Jump to content

Support Your Wang - Dev Response Inside!


145 replies to this topic

#121 LordKnightFandragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,239 posts

Posted 13 March 2015 - 06:34 PM

View PostFupDup, on 14 February 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

Dynamic weapon geometry can be both a blessing and a curse...



Well, based on what ive seen of it, its mostly a curse. Warhawks with stubbies, Mad Dogs with stubbies, centurions with w/e the hell you call those...things... on their arms. Catapults with VCRs. its gunna be absolutely hilariously horrible when a Mauler or a Zeus equips lasers on its arms and the arm goes from a big menacing looking weapon to a little pencil looking stubby thing.

What else has dynamic weaponry destroyed? Hellbringers get stubbies to?

#122 Lulz Kev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 604 posts

Posted 13 March 2015 - 06:43 PM

View PostLordKnightFandragon, on 13 March 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:



Well, based on what ive seen of it, its mostly a curse. Warhawks with stubbies, Mad Dogs with stubbies, centurions with w/e the hell you call those...things... on their arms. Catapults with VCRs. its gunna be absolutely hilariously horrible when a Mauler or a Zeus equips lasers on its arms and the arm goes from a big menacing looking weapon to a little pencil looking stubby thing.

What else has dynamic weaponry destroyed? Hellbringers get stubbies to?


A few more to be added to the list Tuesday :/

Jager and Cataphract I think

#123 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 13 March 2015 - 08:52 PM

View PostLordKnightFandragon, on 13 March 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:



Well, based on what ive seen of it, its mostly a curse. Warhawks with stubbies, Mad Dogs with stubbies, centurions with w/e the hell you call those...things... on their arms. Catapults with VCRs. its gunna be absolutely hilariously horrible when a Mauler or a Zeus equips lasers on its arms and the arm goes from a big menacing looking weapon to a little pencil looking stubby thing.

What else has dynamic weaponry destroyed? Hellbringers get stubbies to?


It'd destroyed the Mist Lynx as a viable chassis thanks to how big it makes the arms. I wouldn't be so mad, but this image clearly shows that the excuse we were given about the weapon sizes needing to be consistent is bunk; the lasers are much smaller on the Adder, which not only looks better, it makes the mech better. Those lasers on the Adder are LPLs, by the way.

It's also made the Hunchbacks ugly, especially the 4P and 4J, and it cost the 4H its cool inverted hunch. The 4G looks pretty hilariously bad with an extra weapon barrel sticking out of that monstrous AC20 slot when whatever the replacement was could clearly have fired from there without adding on barrel length.

The Ravens came out better than just about any other mech, but they still lost their cool laser arm tubes to the blocky monstrosity that's being used now. The Jager is about the only other mech that looks better with dynamic hardpoints than without. There are some mechs too, like the Victor and Highlander, where you can tell that the mech's model looks bad because they had to build it with enough room to stick a bunch of weapons on there, making them look blocky and leaving them with big blank spots too.

#124 Looke Groundrunner

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 21 posts

Posted 13 March 2015 - 11:37 PM

View PostMIKE25S, on 14 February 2015 - 09:11 PM, said:

I really liked the look of the old arm, but considering the fact that the Dragons AC arm has yet to be updated I doubt they will make it a priority.

The dragon is one of my favorite mechs, and I was looking forward to it finally getting updated. After seeing the centurion however, I am kind of dreading how they might ruin my dream machine... They had better not give it a lazy "block-with-a-gun-in-it."

#125 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 12:55 AM

View PostLooke Groundrunner, on 13 March 2015 - 11:37 PM, said:

The dragon is one of my favorite mechs, and I was looking forward to it finally getting updated. After seeing the centurion however, I am kind of dreading how they might ruin my dream machine... They had better not give it a lazy "block-with-a-gun-in-it."


Sorry, it's going to be a block with a gun in it. Every other mech has gone the lazy route, not sure why the Dragon would be any different.

#126 Lulz Kev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 604 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 01:01 AM

View Postaniviron, on 14 March 2015 - 12:55 AM, said:


Sorry, it's going to be a block with a gun in it. Every other mech has gone the lazy route, not sure why the Dragon would be any different.


Yeah unfortunately they seem pretty set in their ways currently with all the weapon overhauls. I'm hopeful in the future they will fine tune them when work load is lower. Hopeful.

#127 Mad Porthos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • LocationChicago, Illinois

Posted 14 March 2015 - 07:55 AM

Ya know, I hate to say it - but we the community asked for this. We asked for the block with a gun, we asked for a normalized Ac20 look and size, we asked for a centurion arm that was smaller, like then centurion-ALs. Maybe some of you individually didn't ask, but in ask the devs forums, polls and ngng chats - time and time again people said their AC20 was constantly being focus fired and blown off their mech, their YLW that they PAID good spacebux and real moneyz for.

Another huge piece of QQ, was that weapons were different sizes on different mechs... an AC20 on a centurion, easy to hit... on a raven 4x, you thought it was a machine gun - then mebbe an ac5, after the first normalization. Even once it got impressively hollow and big on a raven, still QQ that it should not carry it at all - or it should be even bigger so it could be shot off easier, since it was unfairly on a light mech. People wanted a smaller AC20 on a centurion and they also did not want multiple small weapons ' sharing' one barrel, with each one represented clearly and in a proportion that let you read the mech loadout visually... or see that someone was running nothing in the arm, so that as an enemy you dont waste time destroying another shield arm.

So we got what we wanted - and now we don't want it. What they have said is true, the hitboxes hax to be shrunk if we wanted centurions who were not losing their cannon way more often than was reasonable, adding extra armor and structure is not enough in an alpha heavy environment where the only real survivability comes from decreasing the ability to drop a full alpha into one area - by making said area smaller.

#128 Lulz Kev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 604 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 08:49 AM

View PostMad Porthos, on 14 March 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

So we got what we wanted


Uh what? I wanted no part in the gun changing and was completely unaware they were even talking about it. As you can see from the thread there's a majority opinion AGAINST the change.

The concept is good, its just poorly executed a lot of mechs now have undesirable appearances because of the weapon changes.
Also, if I'm reading Alex's reply right. The ac20 hitbox 'scaled up' meaning BIGGER then the original arm. I've asked Alex to confirm.

The thing that made the difference is the fact they buffed the armor.

And let's be honest, if you need the new weapon geometry to see a YLW is sporting an AC20 you have alot more to learn.

Edited by DTF Kev, 14 March 2015 - 08:52 AM.


#129 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 14 March 2015 - 09:31 AM

View PostMavairo, on 18 February 2015 - 07:01 PM, said:

https://www.youtube....e&v=umDr0mPuyQc
Every MWO player everytime PGI announces revised weapon geometry.

It is the kiss of doom on class..

We know how the elves felt, when Frodo took the ring to mordor, only it happens more than once sadly

#130 Viges

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,119 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 09:36 AM

I don't understand this excuse about standartisation. They have it ok on highlanders

Spoiler


I guess they just don't want to change things that they can't sell again.

#131 Clint Steel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 567 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 14 March 2015 - 01:52 PM

I like that they are trying to make the guns the same scale but they seem to have been a bit lazy about it.

At the very least, couldn't they just use the old arm when an AC20 was equipped?

#132 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 02:52 PM

View PostMad Porthos, on 14 March 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

Ya know, I hate to say it - but we the community asked for this. We asked for the block with a gun, we asked for a normalized Ac20 look and size, we asked for a centurion arm that was smaller, like then centurion-ALs. Maybe some of you individually didn't ask, but in ask the devs forums, polls and ngng chats - time and time again people said their AC20 was constantly being focus fired and blown off their mech, their YLW that they PAID good spacebux and real moneyz for.

Another huge piece of QQ, was that weapons were different sizes on different mechs... an AC20 on a centurion, easy to hit... on a raven 4x, you thought it was a machine gun - then mebbe an ac5, after the first normalization. Even once it got impressively hollow and big on a raven, still QQ that it should not carry it at all - or it should be even bigger so it could be shot off easier, since it was unfairly on a light mech. People wanted a smaller AC20 on a centurion and they also did not want multiple small weapons ' sharing' one barrel, with each one represented clearly and in a proportion that let you read the mech loadout visually... or see that someone was running nothing in the arm, so that as an enemy you dont waste time destroying another shield arm.

So we got what we wanted - and now we don't want it. What they have said is true, the hitboxes hax to be shrunk if we wanted centurions who were not losing their cannon way more often than was reasonable, adding extra armor and structure is not enough in an alpha heavy environment where the only real survivability comes from decreasing the ability to drop a full alpha into one area - by making said area smaller.


No, I don't think anyone has ever said, "Please make this look really bad." People have asked for more survivability, and they got it- but the model change had virtually nothing to do with it, the new model is really not much different from the old in terms of size. What did it was the armor/structure buffs that mechs with vulnerable weapon arms got in the form of quirks. THAT is what people were asking for. I don't think I've ever seen a single person make a thread, "PGI, please replace the awesome art asset on my mech with some legos."

#133 stjobe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,498 posts
  • LocationOn your six, chipping away at your rear armour.

Posted 14 March 2015 - 04:23 PM

View Poststjobe, on 23 October 2014 - 12:39 AM, said:

Some side-by-side comparisons of the pre- and post-patch Centurion:

CN9-A (with AC/10)
Posted Image

CN9-AL (with dual LLs)
Posted Image

CN9-D (with LB10-X and MG)
Posted Image

I'm not entirely sure I like the new Tigerstripe camo (in fact, I don't like it at all - it looks like some WWII German battleship camo, not tiger stripes), and as I feared the new gun geometry looks plain bad.

Do it right, PGI, or don't do it at all - ever heard of that one?


#134 Lulz Kev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 604 posts

Posted 14 March 2015 - 04:31 PM

Wow that's a good post! Good find!

Hopefully we can keep getting support maybe down the line PGI will reconsider

#135 Zakie Chan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts

Posted 10 April 2015 - 02:17 AM

Posted Image

And im here just waiting for PGI to care about lore/ Justin/Kai Allard...

Edit - Photo dated 5/9/2013 on my system, How far we have fallen... #NeverForget

Double Edit - If were gonna leave ac20 size the same across all chassis, is PGI going to properly scale down the centurion? Funny how everything gets wider/fatter from artist renditions to implementation...

Some chuckle head must be confusing his centimeters with inches... pity their wives...

Edited by Zakie Chan, 10 April 2015 - 02:24 AM.


#136 Sarlic

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Hearing Impaired
  • Hearing Impaired
  • 4,519 posts
  • LocationEurope

Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:29 AM

This is another good reason never to preorder any package again.

Because PGI can change the asset at anytime.

#137 Hillslam

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,198 posts
  • LocationWestern Hemisphere

Posted 10 April 2015 - 05:41 AM

View PostFupDup, on 14 February 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

Dynamic weapon geometry can be both a blessing and a curse...

Its a curse.

It is only a curse.

It has never been a blessing.

It needs reversed and redacted. The changes need reverted.

#138 Elizander

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,540 posts
  • LocationPhilippines

Posted 10 April 2015 - 06:03 AM

A toggle so it'd look like the old arm on your client would be nice. :P

#139 Telmasa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 10 April 2015 - 07:44 AM

I think the easy solution would be to just take all the "dynamic weapon geometry", and double everything in terms of size.

Hitboxes be damned.

#140 BourbonFaucet

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 767 posts

Posted 10 April 2015 - 09:09 AM

At the very least, they could make it so that if you only equip a single ballistic weapon on a centurion arm, the weapon is centered on the arm.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users