#5881
Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:24 PM
#5883
Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:53 PM
Bishop Steiner, on 13 November 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:
The King Crab for instance, would be SLOW. (As would the Annihilator. almost unusably slow in it's case). And it would be wide. We have already established through the ShadowHawk, that Tall is much less than issue than wide. Wide and slow is kiss of death, ala the Awesome.
Add into it simply programming it to have agility akin to the Stalker.
Plenty enough to balance having good armor.
Though, the KGC wouldn't really be that slow, relative to its mass (and certainly nowhere near as sluggish as the Annihilator) - the stock loadouts of the available variants (KGC-000, KGC-0000, and KGC-010) all start with 300 STD Engines (which gives them the same range of speeds and Engine ratings as the Atlas).
Moreover, giving the KGC the same movement profile classification as the Stalker (which is in the "Large" bracket) would arguably make it more maneuverable than the Atlas (which is in the "Huge" bracket).
The common STK-3F Stalker also has greater torso twist and pitch capabilities than the Atlas - 20° pitch & 85° twist for the STK-3F (versus the same pitch and 60-65° twist for the other STK variants), versus 16° pitch and 80° twist for the Atlas (which is rather consistent across the AS7 variants).
in other words, "simply programming [the KGC] to have agility akin to the Stalker" could actually makes it more agile than the Atlas to which it can/should/will be compared.
As an alternate suggestion: the KGC could have a vaguely lenticular ("lens/saucer-shaped") body with the arms hanging relatively low (as seen in FD's artwork), with torso pitch & twist limits identical to those of theAS7s (e.g. 16° pitch and 80° twist) and the same arm pitch/twist limits as the HGN-733C (that is, 30° pitch and 10° twist), and (like the AS7s) be placed in the "Huge" movement profile classification.
#5884
Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:53 PM
Bishop Steiner, on 13 November 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:
Nice!
I don't normally like the Javelin either, but if it looks good, I'll ride it. (Mechs are like women, doesn't matter what their inner qualities are like) I don't have a Commando, so that's close enough IMO.
#5885
Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:55 PM
A curse word of the future well known among all the tribes of mechanized space warriors.
Example 1:Used when surrounded by three heavy armor class enemies and out of ammo... SHAZBOT!
Edited by SgtMagor, 13 November 2013 - 04:56 PM.
#5886
Posted 13 November 2013 - 07:37 PM
Strum Wealh, on 13 November 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:
Moreover, giving the KGC the same movement profile classification as the Stalker (which is in the "Large" bracket) would arguably make it more maneuverable than the Atlas (which is in the "Huge" bracket).
The common STK-3F Stalker also has greater torso twist and pitch capabilities than the Atlas - 20° pitch & 85° twist for the STK-3F (versus the same pitch and 60-65° twist for the other STK variants), versus 16° pitch and 80° twist for the Atlas (which is rather consistent across the AS7 variants).
in other words, "simply programming [the KGC] to have agility akin to the Stalker" could actually makes it more agile than the Atlas to which it can/should/will be compared.
As an alternate suggestion: the KGC could have a vaguely lenticular ("lens/saucer-shaped") body with the arms hanging relatively low (as seen in FD's artwork), with torso pitch & twist limits identical to those of theAS7s (e.g. 16° pitch and 80° twist) and the same arm pitch/twist limits as the HGN-733C (that is, 30° pitch and 10° twist), and (like the AS7s) be placed in the "Huge" movement profile classification.
I would say a stock speed of 48 kph compared to one with 64 is quite a noticable difference. Especially considering how much more tonnage it costs to try to go fast in a 100 ton mech vs a 65 tonner, especially one that could not afford to use an XL engine.
Part of what makes the BoomJager work is being able to go 75 kph in it. Realistically, with Gauss or Ac20s, you won't break 55-60 kph in a KGC. That is a significant real world tradeoff. Also way to focus on the only Stalker with decent torso twist. Since, ya know, every other version has a 60º yaw, vs the 80 the Atlas has. And the arms would have arm reflex at best, like the Victor, or someplace between the victor and the stalker.
Also point out that my version is even more saucer shaped and wide than that version, but hey what do I know, I'm just throwing out ideas, pointing out how Op or not OP is not as black and white as most of the QQ would have you think.
But I know for whatever reason, the mere mention of the KGC makes you want to get argumentative, so I'll leave you to it. Or maybe you just need to derail any discussion with minutiae so that any resulting continuation is a Strum Wealh idea? I honestly have given up trying to discern sometimes.
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 13 November 2013 - 07:46 PM.
#5887
Posted 13 November 2013 - 08:09 PM
#5888
Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:56 PM
Odanan, on 13 November 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:
BTW, Bishop? Did you ever did the Firestarter? We need moar next mech in here.
sorry Oda.... little tired, so a half hour sketch is the best I could do....
#5889
Posted 13 November 2013 - 10:16 PM
Bishop Steiner, on 13 November 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:
It's definitely better-drawn and better-proportioned than the TRO3025 artwork.
Though, I do wonder about the position of the head/cockpit - why so far forward and (more to the point) so close to the missile tubes?
For that matter, why do you think the Javelin to be "boring" as a conventional humanoid, but the Firestarter presumably doesn't elicit the same response?
#5890
Posted 13 November 2013 - 10:19 PM
Strum Wealh, on 13 November 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:
It's definitely better-drawn and better-proportioned than the TRO3025 artwork.
Though, I do wonder about the position of the head/cockpit - why so far forward and (more to the point) so close to the missile tubes?
For that matter, why do you think the Javelin to be "boring" as a conventional humanoid, but the Firestarter presumably doesn't elicit the same response?
Firestarter has much better proportions.So while not in love with the humanoid gundams, it is a better rendered unit. The Javelin is just horrible.
As for the cockpit, there is room for the missiles to load, though it is tight. That said, I toyed with the cockpit further back and didn't like the look.
Also, not trying to make it an attack over the KGC, but it seems no matter what we lock horns on the smallest of details, and it seems like we both end up on opposite ends of the spectrum for the details we cling too. IDK, maybe we are both too literal in our thinking?
#5893
Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:46 AM
We need a Heavy ECM mech.
If they keep releasing lasercrap, i wont buy.(until they balance).
#5897
Posted 14 November 2013 - 10:34 AM
Odanan, on 13 November 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:
I'm very shallow and uncaring enough to not even lie about it, women realize this fast enough that I don't have to worry about that. It's a self protecting flaw of my character. Similarly, I suck as a mechwarrior, so I hop from mech to mech, hoping to find "the one" but never getting any real bond with particular variants.
Just a wanderin' mechwarrior..(play country guitar)
Edited by verybad, 14 November 2013 - 10:35 AM.
#5898
Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:24 AM
Bishop Steiner, on 13 November 2013 - 09:56 PM, said:
Was showing the MRS. this picture and the first words out of her mouth is that looks like a Mandalorian armor. After looking at it again I noticed that she was right, since it has the T-Visor and flamethrowers that Mandos usually have. I cannot believe that she noticed it before I did, with me being a Star Wars/Mando nut and all. Great work and damn that you only did that in a half hour.
#5899
Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:44 AM
FireSlade, on 14 November 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:
See verybad? Some people find "the one" girl.
7 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users