138 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Trauglodyte, on 02 April 2016 - 07:02 PM, said:

The Cyclops isn't inferior, by any means, to the Mauler. The point of the Cyclops was to be a C&C mech while the Mauler has always been a fire support platform. Speed and communications was what made the Cyclops deadly. In MW:O, the Cyclops would be fantastic. The lack of intel warfare in this game or any semblance of proper HUD interaction with teammates would make the Cyclops inferior, not the mech itself.

And yet the game we got, has no infowarfare, meaning that whatever the reasoning and justifications, the Cyclops IS inferior to the Mauler in the MWO game we all have installed on our computers.

Chimera11, on 02 April 2016 - 07:14 PM, said:

Hmm...I don't actually have a 0XP, but 4/5 hardpoints are low in the arms and it only has 5 to begin with. I've never seen anyone do particularly well in it, but maybe my love of HBRs with their great mounts blinds me to the potential of the 0XP?

Oh yeah, I forgot about the Tempest...I think it may be a better example of ECM's inability to polish turds.

0xp is nothing exciting, but run with a Medium Jocks mentality with an AC20, 4 MLs, ECM and an STD engine it's a reasonably durable ambusher.

[Trauglodyte]

Well, you've got to assume that, due to no JJs, the Cyclops would have the same number of hard points as the Mauler. So, at the very least, you're looking at 7-8

[El Bandito]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 07:02 PM, said:

does it protrude more than an Archers?

I must have forgotten the part where Cyclops is a LRM support boat standing behind the Assaults. Cyclops is basically a faster Highlander with even worse hitboxes (just look at the chest and the back), and how many Highlanders do we see, even with quirks?

Worst of all, Cyclops has a generic Atlas/Orion hardpoints, with single ballistic on the right side, couple of missiles on the left and some lasers. Very uninspiring. Sure, the lore buffs would like to have this mech in game, especially since JJs currently suck, but fact remains that the mech is just dull to the bone. Very little reason to have this mech when the Atlai are functioning very well.

Edited by El Bandito, 02 April 2016 - 07:48 PM.

[Chimera_]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

And yet the game we got, has no infowarfare, meaning that whatever the reasoning and justifications, the Cyclops IS inferior to the Mauler in the MWO game we all have installed on our computers.

I'd say the Highlander is probably a better comparison to the Cyclops, since their hardpoints are more similar; both are pretty well-rounded. The HGN gets JJs, the Cyclops gets ECM and funky looks. Quirks would of course make the biggest difference, but overall they seem pretty similar if you account for hardpoint inflation on the Cyclops. Point being, even if Cyclops were on-par with Highlanders overall they still wouldn't be groundbreaking.

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

0xp is nothing exciting, but run with a Medium Jocks mentality with an AC20, 4 MLs, ECM and an STD engine it's a reasonably durable ambusher.

A fat 4G w/ ECM? Hmm...I could see that.

[El Bandito]

Chimera11, on 02 April 2016 - 07:21 PM, said:

I'd say the Highlander is probably a better comparison to the Cyclops, since their hardpoints are more similar; both are pretty well-rounded. The HGN gets JJs, the Cyclops gets ECM and funky looks. Quirks would of course make the biggest difference, but overall they seem pretty similar if you account for hardpoint inflation on the Cyclops. Point being, even if Cyclops were on-par with Highlanders overall they still wouldn't be groundbreaking.

Cyclops has ECM? Which variant is that?

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

I would love to see the Cyclops... if they overhaul the IW system and make it right.

Primary to that would be removing the auto-C3 and making it a choice.

[Trauglodyte]

You guys can bash the 'clops if you want but I'd take it vs. the Atlas every day. Truth it, it is either an equally fast but heavier Orion or a faster Atlas. At any rate, we could do some really nasty things with it, especially the CP-11-B. If I were to hazard a guess, this is what I'd see coming:

10-Q: 3 Missiles, 5 Energy
10-Z: 2 Missiles, 4 Energy, 2 Ballistic
11-B: 2 Missiles, 2 Energy, 4 Ballistic
11-C: 1 Missile, 4 Energy, 2 Ballistic, ECM

Now, none of that looks bad to me at all. Honestly, how can you bash that?

[Chimera_]

El Bandito, on 02 April 2016 - 07:34 PM, said:

Cyclops has ECM? Which variant is that?

Several people said it does so I took their word for it. I'll go check sarna...

I can't find any mention of ECM on sarna, so now I'm just confused. Maybe people confused "Electronics" with ECM?

[El Bandito]

Trauglodyte, on 02 April 2016 - 07:44 PM, said:

You guys can bash the 'clops if you want but I'd take it vs. the Atlas every day. Truth it, it is either an equally fast but heavier Orion or a faster Atlas. At any rate, we could do some really nasty things with it, especially the CP-11-B. If I were to hazard a guess, this is what I'd see coming:

10-Q: 3 Missiles, 5 Energy
10-Z: 2 Missiles, 4 Energy, 2 Ballistic
11-B: 2 Missiles, 2 Energy, 4 Ballistic
11-C: 1 Missile, 4 Energy, 2 Ballistic, ECM

Now, none of that looks bad to me at all. Honestly, how can you bash that?

We are bashing it based on what we know right now, especially regarding the hitboxes. Imagine worse hitboxes than Banshee's protruding CT combined with Battlemaster's protruding backpack, and you get the idea. Your hardpoints list is only conjecture. And 11-C having ECM? Really?

Chimera11, on 02 April 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:

Several people said it does so I took their word for it. I'll go check sarna...

I can't find any mention of ECM on sarna, so now I'm just confused. Maybe people confused "Electronics" with ECM?

I guess. I knew from the beginning that Cyclops doesn't have ECM, so I was confused when people mentioned that.

Edited by El Bandito, 02 April 2016 - 07:53 PM.

[Amsro]

One eyed atlas

[Trauglodyte]

I know, Bandito. But, you're assuming that the 'Clops chest is going to be massive. Yes, it looks big but even if it were slightly further protruding than the Fatlas, does it matter? Given the amount of overall space on the art attributed to sensors, I'm betting that it wouldn't probably be shorter than Zeus due to volumetric jibber jabber.

As to the ECM, the 11-C dropped a missile rack to make room for additional communications gear. Since we don't have that in game and it wasn't listed as C3, it would have to be ECM+BAP. There is another variant later on that equips a HUGE piece of equipment that was intended to completely neuter ECM. Again, this is all conjecture but it sounds more reasonable giving it ECM than any other mech in the game that isn't the Raven.

You know, the more that I think about it, if you take the Ice Ferret and blow it up to the appropriate volume size that a 90 ton mech would fill, you'd have something similar. ICE FRIDGE 90!!!

Edited by Trauglodyte, 02 April 2016 - 07:58 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Chimera11, on 02 April 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:

Several people said it does so I took their word for it. I'll go check sarna...

I can't find any mention of ECM on sarna, so now I'm just confused. Maybe people confused "Electronics" with ECM?

El Bandito, on 02 April 2016 - 07:50 PM, said:

We are bashing it based on what we know right now, especially regarding the hitboxes. Imagine worse hitboxes than Banshee's protruding CT combined with Battlemaster's protruding backpack, and you get the idea. Your hardpoints list is still conjecture. And 11-C having ECM? Really?



I guess. I knew from the beginning that Cyclops doesn't have ECM, so I was confused when people mentioned that.

It's generally considered that since it's role WAS the premiere electronics mech of the IS it would be given a slot, much as the D-DC, CMD-2D, and several other non canon ECM carriers were.

It's a dangerous assumption to make, though out of the varied mechs one might project it on, it's the most sensible. Hence why I try to preface any mentions of ECM with the word "probable" in regards to the Cyclops.

Because without it, and some serious Infowar changes, it truly has no purpose in MWO. Because on paper it, like the ON1K, is literally a faster, weaker Atlas.

Trauglodyte, on 02 April 2016 - 07:55 PM, said:

I know, Bandito. But, you're assuming that the 'Clops chest is going to be massive. Yes, it looks big but even if it were slightly further protruding than the Fatlas, does it matter? Given the amount of overall space on the art attributed to sensors, I'm betting that it wouldn't probably be shorter than Zeus due to volumetric jibber jabber.

As to the ECM, the 11-C dropped a missile rack to make room for additional communications gear. Since we don't have that in game and it wasn't listed as C3, it would have to be ECM+BAP.

I would use the Mauler as comparison. The Mauller art was famous for it's Sumo Belly, which is largely not in the MWO version. I would state that the "gut" is much less prominent and famous and attribute for the Cyclops than it was for the Mauler, but again, to actualyl assume anything on it before arts, is somewhat foolish.

[TheArisen]

I could think of several IS assaults that'd be better additions to the game. Nightstar, Gunslinger, Devastator, Pillager & so on.

[Seal Farmer]

Hit the Deck, on 02 April 2016 - 05:55 PM, said:

Wow this 'Mech blows! Having the same tonnage as the Mauler, Cyclops is basically an inferior version of it.



This thing needs serious hardpoint inflation if PGI decide to bring it into the game! Why did people vote for it?


EDIT: I didn't include variants with FutureTech or tech not in the game.

Umm where did people vote for it ?

[Hit the Deck]

Seal Farmer, on 02 April 2016 - 08:04 PM, said:

Umm where did people vote for it ?

Supposedly against Zeus when PGI wanted to release the first Resistance pack.

[Bishop Steiner]

Seal Farmer, on 02 April 2016 - 08:04 PM, said:

Umm where did people vote for it ?

http://mwomercs.com/...l/page__st__280

TheArisen, on 02 April 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

I could think of several IS assaults that'd be better additions to the game. Nightstar, Gunslinger, Devastator, Pillager & so on.

most being post the not quite ironclad, but still relatively solid 3053 date Russ is still building around. Or severely lacking in available variants (like the Gunslinger, which I would like to have, myself)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 April 2016 - 08:11 PM.

[Hit the Deck]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 08:10 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...l/page__st__280

Wow that was very close!

[Chimera_]

TheArisen, on 02 April 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

I could think of several IS assaults that'd be better additions to the game. Nightstar, Gunslinger, Devastator, Pillager & so on.

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 08:10 PM, said:

most being post the not quite ironclad, but still relatively solid 3053 date Russ is still building around.

Since you guys were talking about beer bellies earlier...
Annihilator

[Bishop Steiner]

Hit the Deck, on 02 April 2016 - 08:12 PM, said:

Wow that was very close!

would love it if they through a curveball and announced the Charger. With current state of MWO be a lot more useful.

Chimera11, on 02 April 2016 - 08:13 PM, said:

Since you guys were talking about beer bellies earlier...
Annihilator

that's kinda belly and boobs all in one...

[Chimera_]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

that's kinda belly and boobs all in one...

I think the Annihilator is in that special weight zone where everything sort of just blobs together into one central mass.

I would legitimately like to see it in MWO though, with no reason greater than people playing it stock.