86 replies to this topic

[MeiSooHaityu]

Mavairo, on 28 January 2015 - 08:44 PM, said:

also weapon normalization sizes, suck for another reason.

Let's be honest, no one in their right mind is or SHOULD EVER run an AC20 on a raven, PPC etc etc. It's just not gonna work out all that well. The sheer ridiculousness of the combo is why people ever bothered doing it in the first place.....

Right!

The Gauss Raven was such a better choice. A/C20 ravens generate too much heat after a few shots and they are slower. I always preferred the gauss more (at least before the charge mechanic).

Something tells me that wasn't your point though

[xengk]

Mavairo, on 28 January 2015 - 10:05 AM, said:

They're very hard to find now. Mine I bought somewhere around ten years ago. You can still find them on ebay, the energy gun arm variant is on ebay right now, but you will pay serious $$$$$ for these now.
I bought mine for like 25.99 in a game store ten years ago.
Now they're upwards around $200 USD the few I have found.

http://www.ebay.com/...=item5b0ba5e936

Others like the Jupiter are still kind of sane. (I have a Jupiter as well) at 70 USD.
But the Mad Cats.....yeah.

Thanks for the heads up.
Luckily I don't identify with the mechs available, guess that saved me a bunch of money.

[NUK3]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2015 - 10:45 PM, said:

SOON^tm

Oh god no! I planned on purchasing some Awesomes after I'll get bored with my King Crabs. But if THAT transformation takes place, I'll think twice about my next 'Mech. Seriously, the AWS looks gorgeous the way it is. There's no need to change the PPC visuals. I'd rather do without visual customization than seeing all the Awesome's majesic PPCs and missile hardpoints getting replaced by LEGO.

I just hope Bishop's mockup won't turn into reality.

Edited by NUK3, 29 January 2015 - 02:55 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

NUK3, on 29 January 2015 - 02:54 AM, said:

Oh god no! I planned on purchasing some Awesomes after I'll get bored with my King Crabs. But if THAT transformation takes place, I'll think twice about my next 'Mech. Seriously, the AWS looks gorgeous the way it is. There's no need to change the PPC visuals. I'd rather do without visual customization than seeing all the Awesome's majesic PPCs and missile hardpoints getting replaced by LEGO.

I just hope Bishop's mockup won't turn into reality.

Maybe our posts on the subject will help determine how future implementations of the weapon normalization will go. It may be too late for the Catapult or Centurion, but hopefully the Awesome has a chance.

[Nightshade24]

Personally I like the new arm.

Also you guys need to learn that the Ballistic weapons are catagorised by DAMAGE OUTPUT not SIZE.

ALL autocannons can be around25mm to 203mm shells.
Say an Autocannon 10 is a 25 mm gun that fires 10 times (1 damage per bullet) very quickly or a larger 150 mm single shell doing a direct 10 damage.

This is my main defense for the lack of consistency between mech weapons.

Look at the actual mechs, you will quickly notice that there are mechs that have very large and very small weapons that are the same gun. As well as these guns shaped different way (ie catapult K2 PPC's verse Awesome PPC's verse Warhawk PPC's verse Panther PPC's)


I personally like the current catapult K2. I kinda think the scale of the catapult is a tad to big though in general so my feeligns are still neutral about the arms. I think they should change size depending on the weapon like the shoulder mounted weapons for the timberwolf... only problem is what happens if you got no weapon...[/color]

Edited by Nightshade24, 29 January 2015 - 03:04 AM.

[NUK3]

Your gun diameter argument is valid and I also use this very argument to comfort myself. But instead of the "N bullets" I tell myself that a shell with 1/N of the mass and square-root-of-N times the speed of the original shell still has the same energy. Works for me

[Bishop Steiner]

Nightshade24, on 29 January 2015 - 03:03 AM, said:

Personally I like the new arm.

Also you guys need to learn that the Ballistic weapons are catagorised by DAMAGE OUTPUT not SIZE.

ALL autocannons can be around25mm to 203mm shells.
Say an Autocannon 10 is a 25 mm gun that fires 10 times (1 damage per bullet) very quickly or a larger 150 mm single shell doing a direct 10 damage.

This is my main defense for the lack of consistency between mech weapons.

Look at the actual mechs, you will quickly notice that there are mechs that have very large and very small weapons that are the same gun. As well as these guns shaped different way (ie catapult K2 PPC's verse Awesome PPC's verse Warhawk PPC's verse Panther PPC's)


I personally like the current catapult K2. I kinda think the scale of the catapult is a tad to big though in general so my feeligns are still neutral about the arms. I think they should change size depending on the weapon like the shoulder mounted weapons for the timberwolf... only problem is what happens if you got no weapon...[/color]

so....that ac10 firing in different manners....it's still 12 tons, yes? Because while weight can come in some degree of shape and sizes, when you are taking too functionally similar items, the discrepancy tends to be small. It's not here.

Also, not all cannons can be of all calibers. There are exactly zero 185-203mm ac2s. That said, there is and should be some variety, and size discrepancies would be OK.....if they were within the realm of sanity, but often, they simply are not.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 January 2015 - 04:48 AM.

[Mavairo]

MeiSooHaityu, on 29 January 2015 - 01:10 AM, said:

Right!

The Gauss Raven was such a better choice. A/C20 ravens generate too much heat after a few shots and they are slower. I always preferred the gauss more (at least before the charge mechanic).

Something tells me that wasn't your point though

Even the GR raven is hardly anything optimal.
And is only fielded cause it's funny that you can.
Might as well have the looks to go with it!

[Fate 6]

I miss my YLW cannon arm so badly...

[LordKnightFandragon]

NUK3, on 29 January 2015 - 02:54 AM, said:

Oh god no! I planned on purchasing some Awesomes after I'll get bored with my King Crabs. But if THAT transformation takes place, I'll think twice about my next 'Mech. Seriously, the AWS looks gorgeous the way it is. There's no need to change the PPC visuals. I'd rather do without visual customization than seeing all the Awesome's majesic PPCs and missile hardpoints getting replaced by LEGO.

I just hope Bishop's mockup won't turn into reality.

I dont think that is a mockup by Bishop, I think it was concept art by PGI.....

Nightshade24, on 29 January 2015 - 03:03 AM, said:

Personally I like the new arm.

Also you guys need to learn that the Ballistic weapons are catagorised by DAMAGE OUTPUT not SIZE.

ALL autocannons can be around25mm to 203mm shells.
Say an Autocannon 10 is a 25 mm gun that fires 10 times (1 damage per bullet) very quickly or a larger 150 mm single shell doing a direct 10 damage.

This is my main defense for the lack of consistency between mech weapons.

Look at the actual mechs, you will quickly notice that there are mechs that have very large and very small weapons that are the same gun. As well as these guns shaped different way (ie catapult K2 PPC's verse Awesome PPC's verse Warhawk PPC's verse Panther PPC's)


I personally like the current catapult K2. I kinda think the scale of the catapult is a tad to big though in general so my feeligns are still neutral about the arms. I think they should change size depending on the weapon like the shoulder mounted weapons for the timberwolf... only problem is what happens if you got no weapon...[/color]

LOL, Mech MACHINEGUNS are 30mm.....

The UAC2 is maybe a 40-60mm shell, 5s are 75-90mm 10s are 100-150mm, 20's are even bigger yet, up to 203mm.....

That centurion arm we have now, its about the size of a 30mm machinegun shell........what we used to have was a Mech cannon....

[MauttyKoray]

Wrath of Clan Wolverine, on 27 January 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

PGI was already aware of the issue when they released the revisions. They have a rework in progress for scaling issues for many of the problem mechs, though I cannot recall mention of a particular ETA. I believe this came up in the last Town Hall with Russ.

Sadly I don't think we'll get a reversion to the 'old' hardpoint art ever. As for the scaling issue with the weapons, they know and the ETA was sometime this year I believe. They're going back and rescaling the weapons for every mech, making sure their size is at least sensible.

However, you guys realize that in BT the weapons had many different manufacturers, resulting in different sizes, weapon traits, etc. I don't see the issue with smaller PPCs on smaller mechs and larger ones on bigger mechs. Would love them to have traits like the BT universe does (different rates of fire, damage per shot, etc but they were grouped into categories because they generally averaged out with one another).

[Brody319]

LordKnightFandragon, on 29 January 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

I dont think that is a mockup by Bishop, I think it was concept art by PGI.....




LOL, Mech MACHINEGUNS are 30mm.....

The UAC2 is maybe a 40-60mm shell, 5s are 75-90mm 10s are 100-150mm, 20's are even bigger yet, up to 203mm.....

That centurion arm we have now, its about the size of a 30mm machinegun shell........what we used to have was a Mech cannon....

well the weapons are not given a specific ammo size so we can only speculate.

What we do know is that weapons are named after the damage they do.

AC2s do 2 damage. So technically speaking, if I make a big gun that shoots a slow projectile and deal "2 damage". then a small gun that fires a fast projectile and deals "2 damage" are essentially the same thing.

[Tombstoner]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2015 - 10:15 PM, said:

What i see as a travesty is both mechs are supposed to be about the same size in height. meaning the firestarter needs to be almost as tall as the larger mech shoulder. That way weapon scaling is simplified and the targeting difficulty is derived more from speed then a size buff. This fact alone changes the TTK on the larger mech. meaning the effective amount of armor protection per ton invested is less then that of the smaller mech.

PGI really needs to just standardize weapon sizes. if they look goofy on the small mechs its because the mechs are way too small. A 3 crit slot item has the same crit size on smaller mechs or PGI needs to shrink crit slot space relative to mech size.

Build a FPS that emphasizes targeting skill correctly and not gerrymander the TT rules set.... A TT conversion needs way more work under the hood accounting for the differences between a TT and FPS.... small things are harder to hit. big things easier. thus size and speed interact and affect durability in ways not accounted for in TT. Unless its your intent to make lights as durable as assaults...

[badaa]

did pgi say the cents arm was temporary wile they work on sizing issues?

[terrycloth]

I've got an AC20 Raven. It's faster than a Gauss Raven because AC20s are one ton lighter. There are no heat problems. It works pretty well -- easier to use than any of the machine-gun-and-small-laser mechs.

You do have to get close in a relatively slow light mech, though, and you run out of ammo fast (I managed to squeeze on 3 tons but there's no real way to get more).

[Darzok]

I love the Cent my most used mech but i hate the new arm and would kill to get the old one back.

The size of weapons should be scaled to the mech there on and just leave it like that the whole standard weapon size looks out of place on lights its to big on assaults far to small it only works on med/heavy due to there size seem fairly close to each other unlike lights and assaults.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tombstoner, on 29 January 2015 - 03:31 PM, said:

What i see as a travesty is both mechs are supposed to be about the same size in height. meaning the firestarter needs to be almost as tall as the larger mech shoulder. That way weapon scaling is simplified and the targeting difficulty is derived more from speed then a size buff. This fact alone changes the TTK on the larger mech. meaning the effective amount of armor protection per ton invested is less then that of the smaller mech.

PGI really needs to just standardize weapon sizes. if they look goofy on the small mechs its because the mechs are way too small. A 3 crit slot item has the same crit size on smaller mechs or PGI needs to shrink crit slot space relative to mech size.

Build a FPS that emphasizes targeting skill correctly and not gerrymander the TT rules set.... A TT conversion needs way more work under the hood accounting for the differences between a TT and FPS.... small things are harder to hit. big things easier. thus size and speed interact and affect durability in ways not accounted for in TT. Unless its your intent to make lights as durable as assaults...

technically, it's the Heavies and Assaults that are way too big. The Tallest Assaults, the Executioner and the Banshee, are only supposed to be 14 meters, not the Atlas at near 18.

According to Catalyst Game Labs, the shortest mech is 8 meters, the tallest, 14.

[Escef]

I liked the old Cent arm better. I'm ambivalent about Cent missiles. Catapult? Yeah, the old PPC arms looked better, but it isn't a huge deal to me.

Universal weapon sizes? No. Just no.

Look at the Panther's right arm PPC.


And compare to the arm mounted PPCs on the 70 ton Warhammer.


PPCs in the MW/BT universe have never had a universal size beyond tonnage and crit slots. There's no universal barrel length or bore radius. Their appearance is by Rule of Cool. And I, for one, would prefer it stays that way.

[Dino Might]

The Wakelord, on 28 January 2015 - 01:33 AM, said:

If PPCs looked like that all my lights would use them (and then I'd be sad when arms get blown off for increasing my mech's volume by 40% but I'd look awesome before I blew up)

Agree. I REALLY want Bishop's PPC Locust. I would run that thing just on looks alone.

Edited by Dino Might, 29 January 2015 - 06:08 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 January 2015 - 04:56 PM, said:

technically, it's the Heavies and Assaults that are way too big. The Tallest Assaults, the Executioner and the Banshee, are only supposed to be 14 meters, not the Atlas at near 18.

According to Catalyst Game Labs, the shortest mech is 8 meters, the tallest, 14.

yeah, 8meters, not like our lights, that are 8 feet......

The warhawk is 12m, the shortest mech is 8m? Im pretty sure 8 isnt half of 12, and the WHK should not be 2x the size of a commando. I long for the day this game feels like Mechwarrior universe and not Call of Duty: Metal Monsters.

Poor Commando should be about just below the WHKs cockpit. Isnt the Atlas only like 13m? It should be barely taller then the WHK, and even the Dire Whale, it shouldnt be any bigger around then a WHK. That upper portion of the mech? yeah....PGi and their scaling team....I wanna go all Amaris and the Matar team on their butts.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 29 January 2015 - 06:09 PM.