18 replies to this topic

[Merix]

When the Catapult K2 was first introduced the ballistic mounts were in the ears. They moved them into the side torsos afterwords to combat gauss peeking which was extremely strong at the time. Gauss are no longer the problem they once were in the meta and catapults are so far out of the meta giving them a slight buff could be helpful.

Catapults are getting their remodel, and to go along with that is it time to move the ballistic mounts back into the arms of the K2?

Welp looks like I was remembering CB completely wrong. They just lost the energy hard points, not moved the ballistic.

How about proposing moving the arms then. Think that would help the K2 show up more?

Edited by Merix, 08 January 2016 - 09:53 PM.

[Mcgral18]

They were never in the ears.

They lost a pair of Energy hardpoints (and lots of agility), but nothing about the Ballistic hardpoints has changed aside from dynamic visuals,

[DaZur]

Uhhh... Color me silly but I believe the ballistic hard-points were always in in LT/RT?

Been here since the 2nd beta invite and I can't ever recall them in the ears.

[Elizander]

The K2 never had ballistics in the arms and I don't remember them losing any hard points either.

[Bishop Steiner]

Merix, on 08 January 2016 - 09:44 PM, said:

When the Catapult K2 was first introduced the ballistic mounts were in the ears. They moved them into the side torsos afterwords to combat gauss peeking which was extremely strong at the time. Gauss are no longer the problem they once were in the meta and catapults are so far out of the meta giving them a slight buff could be helpful.

Catapults are getting their remodel, and to go along with that is it time to move the ballistic mounts back into the arms of the K2?

No, actually they never were. The ballistics were always low mounted, and the joke was always that people were squeezing 15 ton guns where .5 MGs were.

Elizander, on 08 January 2016 - 09:47 PM, said:

The K2 never had ballistics in the arms and I don't remember them losing any hard points either.

I forget where the others were, but yeah, there were 2 more E points in early early CB.

[Elizander]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 January 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

No, actually they never were. The ballistics were always low mounted, and the joke was always that people were squeezing 15 ton guns where .5 MGs were.


I forget where the others were, but yeah, there were 2 more E points in early early CB.

Oh, totally missed that. If they gave those back the Jester would be out of a job.

[Merix]

I guess I was just remembering things wrong. My bad. I could have sworn they used to be ear mounts. What was I remembering?

[Otto Cannon]

Thank you for the glimpse into your alternate version of reality.

[DaZur]

Merix, on 08 January 2016 - 09:50 PM, said:

I guess I was just remembering things wrong. My bad. I could have sworn they used to be ear mounts. What was I remembering?

No worries Merix...

Please excuse us if it feels like a pile on... It was just a bit of a "wha?!" moment for folks like myself who've been around a long time.

[Navid A1]

Merix, on 08 January 2016 - 09:44 PM, said:

How about proposing moving the arms then. Think that would help the K2 show up more?

It will the certain recipe for making it even worse.


You brought up this matter to Russ in twitter too?

[Lykaon]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 January 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

I forget where the others were, but yeah, there were 2 more E points in early early CB.

The removed energy hardpoints were taken from the arms.

RA 2 E
LA 2E
RT 1E 1B
LT 1E 1B

was the early hardpoint layout.

[Alistair Winter]

The question is:

Is it time to give the CPLT-K2 more energy hardpoints to keep up with the hardpoint inflation since 2012?

Spoiler

The answer is yes.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alistair Winter, on 09 January 2016 - 01:24 AM, said:

The question is:

Is it time to give the CPLT-K2 more energy hardpoints to keep up with the hardpoint inflation since 2012?

Spoiler

The answer is yes.

I'd take it's old twist back and be happy

[Satan n stuff]

Alistair Winter, on 09 January 2016 - 01:24 AM, said:

The question is:

Is it time to give the CPLT-K2 more energy hardpoints to keep up with the hardpoint inflation since 2012?

Spoiler

The answer is yes.

Only if every Catapult gets more hardpoints. 7 hardpoints should do it, that's on par with the best 65 ton mechs.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 09 January 2016 - 03:25 AM.

[LordNothing]

i think there was an MWLL (maybe mektek) version of the catapult that had guns in the arms. could have also been the beatstick <3. i think thats what he remembers.

Edited by LordNothing, 09 January 2016 - 04:20 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 January 2016 - 01:34 AM, said:

I'd take it's old twist back and be happy

And more torso pitch. Pitch first, actually.

[Bishop Steiner]

Yeonne Greene, on 09 January 2016 - 09:35 AM, said:

And more torso pitch. Pitch first, actually.

Meh. It has good arm pitch.

Ain't like the HBK-IIC where it got no arm weapons.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 January 2016 - 09:38 AM, said:

Meh. It has good arm pitch.

Ain't like the HBK-IIC where it got no arm weapons.

Only matters if you put your big guns in the arms which, for obvious reasons, some of us don't.

I mean, yeah, I know you like your stock/super-stock builds, but that's no excuse to handicap it for people who want to build it differently. I shouldn't be punished for choosing to make ballistics my main punch on a 'Mech whose primary differentiating characteristic is the fact that it has those ballistics.

Apart from quirks, there's actually nothing stopping you from running PPCs on a Jester.

[Bishop Steiner]

Yeonne Greene, on 09 January 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

Only matters if you put your big guns in the arms which, for obvious reasons, some of us don't.

I mean, yeah, I know you like your stock/super-stock builds, but that's no excuse to handicap it for people who want to build it differently. I shouldn't be punished for choosing to make ballistics my main punch on a 'Mech whose primary differentiating characteristic is the fact that it has those ballistics.

Apart from quirks, there's actually nothing stopping you from running PPCs on a Jester.

Is it handicapping it? It has the option for good pitch, you yourself said some of you choose not to use it. Player choice, not chassis flaw. You're not being punished, you are choosing to accept limitations to build a mech counter to it's actual intended design. The mech's "differentiating characteristic" is it had MGs. Anti infantry weapons.

There's already a great K2 with ballistic arms...it's called a Jagermech.

Another example of why MWO should have had sized hardpoints.