20517 replies to this topic

[Gasboy]

Odanan, on 22 July 2014 - 09:02 AM, said:

Isn't the Javelin 10P from 3049?

Didn't it just turn 3049? It's not like the 10P will be instantly available everywhere.

[CycKath]

Bishop Steiner, on 22 July 2014 - 09:28 AM, said:

Doesn't the ClanBuster pack require melee combat?

Just the Black Knight. Treat it Atlas D-DC style or develop a close enough variant (BL-9-KNT- and just change it to bypass the issue. Replace the sword with either another large laser or restore the Beagle and add a couple of smaller lasers to fill the weight.

[Odanan]

CycKath, on 22 July 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

yu
Just the Black Knight. Treat it Atlas D-DC style or develop a close enough variant (BL-9-KNT- and just change it to bypass the issue. Replace the sword with either another large laser or restore the Beagle and add a couple of smaller lasers to fill the weight.

Or put a larger engine.
(Or, you know, implement melee)

[Steinar Bergstol]

Odanan, on 23 July 2014 - 12:50 AM, said:

(Or, you know, implement melee)

The day I can punch a clanmech in the face with my Thunderbolt's claws is the day I shall be a happy, happy little facepuncher.

[Jody Von Jedi]

Odanan, on 27 June 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

• Black Knight (3 possible variants: BL-6-KNT, BL-7-KNT, BL7-KNT-L) Pros: powerful mech with lots of fans; can look extremely beautiful. Cons: variants originally identical in hardpoints. Discussion about the BK here.[/spoiler]

I noticed the strike through on the Black Knight. Is it forever stricken from the possibilities of a future Heavy chassis? I read through this topic where it's being discussed, but didn't see anything that excludes it from the running. Did I miss something?

Jody

[Strum Wealh]

Jody Von Jedi, on 23 July 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

I noticed the strike through on the Black Knight. Is it forever stricken from the possibilities of a future Heavy chassis? I read through this topic where it's being discussed, but didn't see anything that excludes it from the running. Did I miss something?

Jody

As a chassis, it could be included.

There is an issue, however, wherein its Clanbuster variant requires a massive hatchet/cleaver/sword - PGI would either have to modify it and redistribute the weight, or leave it out and have the Champion (which does have enough variants, and can have enough difference between variants, to work in MWO) as the sole Heavy 'Mech in the Clanbuster set.

[CDLord HHGD]

Strum Wealh, on 23 July 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

As a chassis, it could be included.

There is an issue, however, wherein its Clanbuster variant requires a massive hatchet/cleaver/sword - PGI would either have to modify it and redistribute the weight, or leave it out and have the Champion (which does have enough variants, and can have enough difference between variants, to work in MWO) as the sole Heavy 'Mech in the Clanbuster set.

I'd take it as visual fluff just to have the mech in.... Same with the hatchetman and axman...

Course they could just add in melee to the game. Extreme short range (duh) and only one type of attack (punch, kick for mechs without arms, weapon for mechs with melee weapons etc). The damage algorithms are already done and align with the rest.

[Jody Von Jedi]

cdlord, on 23 July 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

I'd take it as visual fluff just to have the mech in.... Same with the hatchetman and axman...

Probably sacrilegious for me to suggest it, but how about a shield arm in it's place, a la Centurion?

Jody

[CDLord HHGD]

Jody Von Jedi, on 23 July 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Probably sacrilegious for me to suggest it, but how about a shield arm in it's place, a la Centurion?

Jody

Well, the graphic of the weapon would act as a damage sink and provide more cover from a side perspective... The complication lies is, how to account for the weight and crit of the weapon when it's otherwise useless? Give it back to the mech so it can mount more tonnage? Force the crit as another way to spread crit damage (I'd like this).....

If PGI were to intro these mechs and not have melee, they'd have to be very transparent to the community otherwise they'd get more forum hate. Not from me, I just want my Hatchetman... But the min/maxers will see that wasted weight and crit and cry foul....

[Strum Wealh]

cdlord, on 23 July 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

Well, the graphic of the weapon would act as a damage sink and provide more cover from a side perspective... The complication lies is, how to account for the weight and crit of the weapon when it's otherwise useless? Give it back to the mech so it can mount more tonnage? Force the crit as another way to spread crit damage (I'd like this).....

If PGI were to intro these mechs and not have melee, they'd have to be very transparent to the community otherwise they'd get more forum hate. Not from me, I just want my Hatchetman... But the min/maxers will see that wasted weight and crit and cry foul....

Just assign the tonnage & crits to the melee weapon, and lock said melee weapon in place.

And if the min-maxers don't like it... that's their problem, and that's just too bad.

[CDLord HHGD]

Strum Wealh, on 23 July 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:

Just assign the tonnage & crits to the melee weapon, and lock said melee weapon in place.

And if the min-maxers don't like it... that's their problem, and that's just too bad.

I like the way you think....

[SgtMagor]

heh you, yeah you!

[CycKath]

SgtMagor, on 23 July 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

heh you, yeah you!

Always did like how wildly different the 3025 Charger variants were (got your Lyran Scout, got a boring assault brawler and a jumping LRM guy)

[SgtMagor]

we need another jump jetting 80ton brawler, Charger would be a good one, what it lacks in its stock weapons can be made up with xtra slots, besides maybe some day will have melee (doubtful) but at least will have a a lot of IS mechs that can use their close combat ability.

[Odanan]

I'm afraid if they add the Charger, they won't add the Hatamoto.

(Tough it would be fun to pilot an assault at 100 km/h)

Edited by Odanan, 26 July 2014 - 03:43 AM.

[SgtMagor]

dunno why, Charger afaik uses its jump jets for brawling, the Chi seems more like long range sniper/ hit N run mech.

[Odanan]

Gasboy, on 22 July 2014 - 07:25 PM, said:

Didn't it just turn 3049? It's not like the 10P will be instantly available everywhere.

It's currently the end of July 3049.

Javelin is not my first (or second, or third) choice, but it's not out of the timeline. Specially if it is released in a few months.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Odanan, on 27 July 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

It's currently the end of July 3049.

Javelin is not my first (or second, or third) choice, but it's not out of the timeline. Specially if it is released in a few months.

Only six more years to wait for my Daikyu.

[Odanan]

Steinar Bergstol, on 27 July 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:

Only six more years to wait for my Daikyu.

You talking about this?


It looks like you will have to wait more.*

Look:
First variants: 3055
Second variant: 3060
Third variant: 3064

*unless PGI does leaps to the future, something they hinted they might do.

[Odanan]

About the new patch:

Odanan, on 29 July 2014 - 02:27 PM, said:

2 Consumable modules for every mech: really? Do you want obligatory 48 artillery/air strikes each match?

Suggestion:

small (up to 50 tons) IS mechs: 2 consumables
large IS mechs: 1 consumable

small Clan mechs: 1 consumable
large Clan mechs: no consumables

EDIT:

PGI is also losing the opportunity to improve some inferior chassis/variants by giving them significantly more modules.

We know the Weapon modules not worthless. Since the bonuses are ridiculous, why not REMOVING the heat penalty?

And PGI should add more options for them like:

- minimal damage increase;
- minimal rate of fire improvement;
- reduced spread (for missiles);
- faster lock-on (LRMs and SSRMs);
- shorter laser bust;
- faster projectiles;
- and so on...

TBH, I think the weapon modules should not be separated by each weapon type, but category (lasers, missiles, autocannons..)

What do you guys think?