259 replies to this topic

[Roughneck Cobra]

Wasnt actually bothered by quirks as much as I was bothered with only 3 missile slots on my favourite model, I wanted do a 4x10 pack puncher, not twin 15's or just 3x10.

Wanna Chainfire like a Catapult and just reign 10's of pain.

I'd dump all Quirks FOR that one missile slot, seriously

[Bishop Steiner]

Xavori, on 12 March 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

*sigh*

I might pick up the archers just for the 2R(S) (should be able to cycle LRM 5's to decent effect) and the Tempest (ECM heavy), but they're still petty meh, and definitely put a damper on my pre-ordering the Phoenix Hawk.

Cycling 3x LRM5? Color me unimpressed.

[Xavori]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 March 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

Cycling 3x LRM5? Color me unimpressed.

I'm not going to be able to do my normal 2k+ lrm ammo, so I actually want my lurmies to be hitting CT, and if the Archer can spit them out quick enough, that'll make it an okay mech.

[Bishop Steiner]

Xavori, on 12 March 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

I'm not going to be able to do my normal 2k+ lrm ammo, so I actually want my lurmies to be hitting CT, and if the Archer can spit them out quick enough, that'll make it an okay mech.

LRM5s haven't been CT seeking in months now (probably due to crying about 6xLRM5 MDDs) and 15% cooldown isn't that earth shattering, even after you add the Cooldown5 module.

If 6xLRM5 MDDs are not terribly impressive, I just don't see a 3xLRM5 Archer being any more so, without cooldowns of at least 50%.

*shrugs*

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 12 March 2016 - 09:12 PM.

[Appogee]

Xavori, on 12 March 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

I'm not going to be able to do my normal 2k+ lrm ammo, so I actually want my lurmies to be hitting CT.

I want enemies to shut down when I glance in their direction.

But for the sake of balance, both of us will just need to be disappointed.

Edited by Appogee, 12 March 2016 - 08:01 PM.

[Damia Savon]

Oderint dum Metuant, on 11 March 2016 - 05:46 PM, said:

Exactly.
Those were the final quirks, or they wouldn't have shown them off.

Actually I am wondering if they were not released early. As we have pointed out there really is no rhyme or reason to them. The base model has some CT and missile quirks, the 5s has 0 missile quirks and weird structure buffs, the 5w has useful structure buffs but only one lrm quirk, the tempest gets all the structure buffs but weird weapon quirks. Given that the screen shots did not reflect the accurate default load outs and I really wonder if the quirks were actually set or the wrong set of mechs were grabbed.

Who knows though.

[Damia Savon]

Gyrok, on 12 March 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

I hope it gets no LRM quirks at all, and all SRM quirks...

We all really hope you will shut up one day but then what will do when you are not scrubbing mommy's toilets or crying about the evil lrms.

Get a clue dude, some of us LOVE LRMS. We are going to run them no matter how much fing whining you do. Yes we are well aware they are not tier 1 weapons but we also know that is due to cry babies like yourself who want a "point, click, I win" game so you can boast about your skillz to your sex doll.

So just shut up about how much you hate lrms. Good or bad they are going to exist in the game, so Suck it up buttercup. Do something productive with your life instead of waging a pointless battle to make mwo "gyrok's boring laser vomit skirmish fest".

[Damia Savon]

Sader325, on 12 March 2016 - 09:23 AM, said:

So.

The archers quirks were released "prematurely".

But then they did this: http://mwomercs.com/...15mar2016-patch


Are they even trying?

Different people do different things. The folks in charge of sneak peeks decide to release quirks not realizing they are not finalized, or grab the wrong screen shots. The people doing the patch notes don't realize there is a goof and go ahead with what is posted. Paul didn't say anything about the quirks being cooked up until after the patch notes were released. So someone probably didn't tell them to hold the archer ones. But the archer release has been one screw up after another so...

[Jenovah]

Cathy, on 12 March 2016 - 06:12 AM, said:

but bigger should be better, not the other way around.

I take it you have never had:

1) A colon cleansing (since Enem-something is filtered.)
2) An over 40 physical/Military physical, etc (prostate exam)
3) Hemorrhoids

XD

Edited by Jenovah, 12 March 2016 - 11:06 PM.

[1453 R]

Kinda sad, really. LRM velocity quirks were an interesting idea for traditional/canonical missile boats, helps address one of the biggest problems with the weapon. Heh...can you imagine an Archer with 25% LRM speed? about as high as I'd set it right outside the gates, but hot damn. The QQmageddon would be real.

[Malleus011]

I'd like to see LRM20 spread for the 2R - group those missiles closer and maybe it'll be worth taking the big, heavy, slow launcher instead of massed little racks. But I won't hold my breath. (And I'll take velocity too)

I get that a lot of you want to run SRM builds because LRMs are sub-par, but putting SRM quirks on a 'mech like the 2R just ain't right. It's an LRM carrier. Don't campaign for a 'mech to be made something that it isn't.

Now, the 5W or 5S at least mount SRM secondaries, you've got room to argue for quirks there (though it always bother me when they under quirk main weapons and over quirk secondaries ... or tertiaries ... or even less significant weapons ...) There's no point quirking for the meta, the meta changes. Quirk for stock load out. They'll be making more 'mechs anyway.

[LegendaryArticuno]

The whole point is that general missile quirks allows for both LRM and SRM builds. PGI should not be forcing people into one single route with their mech design.

Edited by LegendaryArticuno, 13 March 2016 - 08:36 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

LegendaryArticuno, on 13 March 2016 - 08:11 AM, said:

The whole point is that general missile quirks allows for both LRM and SRM builds. PGI should not be forcing people into one route single route with their mech design.

Some people don't like freedom they like being oppressed and want a PGI dictator to force everyone to lrm because of lore

[Bishop Steiner]

LegendaryArticuno, on 13 March 2016 - 08:11 AM, said:

The whole point is that general missile quirks allows for both LRM and SRM builds. PGI should not be forcing people into one route single route with their mech design.

Naw, the real point is why are people buying a famed LRM mech expecting to run SRM builds? You don't buy a Bradley, then complain it isn't an Abrams, etc.

But then, in your 4 months here, you've already become THE authority on how the game should be.

Monkey Lover, on 13 March 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Some people don't like freedom they like being oppressed and want a PGI dictator to force everyone to lrm because of lore

Actually, that would not be PGI dictating, then would it, but the actual IP this claims to represent? Tough concept I know, people wanting to play an IP based game that at least semi remotely resembles said IP.

Malleus011, on 13 March 2016 - 07:56 AM, said:

I'd like to see LRM20 spread for the 2R - group those missiles closer and maybe it'll be worth taking the big, heavy, slow launcher instead of massed little racks. But I won't hold my breath. (And I'll take velocity too)

I get that a lot of you want to run SRM builds because LRMs are sub-par, but putting SRM quirks on a 'mech like the 2R just ain't right. It's an LRM carrier. Don't campaign for a 'mech to be made something that it isn't.

Now, the 5W or 5S at least mount SRM secondaries, you've got room to argue for quirks there (though it always bother me when they under quirk main weapons and over quirk secondaries ... or tertiaries ... or even less significant weapons ...) There's no point quirking for the meta, the meta changes. Quirk for stock load out. They'll be making more 'mechs anyway.

Oh, you mean like Quad AC Black Widows, or a Boom-Hammer-6Rs?

[Revis Volek]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 March 2016 - 04:44 PM, said:

rather see less weapon quirks, more defensive. And if Offense gets addressed, prefer pattern tighened

Tighten pattern on 15's and 20's by 3%-5% more then the 5's and 10's IMO, they need a bit more help but i also think all LRMS need a 10% velocity boost or a cut down on the MISSILE WARNING time by a 1-2 seconds.

Edited by Revis Volek, 13 March 2016 - 08:36 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 March 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

Naw, the real point is why are people buying a famed LRM mech expecting to run SRM builds? You don't buy a Bradley, then complain it isn't an Abrams, etc.

But if we quirk the Bradley with 40% cooldowns and 30% range it will be balanced to the OP Abrams.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 March 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

Actually, that would not be PGI dictating, then would it, but the actual IP this claims to represent? Tough concept I know, people wanting to play an IP based game that at least semi remotely resembles said IP.

I understand your fight, I just like seeing all kinds of loadouts. I dont always want to be in a light and see an archer and say that's an easy kill.

[Bishop Steiner]

Monkey Lover, on 13 March 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

But if we quirk the Bradley with 40% cooldowns and 30% range it will be balanced to the OP Abrams.



I understand your fight, I just like seeing all kinds of loadouts. I dont always want to be in a light and see an archer and say that's an easy kill.

If one wants a splat mech, perhaps they should run an actual splat mech? If one runs an LRM mech, and decides to rig it as a splat mech, they are, IMO, accepting they are running it at (theoretically) less than it's optimal configuration, because the mech was never designed around said weapon.

Without ridiculous Structure buffs, the Archers geometry is already pretty much "dead duck" for people who think they are going to run it as some type of Uber-Splat. And when it (apparently) get's scaled up 8%?

It's a Dragon's CT with MDD STs, on a mech that will only see decent speeds if boating small weapons and a non-clan XL engine. Yup. Should be optimized to Splat!!!

You see, you start quirking it for something it's categorically not meant to do, the next thing is people will start demanding further quirks so that it can actually do that role WELL (SO now we have uber structured and SRM quirked Archer) inevitably drawing the chassis further down the rabbit hole from what it was supposed to do.

Simple fact, with quirks:
-A Mech should always perform it's "lore" role and loadout types at maximum optimacy.
-Mechs certainly can and should be able to be kitted out in different manners but should not be as good as or superior as what they were actually engineered to do, except by dint of sheer playstyle differences/preference.
-Mechs should never be quirked to cater to Meta or playstyle

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 13 March 2016 - 08:49 AM.

[Malleus011]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 March 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

Oh, you mean like Quad AC Black Widows, or a Boom-Hammer-6Rs?

Every time a Mechwarrior takes the PPCs out of the arms of their Warhammer, Blake sheds a single tear.

Monkey Lover, on 13 March 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

I understand your fight, I just like seeing all kinds of loadouts. I dont always want to be in a light and see an archer and say that's an easy kill.

PGI won't retract their nigh-unlimited customization at this late date. (dammit) But they will keep churning out Battlemechs as their only real source of income. That means another chassis will be along any minute. Making them all 'generic mech gun bags' isn't good for the game.

You probably *should* see an Archer and think 'LRM boat - I should close fast' - because that's an Archers job. There's a reason the later variants started adding more close-in firepower. Pity nigh-unlimited customization utterly destroys all that history and lore.

What's the use of having different skins on identical meta load-outs? Why not just make one 35, 55, 75, and 100 ton chassis with unlimited hard points and call it done?

[LegendaryArticuno]

You lore addicts are part of the reason why Mechwarrior is a dying franchise.

There hasn't been any innovation or creativity injected into the IP for decades, i.e. no new mechs with modern designs. Everyone wants customisability and the ability to make a mech uniquely their own without being pigeonholed through too many specific quirks.

[RestosIII]

LegendaryArticuno, on 13 March 2016 - 08:53 AM, said:

You lore addicts are part of the reason why Mechwarrior is a dying franchise.

If you want a mech game that isn't based on proper lore, you can head back to Hawken, or Heavy Gear.