35 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

Kain Demos, on 12 July 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

...Honestly I don't think the Highlander will even be better than the Warhawk or Executioner and the Orion IIC may even be the 4th best Clan heavy after the Timberwolf, Hellbringer, and Ebon Jaguar....

HGN-IIC does heavy weapons better than WHK and EXE in most cases, e.g. it can do 2UAC/10 better than them (but not DW for obvious reasons!). The same could be said for ON1-IIC compared to TBR/EBJ. This should be no surprise actually because of IIC's flexible "IS construction rules".

[ShadowWolf Kell]

I wouldn't bother going all crazy and starting QQ threads. Until we actually see the re-balance on the PTS there's really no point, unless the re-balance gets voted down. Launch date is Dec 15th I think... well past the rebalance pass(es).

Edited by ShadowWolf Kell, 12 July 2015 - 03:28 PM.

[Throat Punch]

I cannot wait for the Hunchback IIC. I'll go *Boom** Boom* pew pew pew, and the enemy will be all like AHHHHHH and then I'll *Boom* *Boom* again and they will go FUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuu *POP* Bang crunch CLANG *die* and I'll be all like

[CyclonerM]

Nightmare1, on 12 July 2015 - 02:37 PM, said:

Locked Components has got to be the second worst idea PGI ever had.

Except, that was not PGI's idea ..

[KuroNyra]

Ha... The Huncback IIC will be mine, I'm waiting that guy since the start.

[Nightmare1]

CyclonerM, on 12 July 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

Except, that was not PGI's idea ..

But they've maintained it rather than repealing it, so now they own it.

[Black Arachne]

IIC's > Omni's


What is PGI smokin ?

[LastKhan]

Wait! clan battlemechs are going to be?... DUN DUN DUNNNN! Clan battlemechs?! *mind exploson, MLG, mt dew, dorritos.*

[Kain Demos]

Hit the Deck, on 12 July 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

HGN-IIC does heavy weapons better than WHK and EXE in most cases, e.g. it can do 2UAC/10 better than them (but not DW for obvious reasons!). The same could be said for ON1-IIC compared to TBR/EBJ. This should be no surprise actually because of IIC's flexible "IS construction rules".

Considering the only variant that has two ballistics for the Orion IIC has them in the same Torso I don't think it will be that hot of a dual ballistic platform.

[Hit the Deck]

Kain Demos, on 12 July 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:

Considering the only variant that has two ballistics for the Orion IIC has them in the same Torso I don't think it will be that hot of a dual ballistic platform.

I admit that the hardpoints on that variant is not that hot but at least it still can do 2Gauss + 1LPL (71 kph - Warhawk's speed) or 2UAC/10 + 2ERLL with 6t ammo (81kph). It should be interesting to note that no existing Clan Omnis can do these builds except the mighty Dire Wolf!

The HGN-IIC-C is a bit more exciting because the this variant also has 3E and JJs. For example: 2UAC/10 + 3ERML + 2SRM6+A + 3JJs, 64.3 kph. Should be a decent short-mid-range brawler. Can push better than the EXE although less mobile.You can also drop the SRMs and swap 2 cERML with 2 cERLL (or cLPL but it will be HOT).

Edited by Hit the Deck, 12 July 2015 - 05:26 PM.

[Jack Corban]

yada yada yada everyone can use them bla bla bla calm your **** 6 month early rage is 6 month early forum users all be stupid yada yada yada

just my 5 cent

[Rakshasa]

Black Arachne, on 12 July 2015 - 04:19 PM, said:

IIC's > Omni's


What is PGI smokin ?

Nothing, IIC's are better than OmniMechs for all practical purposes due to their customisability. OmniMechs are considered superior only by setting (i.e. writer) fiat. Mechanically speaking most Omni's are terribly designed, with weird upgrade choices and placement for their fixed internals. Every odd idea or system misunderstanding the TT writers had became canon and unalterable with OmniMechs because of the Omni design rules, which is why in MWO there are sad examples like the Ice Ferret, Summoner and Gargoyle - 'Mechs with glaring faults that cannot be fixed, yet still canonically being said to be better than their BattleMech counterparts, because...reasons.

Blame the 90's I guess

Edited by Rakshasa, 12 July 2015 - 05:31 PM.

[Hit the Deck]

Well, to be fair Omnis can mix and match Omni Pods to get the desired hardpoints which IIC 'Mechs can't do.

[Throat Punch]

Rakshasa, on 12 July 2015 - 05:24 PM, said:

Nothing, IIC's are better than OmniMechs for all practical purposes due to their customisability. OmniMechs are considered superior only by setting (i.e. writer) fiat. Mechanically speaking most Omni's are terribly designed, with weird upgrade choices and placement of their weapons and fixed internals. Every whimsical idea the old writers had became canon and unalterable with OmniMechs because of the Omni design rules, which is why we see sad examples like the Ice Ferret, Summoner and Gargoyle - 'Mechs with glaring faults that cannot be fixed, yet still being said to be better than their BattleMech counterparts, because...reasons.

Blame the 90's I guess

It was because when Clan tech was introduced in TT it was vastly better than anything the IS had. Also if you played a game that made use of build rules and so on you could swap an omni configs with no down time where per the construction rules for the IS you needed time, the salvage/parts, C-bills, and the techs to be able to retrofit your 'mech creating "franken-mechs". If you played a long TT campaign game and were using IS level 1 tech thats all you used. If you lost a 'mechs arm, you better hope you salvaged an arm somewhere and had the ability to put it on your mech. IS Battlemechs were basically, you used what you had because that was all you had, there was very little, to none actually, of this customization we see in MWO. It had nothing to do with "author's whims" . It had plenty to do with 'mech construction rules where the Omni 'mech reigned supreme.

[Ace Selin]

Black Arachne, on 12 July 2015 - 04:19 PM, said:

IIC's > Omni's


What is PGI smokin ?

IIC's > everything ....
thats where it looks like its heading without some serious disadvantages given to the IIC mechs..

[Rakshasa]

Mors Draco, on 12 July 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

It was because when Clan tech was introduced in TT it was vastly better than anything the IS had. Also if you played a game that made use of build rules and so on you could swap an omni configs with no down time where per the construction rules for the IS you needed time, the salvage/parts, C-bills, and the techs to be able to retrofit your 'mech creating "franken-mechs". If you played a long TT campaign game and were using IS level 1 tech thats all you used. If you lost a 'mechs arm, you better hope you salvaged an arm somewhere and had the ability to put it on your mech. IS Battlemechs were basically, you used what you had because that was all you had, there was very little, to none actually, of this customization we see in MWO. It had nothing to do with "author's whims" . It had plenty to do with 'mech construction rules where the Omni 'mech reigned supreme.

Then they could at least have fixed the problems the Omni's had before they introduced the Omni locking I know BattleTech is one of the last great bastions of patched-up bad rules, along with RIFTS and a couple others, but still. And I edited out the "author's whims" bit, figured that was a bit inflammatory. You must have quoted my post whilst I was editing

Edited by Rakshasa, 12 July 2015 - 05:44 PM.