244 replies to this topic

[VorpalAnvil]

Guys, guys, guys! C'mon, the brainless davion hordes have spoken: Viable and useful clan mech = OP! If they fix the suckonner PGI will HAVE to "fix" it back or most likely nerf it to the point that it is worse than it currently is already. Besides, we all know that kitfox is the new meta.

[Bishop Steiner]

Averen, on 23 May 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

Yep, I think it's viable to unlock jets without breaking the summoner, just because it has comparably few laser hardpoints. Might actually become a really great - and pleasantly different - heavy in that case.

Summoner without JJs exist. It's called a Hellbringer

[Averen]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 May 2015 - 07:45 AM, said:

Summoner without JJs exist. It's called a Hellbringer

*looks it up*

A summoner with slightly less tonnage, armor and somewhat worse hitboxes. Without ecm tho.

So, why do we even need a summoner then? Looks kinda pointless.

[Bishop Steiner]

Averen, on 23 May 2015 - 07:49 AM, said:

*looks it up*

A summoner with slightly less tonnage, armor and somewhat worse hitboxes. Without ecm tho.

So, why do we even need a summoner then? Looks kinda pointless.

JJs. And the mobility fighting style they bring

[Summon3r]

the JJ's are integral part of the SMN imho, the clan mech lab needs to have FF ES unlocked along with DHS

[Averen]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 May 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

JJs. And the mobility fighting style they bring

Idk, don't really see how they are any more mobile than a timber...

Which is probably a point you can make about a lot of stuff, but the timber isn't exactly used as a fast mobile fighter despite 80kph and JJ's. Which ofc also is because of weak jj's. Then again, jj-quirks for the summoner might be a more interesting idea than modifications on the chassis itself.

Edited by Averen, 23 May 2015 - 07:59 AM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Averen, on 23 May 2015 - 07:58 AM, said:

Idk, don't really see how they are any more mobile than a timber...

Which is probably a point you can make about a lot of stuff, but the timber isn't exactly used as a fast mobile fighter despite 80kph and JJ's. Which ofc also is because of weak jj's. Then again, jj-quirks for the summoner might be a more interesting idea than modifications on the chassis itself.

Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways. I still don't understand why PGI put that variant out so early.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways. I still don't understand why PGI put that variant out so early.

and omnipod JJs should be less powerful and efficient than locked ones on stock designs.

[Escef]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways. I still don't understand why PGI put that variant out so early.

Master Unit Lists says the Timber Wolf S first hit hte field in 3050. Explain to me why we shouldn't have it yet.

[Deathlike]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways. I still don't understand why PGI put that variant out so early.

[Nathan Foxbane]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways. I still don't understand why PGI put that variant out so early.

Technically, we should be able to mount JJs to any Omni which lacks them as fixed equipment. We should also be able to mount ECM to any Clan 'Mech and place any weapon anywhere with enough criticals to contain it. But such TT rules were deemed OP and hammered into the ground along with mounting ECM on any 'Mech. But that is what happens when you put the ECM cart before the Active Probe and Artemis IV horses.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Escef, on 23 May 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Master Unit Lists says the Timber Wolf S first hit hte field in 3050. Explain to me why we shouldn't have it yet.

Only if you first explain why you decided to respond in the tone of a sarcastic jerk instead of someone who's got different information.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Nathan Foxbane, on 23 May 2015 - 08:18 AM, said:

Technically, we should be able to mount JJs to any Omni which lacks them as fixed equipment. We should also be able to mount ECM to any Clan 'Mech and place any weapon anywhere with enough criticals to contain it. But such TT rules were deemed OP and hammered into the ground along with mounting ECM on any 'Mech. But that is what happens when you put the ECM cart before the Active Probe and Artemis IV horses.

Eh, even not counting potential ECM issues, the hardpoint/omnipod thing makes sense, given the way standard BattleMechs have been so far. I suppose theoretically any equipment could have been mountable anywhere, but then there would be grounds to say that that could be done with standard 'mechs (which it technically can, it just takes a lot more time and money), and then we sort of walk sideways into a mess of redoing the 'mech construction system of the entire game, which isn't going to be (and shouldn't be) revisited after so much work's been done on the game.


Meandering back to the original topic, I'd totally be on board for some pod quirks for the Summoner. Maybe to discourage laserboating, each pod could have quirks that benefit weapons of types that there aren't hardpoints for on the pod? For instance, ballistics pods with PPC quirks, missile pods with LB-X quirks, et cetera? That would encourage varied loadouts (and could be done on any omnimech, too) and in the case of 'mechs with few hardpoints on any pods, like the Summoner, it could allow a pilot to be rewarded with better weapon quality for deliberately taking less weapon quantity.

[Lightfoot]

The Summoner just proves PGI's version of Clan Mechlab is flawed. Basically, unlock all the Equipment like the Inner Sphere gets, but lock the Engines for balance. Something like that.

That is unlikely though so just make the Summoner tougher with armor quirks. Maybe fast recharge, but the mech has limited loadouts so picking a certain weapon type to be buffed might actually just be another limitation.

Edited by Lightfoot, 24 May 2015 - 05:19 AM.

[Escef]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

Only if you first explain why you decided to respond in the tone of a sarcastic jerk instead of someone who's got different information.

I didn't. I'm not responsible for what you read into my words. Now, once again, why is it that you believe "Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways."?

[Burktross]

lordtzar, on 22 May 2015 - 11:31 PM, said:

What I'd personally like to see are some big quirks like some of the IS mechs. Keep the hardpoints to low-ish numbers but have set bonus quirks that reflect the stock loadouts.

Like the prime variant......

With all prime omnipods equipped, you get something along the lines of ERPPC bonuses of pre-nerf thunderbolt 9S and the cent-D LBX10 bonuses and I guess throw some LRM15 bonuses in even though it doesn't really have the tonnage to bring it.

It can't fit more than one of each weapon system, so it couldn't possibly be overpowered but it would be really effective with it's intended loadout.

Dude, even I thought the TDR was op. Don't ***** out the Summoner. Make it a respectable mech like it deserves.

[Bishop Steiner]

Burktross, on 23 May 2015 - 08:38 AM, said:

Dude, even I thought the TDR was op. Don't ***** out the Summoner. Make it a respectable mech like it deserves.

he does have a point though that quirks that were OP on the TDR aren't so much here because it can't mount multiples

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Escef, on 23 May 2015 - 08:37 AM, said:

I didn't. I'm not responsible for what you read into my words. Now, once again, why is it that you believe "Technically, we shouldn't have jumping Timber Wolves yet anyways."?

You didn't say 'You're wrong, here's why', you said, 'You're wrong, explain yourself.' One's a reasonable argument, the other's- well, I don't know what it is, exactly, but it's hostile.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 23 May 2015 - 08:45 AM.

[Escef]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 23 May 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

You didn't say 'You're wrong, here's why', you said, 'You're wrong, explain yourself.' One's a reasonable argument, the other's- well, I don't know what it is, exactly, but it's hostile.

One should for some reason be accommodating to misinformation that has been debunked multiple times since before Wave I released? Nope, not buying it.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Escef, on 23 May 2015 - 08:50 AM, said:

One should for some reason be accommodating to misinformation that has been debunked multiple times since before Wave I released? Nope, not buying it.

Save your hostility for people who were part of those conversations then. I can't read every topic on the board, and I don't expect anyone else to. I'm not sure why you're expecting me to.