134 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 February 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

Bad Geometry and lack of Toughness Quirks are not the same as bad hitboxes.

Yes and no...geometry is pretty closely linked to how the hitboxes turn out, with some geos being easier to make good than others...

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 02 February 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:

If the hitboxes turn out like your mock up, I will be very pleased.

You should tweet that to Russ, that's definitely a good design.

done

[Gas Guzzler]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 February 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

OP updated to HOPEFULLY minimize future confusion.

Wait wait wait, you think the Claws are going to be part of the head hitbox now?????

[FupDup]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 February 2016 - 09:51 AM, said:

Wait wait wait, you think the Claws are going to be part of the head hitbox now?????

That would be the ultimate troll move by the modeling department.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 02 February 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

Yes and no...geometry is pretty closely linked to how the hitboxes turn out, with some geos being easier to make good than others...

Linked is not the same as interchangeable.. Some geometry, no amount of hitbox tweaking can save, thus the whole reason we started seeing Structure and Armor quirks to being with, before Russ started handing em like candy.....

Gas Guzzler, on 02 February 2016 - 09:51 AM, said:

Wait wait wait, you think the Claws are going to be part of the head hitbox now?????

don't make me change them to being part of your scrot's hitbox.....

[0bsidion]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 February 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

OP updated to HOPEFULLY minimize future confusion.


Bad Geometry and lack of Toughness Quirks are not the same as bad hitboxes.

I'll give you that one to an extent, but you and I both know it doesn't entirely excuse the Hunchie IIC.

[Bishop Steiner]

0bsidion, on 02 February 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

I'll give you that one to an extent, but you and I both know it doesn't entirely excuse the Hunchie IIC.

actually, it really is.

Just like the IS Hunchie...without solid quirks it would be insanely fragile still, because there is only so much you can do. On the IIC, the arms have been extended as much as makes sense, given the geometry, and really the only other change would be to make the CT even squishier. Which is why it's an example of needing ST structure quirks, unfortunately, just like it's ancestor.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 February 2016 - 09:09 AM, said:

If it does get less agility it will NEED that speed to be viable.

yup. Without twist quirks like the as7, its going to NEED at least a 350.

I kind of hope the claws do count as arm hitbox, just to make the arms even better at catching shots. I hope they keep this arm positioning - higher, aggressive, for looks and for blocking functionality.

[Lostdragon]

I am really excited about this mech, more so than I have been for any other one. The concept art looks great, as long as it is decently scaled and the hitboxes are ok then it should be quite serviceable.

It looks like there will be a lot of viable builds considering how many hardpoints most variants have. I will probably run the prime variant with 2 LPLs in the right arm, UAC20, and 2 SRM6. I am interested to see what hardpoints the hero will have, it may or may not be worth the money based on that.

[Bishop Steiner]

Wintersdark, on 02 February 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

yup. Without twist quirks like the as7, its going to NEED at least a 350.

I kind of hope the claws do count as arm hitbox, just to make the arms even better at catching shots. I hope they keep this arm positioning - higher, aggressive, for looks and for blocking functionality.

Looking at them, they really won't add much benefit as the arms just out considerably already. And you get to the point of diminishing gains where people will sharp shoot your claws while you are starting to peek, and blow you whole darn arm off that way. I really think it would be a very bad tradeoff, personally.

[FupDup]

Speaking of claws, I think they should be retractable using the missile bay doors button.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 02 February 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

Speaking of claws, I think they should be retractable using the missile bay doors button.

well, at least the outside ones......

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 February 2016 - 10:20 AM.

[pattonesque]

FupDup, on 02 February 2016 - 09:23 AM, said:

Why the heck do people always freaking ask this? Even on Sarna it says that the claws were just for looks only. They were never meant for actual melee combat, they would probably break instantly if they were used for that purpose.

The most you could hope to do with them is skewer a human or something.

because like, it's cool

why the heck are you getting so freaking weirded out by it

[Bishop Steiner]

pattonesque, on 02 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

because like, it's cool

why the heck are you getting so freaking weirded out by it

eh, because seeing the same ubernoob question asked 20x per Topic by people who obviously can't be bothered to read the replies in the thread gets kind of old?

[ExplicitContent]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 February 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

OP updated to HOPEFULLY minimize future confusion.


Bad Geometry and lack of Toughness Quirks are not the same as bad hitboxes.

Good luck with not confusing this lot

[cazidin]

Clearly, this is meant to boat small pulse lasers, LBX/2 and an LRM 20.

[Wintersdark]

pattonesque, on 02 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

because like, it's cool

why the heck are you getting so freaking weirded out by it

Because the question gets asked over and over again. It gets annoying.

cazidin, on 02 February 2016 - 11:17 AM, said:

Clearly, this is meant to boat small pulse lasers, LBX/2 and an LRM 20.

Anyone runs an LRM Kodiak, and I'm going to personally show up at their house and beat them to death with a salmon.

[Bobzilla]

I'd imagine they'd give it more CT less RT/LT then the photo. It's going to have an CXL most of the time anyways, make it an over sized CT hitbox (which usually seems to happen) and adjust it smaller if it isn't performing well.

Be nice if the upper arms stay short.

[Metus regem]

Wintersdark, on 02 February 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

Anyone runs an LRM Kodiak, and I'm going to personally show up at their house and beat them to death with a salmon.

That I would pay money to watch.

[FupDup]

pattonesque, on 02 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

because like, it's cool

why the heck are you getting so freaking weirded out by it

My jimmies are rustled because the question has been answered so many times that it's just getting ridiculously repetitive having to point it out over and over and over and over and over and over again.

It's like when PGI announced the Origins pack, and some people (like me) had to go around the forum and keep constantly reminding everybody that the IIC mechs are Battlemechs instead of Omnimechs.


TL;DR: There are some basic bits of information that nearly everybody ought to know by now. Advanced stuff is fine to not know, but things like this or that IIC example above are a lot harder to excuse.