downgrade LosTech) and the HTM-27V (replace SRM-6s with LRM-5s))
  
• HTM-27U (energy boat model; can duplicate the HTM-27Y (replace one RT-mounted MPLas with one ERLL, remove all other MPLas), the HTM-C (replace one Heat Sink with a C3 Slave Unit), and the HTM-CM (replace both RT-mounted MPLas and one Heat Sink with a C3 Master unit))
  
• HTM-27W (only energy/ballistic model)
  
• HTM-27T "Daniel" (Hero 'Mech; only ballistic/missile model, and only dual-ballistic model)

The Awesome has no variants with any ballistics, and doesn't have the distinctive "space samurai" styling.

Your thoughts?

Strum Wealh, on 12 January 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

The HTM-27W carries only a single ballistic weapon (an AC/5 in the Right-Torso).

The dual-ballistics version is actually a named-and-custom variant (and potential Hero 'Mech version), the HTM-27T "Daniel" piloted by Daniel Sorenson II, founder and commander of Sorenson's Sabres.

"HTM-27T Hatamoto-Chi "Daniel" - Personally awarded by Coordinator Takashi Kurita to Sorenson’s Sabres commander Daniel Sorenson in the lead-up to the War of 3039, the 'Mech Daniel received was a bridging design between the early field-test HTM-26T and the later production HTM-27T. Dropping two tons of armor and outfitted with a bulkier and less refined Endo-Steel chassis, enough weight was saved to mount a pair of experimental Luthien Armor Works developed LB 10-X AC prototypes in it arms and a pair of Telos SRM-4 launchers in its chest. A ton of reloads for each SRM launcher and four tons of autocannon reloads in its CASE protected side torsos kept the 'Mech in the thick of battle."

x2 (prototype) LB 10-X ACs (LA, RA) with four tons of ammo (x2 LT, x2 RT)
x2 SRM-4s (LT, RT) with two tons of ammo (LT, RT)
x2 CASE (LT, RT)
(prototype) Endo-Steel Internal Structure
320 Std Engine (top speed: 64.8 kph)
10 Standard/Single Heat Sinks
(Record sheet is on page 103 of Starterbook: Sword and Dragon)

All of the other timeline-appropriate variants are either energy boats (HTM-27U, HTM-27Y) or energy/missile carriers (HTM-26T, HTM-27T, HTM-27U, HTM-27V).

[Bishop Steiner]

maybe..........

KING CRAB?

[General Taskeen]

Strum Wealh, on 18 July 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

Indeed. Hatamoto was even in Mech Warrior 2. Variety is good. So again, my reasoning stands that what makes Mechs unique are they weapons and their looks. One pilots a Hunchback, because they want to, and they like the way it looks, or a Quickdraw, or whatever. We have Stalkers that run around with PPC's, even though Awesome's originally used them, so then by that, I guess the Awesome or Stalker is not needed in game, just "cuz."

[Ens]

oh ZEUS, where are you?

[Spheroid]

Ens, on 18 July 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

oh ZEUS, where are you?

I think the community should be patient on wanting a Zeus quickly. We should see how they handle the Orion's arm design as the Zeus has similar weirdness.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 July 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

maybe..........

KING CRAB?

Looks generally okay (not that I could do better ), though the arms seem a bit too bulky, and are lacking the hands/pincers that, besides appearing on the record sheets for each variant, literally give the 'Mech its name.

Quote

Because they mounted these weapons in the arms, the designers also installed very simple hand actuators, which serve primarily as housings to protect the massive Imperator autocannons when not in actual use. The actuators open and close during combat, an effect that gives them the appearance of pincers or claws - one of the characteristics from which the 'Mech draws its name.
[TRO 3025R, pg. 120]

Quote

Because the autocannons are mounted in the reinforced arms, the designers also included claw-like protective housings for the weapon barrels. The covers actually open and close in combat, an effect that gives them the appearance of pincers or claws, a characteristic for which the ’Mech is known - and named.
[TRO 3039, pg. 278]

Also, why are the legs' interior mechanisms (pistons and such) exposed, given that both the KGC-000 (the original, LosTech-load variant) and the KGC-0000 (the downgrade, no-LosTech variant) are both carrying ~75% of their allowable leg armor (with respective overall totals of 93% and 89%)?

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 18 July 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Looks generally okay (not that I could do better ), though the arms seem a bit too bulky, and are lacking the hands/pincers that, besides appearing on the record sheets for each variant, literally give the 'Mech its name.
Also, why are the legs' interior mechanisms (pistons and such) exposed, given that both the KGC-000 (the original, LosTech-load variant) and the KGC-0000 (the downgrade, no-LosTech variant) are both carrying ~75% of their allowable leg armor (with respective overall totals of 93% and 89%)?

follow the orange lines. See the claw now?

They function exactly as the fluff describes, as a "Claw-like Protective housing for the weapon barrels. The covers actually open and close in combat, an effect that gives them the appearance of pincers or claws".

They are simply armored shouds. They open and close. Nothing more. Since they also DON'T split locations for crits in MW:O, all 10 crits therefore MUST be in the KGC's arms, eliminating any possibility of a Lower Arm or Hand Actuator. Mine still open and close, but they are just another "hatch" like the ones on a Cent's chest, or a Cat's arms.

As for the legs.... why do half the actuators on mechs get shown? Shrouding them in armor, ala IronMan would make more sense. But it looks more interesting to see them. I felt (artistic license brah) that they looked more interesting. Also, the Highlander has many f it's shocks and such exposed in Alex's art.

Why? It looks cooler.

[Odanan]

cdlord, on 18 July 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

I was invited to play the MWT beta. I liked MechCommander and strategy type star-crafty games. But when I saw the art, I deleted the invite. I hate to say it, but if MWO had similar art, I am not sure if I'd be here. I certainly wouldn't have spent ~$400 on this game for sure. Alex and the PGI art department have won my eternal gratitude for "keeping it real" and not turning this war-torn gritty combat sim into the next anime.

Agreed!
I wouldn't play MWO with an art like MWT.