33 replies to this topic

[Imperius]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 March 2016 - 06:52 PM, said:

"Our" goal?

I like them fine as modeled or I would not be saying so. Would longer be better? Perhaps, though ONLY if they are wide. I'm content with it as shown.

And so, if you can't be bothered to contact and communicate your dissatisfaction to Russ, then I'd appreciate it you stop spamming these posts. You have a course of action open. YOU choose not to pursue it.

He's spamming everyone's threads with nonsense.... Might be someone's alt... Haven't seen a Ted Wayz thread in a while...

Edited by Imperius, 20 March 2016 - 07:01 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Looks really good, I approve.

The big PPC cannons are back!

I'm surprised to see the ballistics moved up a bit, but it is a nice surprise.

Now this mech does have more hardpoints than a K2, so I'm assuming it is just a model to show off hardpoints? In anycase, I hope the ballistics stay high like that .

[EvilCow]

Looks very good, when is introduction planned? The cat is an old favourite of mine.

[Bishop Steiner]

Imperius, on 20 March 2016 - 07:01 PM, said:

He's spamming everyone's threads with nonsense.... Might be someone's alt... Haven't seen a Ted Wayz thread in a while...

yeah, I hear he and CK16 are locking horns over the faction appropriateness of the MkII. *SMH*

While he's not entirely wrong (about 10% longer or so, would look even better) think the stubbier but thick barrels look fine, personally.

I also understand when and where to pick my battles with Russ, which is why I still get some results. To me it's such a minor detail, overall, I have no intent to bug him over it. It bothers me about as much as the weird extra long left wrist on the Vindicator does..... actually less. I sometimes think about how perfect the Vindy model would look if it was smaller and that wrist was fixed. I literally have no such compunctions about the remodel on the K2.

[DovisKhan]

Hate the new design, old one looks rugged and badass, this new one looks like some pushover


Why can't they make it a new mech like and just call it Catapult MKII and leave the old one as it is, it's a grea performing and looking mech :/

Edited by DovisKhan, 21 March 2016 - 03:22 AM.

[NeoCodex]

Maybe we're just looking from the wrong angle, also there's shadows obscuring initial part of the barrels.

Compared to original art, there is clear difference where barrels start and end (grey) separated from the chassis (orange), so it stands out even more.

The second thing I notice is, the nose looks shorter on the new model, or is it just me? It is as both it's nose and barrels are a bit chubbier and shorter. If I look at the original orange one again, these look more forward stretched.

Edited by NeoCodex, 21 March 2016 - 03:36 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

The nose looks the same to me. I'd have to see them side by side I suppose, because to me, it looks like the old Catapult with different hard point placement/design.

[DovisKhan]

MeiSooHaityu, on 21 March 2016 - 03:49 AM, said:

The nose looks the same to me. I'd have to see them side by side I suppose, because to me, it looks like the old Catapult with different hard point placement/design.

The nose it what makes the whole difference, it's an ugly beak, while what we have currently looks bulky and rugged, like an IS mech should be

[MeiSooHaityu]

DovisKhan, on 21 March 2016 - 04:02 AM, said:

The nose it what makes the whole difference, it's an ugly beak, while what we have currently looks bulky and rugged, like an IS mech should be

OK, I get what you are saying.

That "beak" is custom geometry for the Founders Cat C1 added to that K2/Jester model shown in this thread.

There is a good chance still that the beak won't be added to anything other than the Catapult C1(F) so your rugged torso should stay intact . It is probably just shown here to demonstrate how the new CT energy would interact with that beak.

[Haakon Magnusson]

MeiSooHaityu, on 21 March 2016 - 04:08 AM, said:

OK, I get what you are saying.

That "beak" is custom geometry for the Founders Cat C1 added to that K2/Jester model shown in this thread.

There is a good chance still that the beak won't be added to anything other than the Catapult C1(F) so your rugged torso should stay intact . It is probably just shown here to demonstrate how the new CT energy would interact with that beak.

Yup and I love the beak on Founders (I know opinions differ on that, this opinion happens to be mine)
though I don't get how it got SO bad in his opinion with that beak... I mean barrels are awesome compared what we have now.
Hmm, with all the trauma I am getting leveling Archers maybe I should go and enjoy life in a Founder pult for a match or two today...

[MeiSooHaityu]

Haakon Magnusson, on 21 March 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

Yup and I love the beak on Founders (I know opinions differ on that, this opinion happens to be mine)

+1

I think the black beak on an olive green torso might be throwing him off too. When the beak is body color, it looks pretty good on the C1(F).

I kind of wish that beak was on the K2/Jester, but as a Founder myself, I just want it on those mechs for Founders only

[DovisKhan]

MeiSooHaityu, on 21 March 2016 - 04:08 AM, said:

OK, I get what you are saying.

That "beak" is custom geometry for the Founders Cat C1 added to that K2/Jester model shown in this thread.

There is a good chance still that the beak won't be added to anything other than the Catapult C1(F) so your rugged torso should stay intact . It is probably just shown here to demonstrate how the new CT energy would interact with that beak.

Really hope so

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Now if only those arms vanished without weapons in them, it would look hella sexy.

[MeiSooHaityu]

xMADCATTERx, on 21 March 2016 - 04:36 AM, said:

Now if only those arms vanished without weapons in them, it would look hella sexy.

I'm with you on that one.

Only issue is that there would need to be some form of arm still present. Mechs can't completely lose an arm when weapons are unequipped after all.

So, even if the posts have to stay (that the weapons mount to), that would be ok IMO. It might not look the greatest, but arms would still be present (minus the launcher/laser), so it would follow the rules and the mech would still benefit from less exposure to fire.