181 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

Krivvan, on 19 April 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

I can't be the only one that likes the longer legs on an aesthetic level? The original squat cauldron born is one of the silliest and ugliest mechs I've ever seen.

I like it a lot too.

Trashhead, on 19 April 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

Agree.
However, PGi CAN make "legs like this".
The Nova and the Stormcrow use almost the same set of legs (only minor differences, if at all),
but the Nova's torso is still at a lower point then the S'crows:
And i bet the Nova could be lowered even more without looking (more) stupid, so i assume there is room for improvement.

EDIT:
besides, the original Legs (those that are mounted directly to the torso) for the Nova look even more ridiculous, come to think of it.
Which is part of why the walking animation in the video in this thread (Cauldron Born vs. Puma-Fight, see above somewhere), looks so odd... .

My 2 cents.

Oh, sure. The legs could be shorter, but not leaned back more, is where I'm going. The squatter profile with long legs as per MW3 looks awful. They of course could just use shorter legs.

But honestly - and I accept I'm in the minority here - I like the legs as they are.

[Tarogato]

Ultimatum X, on 19 April 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

Actually it's hindered by it's torso twist to use it's arms effectively.

...

I think you are mixing things up. You said yaw angle for the STK and yaw speed for the BLR. Did you mean to do angle vs. angle here?

I mean it exactly how I put it, but perhaps I was unclear, or I misunderstand the point you're trying to make. Most of the STK's have 60°-65° twist, one has 80°. The strongest, the meta-queen 4N, is one of the ones with a mere 60° range of motion.

The BLRs all have 75°-80° of twist, and only two have 60°. The strongest, the 3S (though debatable, I don't know my BLRs that well) has the 80°. The other candidate, the 1G, has 60°, but like all the others at least has 30° of arm range and a rotation rate of 80° per second. All the Stalkers (except the splat brawler) have a mere 60° per second.

In other words, the Stalkers are flat out inferior when it comes to torso twist performance, so I don't see how you can support an argument that Battlemasters are doomed mostly because of their poor torso twisting. And don't many of them run 345 STD engines, or even sometimes larger XLs? While the Stalkers usually run close to a 300 STD across the board.

Edited by Tarogato, 19 April 2015 - 04:38 PM.

[the hedgehog]

YES!

Unequivocally yes.

And yes to ALL the mechs as I feel their animations and a few models are in great need of love as they have a very RUSHED feel about them compared to a number of the other mechs.

[Wild Kadabra]

Lower profile C-Born definitely, the low profile is one of the defining characteristics of the mech, taking that away from it is like taking away an atlas's skull head.

[Raigir]

Complete agreement. The calling card of the ebon jaguar is supposed to be that low profile and sharp angle joints. PGI please listen to this feedback while the model is still in its early state.

[CutterWolf]

Yes!!

[klez]

signed

[Summon3r]

+1 op

[darkchylde]

Cauldron Born is supposed to have a low profile - it was designed to ambush its enemy.

[Knight Magus]

Ed Steele, on 19 April 2015 - 01:45 PM, said:

Some of the Clan mechs in MWO are taller than they are in TT or in older MW games because they have torsos (Nova, Cauldron Born...). Are you Clan players willing to give up the ability to torso twist in order to have a lower profile?

Can you point out where it was written that these clan mecns could not torso twist? And what advantages and disadvantages they gained from this?

[PhilTheDestroyer]

Yes, please shorten the legs a little bit.

[QuantumPolagnus]

I agree. The lower stance does look more menacing and closer to the model you showed.

[Ragtag soldier]

Knight Magus, on 19 April 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

Can you point out where it was written that these clan mecns could not torso twist? And what advantages and disadvantages they gained from this?

canonically, the 'mechs hip joints are mounted around their shoulders, so they don't have a waist. they can technically still torso twist but....well for them that means skipping sideways like they're in a dance number. a dance number that melts several tons of armor with a laser barrage but still.

[CHH Badkarma]

Yeah, an adjustment should be made. Keep this alive and maybe just maybe it will happen. They did adjust the clan emblems after all

Edited by CHH Badkarma, 19 April 2015 - 08:42 PM.

[FETTY WAP]

I support the fix.. if you're going to spend time modeling and coding a permanent addition to the game, do it correctly.

[STEF_]

Wintersdark, on 19 April 2015 - 12:48 PM, said:

It's one thing to draw this, another entirely to animate it. Legs like that would look utterly ridiculous walking - and we've got enough sketchy walking animations as it stands.

Why are you writing about walking issue of that tro design?
Have you seen taro's first post?
Taro's modified Ebon Jaguar would not have walking issues at all. And still it would be much better and closer to the original tro.

[Trashhead]

Wintersdark, on 19 April 2015 - 04:30 PM, said:

I like it a lot too.


Oh, sure. The legs could be shorter, but not leaned back more, is where I'm going. The squatter profile with long legs as per MW3 looks awful. They of course could just use shorter legs.

But honestly - and I accept I'm in the minority here - I like the legs as they are.

Don't worry.
As PGI already has modeled the Cauldron Born in a way that you like,
they will keep it that way, no matter what.
So you ~might~ be the minority here (which we don't know for sure, as people that are fine with the status quo usually don't speak up; hence why i am suggesting in game polls),
but PGI won't change the model.

At least not to the better.

(Catapult says "Hi")

[Tapdancing Kerensky]

I think both version look fine? A taller mech has an easier time shooting over hills anyway so I don't really see an issue.

[Ralgas]

somebody do me a favor and cut/paste the nova models legs onto the CB and show it. the torso seems fine

fixd, including animation

[Tennex]

DancingShade, on 19 April 2015 - 11:36 PM, said:

I think both version look fine? A taller mech has an easier time shooting over hills anyway so I don't really see an issue.

The flaw in that logic for anyone paying attention. Dont matter if its squat or tall, for hill humping.

Edited by Tennex, 20 April 2015 - 03:28 PM.