1212 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

But the cheater also has missile high mounts in it's arms as they are are not mounted low like they tipicly would be

That's besides the point, missiles spread far out are not good, I'm not able to check where the hardpoints would be placed section-wise so I'm unsure on whether you run several in the same section or adjacent sections, but I doubt they would be as tight as the Hunchback IIC's. The only problem with the Missileback IIC is that it can't mount a larger engine to try and make up for its relative squishiness.

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I love the HBK IIC, I am a Hunchy-juncky, but it does not change the fact that the HBK IIC is squishy.

That's because it has no structure quirks, and thanks to its high mounts, it can poke safer than the SCrow. I know some of us in the comp groups have been testing this since it became available for c-bills, but it is looking solid, especially compared against the Nova which is its direct competitor (HBK-IIC-A outperforms almost all energy builds outside small laser boats and PPC boats), minus the structure buffs though.

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

I am not denying the quirks helped out the Adder, but one can also make the argument that when PGI unlocked it's flamer helped it out just as much, perhaps even more so that Its quirks.

It really only helped the laser boat builds (ERLL/MPL spam), the PPC build was unaffected, and the splat/streak builds often use the flamer in that area now that it is useful. So I'm still going to side with the quirks helping it out a lot.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 March 2016 - 11:14 AM.

[Coralld]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

That's besides the point, missiles spread far out are not good, I'm not able to check where the hardpoints would be placed section-wise so I'm unsure on whether you run several in the same section or adjacent sections, but I doubt they would be as tight as the Hunchback IIC's. The only problem with the Missileback IIC is that it can't mount a larger engine to try and make up for its relative squishiness.


That's because it has no structure quirks, and thanks to its high mounts, it can poke safer than the SCrow. I know some of us in the comp groups have been testing this since it became available for c-bills, but it is looking solid, especially compared against the Nova which is its direct competitor (HBK-IIC-A outperforms almost all energy builds outside small laser boats and PPC boats), minus the structure buffs though.


It really only helped the laser boat builds (ERLL/MPL spam), the PPC build was unaffected, and the splat/streak builds often use the flamer in that area now that it is useful. So I'm still going to side with the quirks helping it out a lot.

If you are looking for hardpoint locations on the Huntsman then ask FupDup, he did a whole spread sheet on it.
Also I mentioned the Huntsman would also have potentially high mounted energy in the arms like the missile pod on the Cheater. As for the STs it's a safe bet it's weapon locations will be at least just bellow the cockpit.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

Also I mentioned the Huntsman would also have potentially high mounted energy in the arms like the missile pod on the Cheater.

Doubtful for all but maybe special variants with one or two, also with the size of those arms in some of the artwork would probably mean it loses the arms faster than the Vindi or Trenchbucket, so it would most likely not be worth it to begin with.

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

As for the STs it's a safe bet it's weapon locations will be at least just bellow the cockpit.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.



Either way, I think people have a little too high of hopes for what the Huntsman is capable of.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 March 2016 - 11:48 AM.

[Coralld]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

Doubtful for all but maybe special variants with one or two, also with the size of those arms in some of the artwork would probably mean it loses the arms faster than the Vindi or Trenchbucket, so it would most likely not be worth it to begin with.


I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.



Either way, I think people have a little too high of hopes for what the Huntsman is capable of.

As they say "Well that's just like your opinion man."

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 11:49 AM, said:

As they say "Well that's just like your opinion man."

It may be an opinion, but it is one backed up by experience, both my own and my fellow teammates.

[Coralld]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 11:58 AM, said:

It may be an opinion, but it is one backed up by experience, both my own and my fellow teammates.

The remark was to your opinion that the Huntsman would not have high mounts in anyway.
Also, say the Huntsman only has high mounts in it's arms or STs, it's no more of a weakness than that of the HBKs massive STs when they are hill humping.

Edited by Coralld, 18 March 2016 - 12:12 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

Also, say the Huntsman only has high mounts in it's arms

Well it has the high up head or CT laser, but the side torsos are always up for debate when it comes to the artwork, I don't think anyone expected the Banshee to have high mounts, but it did, unlike the Black Knight which got low mounted weapons for days.

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

it's no more of a weakness than that of the HBKs massive STs when they are hill humping.

It is, slightly, since the arms are weaker than STs, they also may stick up higher than the cockpit does, which is another problem.

[Coralld]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

Well it has the high up head or CT laser, but the side torsos are always up for debate when it comes to the artwork, I don't think anyone expected the Banshee to have high mounts, but it did, unlike the Black Knight which got low mounted weapons for days.


It is, slightly, since the arms are weaker than STs, they also may stick up higher than the cockpit does, which is another problem.

I'm with you on how the art work and eventual 3D model are different especially when it comes to STs weapon mounts.
As for the Black Knight, it was kinda a given it's ST weapon mounts were going to be low.

Your not wrong about that, but the vast majority of people aim for center mass, not arms. The only time people make an effort to go for the arms is if it's a mech people know run asymmetrical builds, like Dragons and Wolverines.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Coralld, on 18 March 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

Your not wrong about that, but the vast majority of people aim for center mass, not arms. The only time people make an effort to go for the arms is if it's a mech people know run asymmetrical builds, like Dragons and Wolverines.

If it doesn't have a bunch high mounted, you will most likely be asym, because otherwise you will have to expose too much or have odd convergence.

[Coralld]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

If it doesn't have a bunch high mounted, you will most likely be asym, because otherwise you will have to expose too much or have odd convergence.

That's not my experience, but what I have experience does not mean the same as what you have so this particular argument is a wash.

[Gas Guzzler]

The bigger problem with the Huntsman is that it isn't 40 tons!

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 18 March 2016 - 12:33 PM, said:

The bigger problem with the Huntsman is that it isn't shaped like a duck!

FTFY

[CK16]

LastKhan, on 18 March 2016 - 10:24 AM, said:

The one imp posted is more along the lines of a more hyper realistic Madcat mk2 with all the armor skirting and dodads. If there is going to be one it will more then likely be sharing alot of the style of the current concepts and in game models. No lanky legs mcgee like the mw4 version and not super ultra armored core like the mk7 most likely the in between.

Agree'ed but also that design just looks so sluggish and not at all what I envision the Mk.II to be like. The Mk.II should resemble its quite mobile. Looking a damn King crab had a ******* child with a some IS junk NO. I would be so pissed if they gave it that geometry and stance.

The Mk.II the biggest thing that drew me to it in MW4 was is stride, its movement. It seemed just sleeker and smoother then a ground pounder like the Direwolf or Atlas. Imperious complains he doesn't want a Direwolf like mech but yet if they went with that design that is exactly the kind of movement and close to geometry you would get.

I feel the Mad Cat Mk.II should have a stride not a prance or waddle..

The skirting and what not is ok, I just dislike the shape though of that MK..VII so much, let it be its own thing not the Mk.II....

Edited by CK16, 18 March 2016 - 01:29 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

CK16, on 18 March 2016 - 01:28 PM, said:

I feel the Mad Cat Mk.II should have a stride not a prance or waddle..

The irony is this is part of what I disliked about the MW4 version, well the overly long legs may have been the major factor in that.

[CK16]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 March 2016 - 01:35 PM, said:

The irony is this is part of what I disliked about the MW4 version, well the overly long legs may have been the major factor in that.

Yes that could, but they had a nice stride and length compared to the Direwolf. I admit the legs in that on are very thin. I would be happy if they gave it a similar movement to the Timberwolf in MWO....I mean it would be most logical there instead of a Direwolf or Warhawk "prance". Something that MK.VII design would not do, that would be short little stubby strides and at max speed would look not good..

[Pariah Devalis]

CK16, on 18 March 2016 - 01:28 PM, said:

I feel the Mad Cat Mk.II should have a stride not a prance or waddle..

Let it be put on my record that I stated "the only mech that should prance is the Nova Cat." Pew pew with swagger.

[Imperius]

Movement hasn't been the strongest suit in MWO sadly, sometimes I think they get rushed or something. People shouldn't worry about the look Alex hasn't failed us yet, the concern always comes with modeling and animation, but since the community has raised enough stink on the matter they have been doing really good.

[Pariah Devalis]

Imperius, on 19 March 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

Movement hasn't been the strongest suit in MWO sadly, sometimes I think they get rushed or something. People shouldn't worry about the look Alex hasn't failed us yet, the concern always comes with modeling and animation, but since the community has raised enough stink on the matter they have been doing really good.

What gets me is their animation team hit some home runs early on. Take the original Catapult walking animation. I hope they retain it for the new model, but the current, old pattern walks like you'd expect a chicken walker to walk. Most others almost look like their walk cycle, in regards to foot movement in particular, seems reversed.

[Y E O N N E]

Imperius, on 19 March 2016 - 02:34 AM, said:

Movement hasn't been the strongest suit in MWO sadly, sometimes I think they get rushed or something. People shouldn't worry about the look Alex hasn't failed us yet, the concern always comes with modeling and animation, but since the community has raised enough stink on the matter they have been doing really good.

Pariah Devalis, on 19 March 2016 - 02:57 AM, said:

What gets me is their animation team hit some home runs early on. Take the original Catapult walking animation. I hope they retain it for the new model, but the current, old pattern walks like you'd expect a chicken walker to walk. Most others almost look like their walk cycle, in regards to foot movement in particular, seems reversed.

Are they even the same animators, though? I read somewhere on here that there was something of an exodus of developers from PGI awhile back. That could explain the change in quality for the animations; the newer team is less experienced.

Also, there's an issue with some of these 'Mechs regarding the geometry. The torso cannons on the K2, torso PPC barrels on the Battlemaster and Dragon, and arms on the Rifleman do not bob with the rest of the 'Mech as it walks. It's...weird. They stay fixed in the air while the rest of the 'Mech bobs around. This doesn't happen with the Jager or Blackjack.

[Imperius]

Yeonne Greene, on 19 March 2016 - 05:28 AM, said:

Are they even the same animators, though? I read somewhere on here that there was something of an exodus of developers from PGI awhile back. That could explain the change in quality for the animations; the newer team is less experienced.

Also, there's an issue with some of these 'Mechs regarding the geometry. The torso cannons on the K2, torso PPC barrels on the Battlemaster and Dragon, and arms on the Rifleman do not bob with the rest of the 'Mech as it walks. It's...weird. They stay fixed in the air while the rest of the 'Mech bobs around. This doesn't happen with the Jager or Blackjack.

Well, if it comes out I can assure you I'll be all over making sure it's correct to Alex's concept art