49 replies to this topic

[Rhent]

Comparing the Linebacker on Sarna to what PGI is putting out (lets be frank the art isn't changing), they stretched the mech out way to much. The linebacker should have had a form factor closer to the Nova NOT the Timberwolf.

[Scout Derek]

We don't even know it's actual size yet, wait for them to bring the model in-game.

They might even scale closer to a ebon than a Nova, considering the tonnage of it.

[Destructicus]

It's impressive how quick someone was able to complain about something we know nothing about

[roboPrancer]

And I want to know why its feet are pointing backwards! It says lead the charge but he is clearly going in the opposite direction

[Gas Guzzler]

You guys are going pretty hard at the OP.

The Fact is, we DO know the proportions based off of the art. The sarna art is much wider. I'm not saying wide in an absolute sense, I'm saying its width compared to its height is larger than for the MWO concept art. So, based on the art, the Linebacker is much taller than the older art suggests.

[CK16]

Same type of doom saying on the Ebon Jag, and look how that turned out!

[Metus regem]

Rhent, on 07 July 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

Comparing the Linebacker on Sarna to what PGI is putting out (lets be frank the art isn't changing), they stretched the mech out way to much. The linebacker should have had a form factor closer to the Nova NOT the Timberwolf.

Well they had to give hips to the Nova, hips to the Ebon Jaguar, hips to the Viper.... you see where I'm going with this right? Those three mechs I listed, with out hips, would not be able to torso twist, something that is apparently, according to PGI a required thing, so they had to add hips.

[Deathlike]

Urbie Disguised As Grandma said:

The better to shoot you my dear.

[Alistair Winter]

For the sake of cutting the artists some slack, it's probably because extremely crouched stances are hard to animate properly. They end up looking really weird when they waddle forward. There's a reason why animals that move quickly don't generally have such crouched stances. It's awkward as hell. And the Linebacker is the fastest heavy mech in the game, I think. It would look hilarious if it was as low as the original artwork.

[ScarecrowES]

It's definitely taller, but adding torso twist to a mech that never had it before will do that.

As for how much squat it gets, we don't know how the final model will go. I imagine it will go through iteration like the Mad Dog, Timberwolf, and Ebon Jag did, until PGI and the community settle on what works aesthetically and for gameplay.

I think a lack of width compared to the TT art is more perception based on the fact it has proper legs now. Looking at the torso proportions, there's no doubt it's just as wide as the TT art... it's just sitting on legs that are easily double their previous height.

[cazidin]

It'll probably be closer to the Nova than the Night Gyr. Short and squat.

[Moldur]

I like having a torso.

[El Bandito]

As I said in another thread.:

El Bandito, on 07 July 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

What's with PGI's fetish in straightening up squat mechs? At this rate I'm not sure I want to see how they make the Bushwacker.

PGI finally managed to make the Timbie and the Mad Dog go squat again, but then do this?

They will **** up Bushwacker for sure, at this rate.

[Danghen Woolf]

I think the NEED to add a torso twist to every 'mech is a mistake but to be fair to the point and shoot crowd they have to have it because there is not "strafing" in MWO. I would love to have my Black Hawks nice and squat and Jenners to be a little more true to BattleTech but it will not happen. I just wish that we could have tested it before it was completely axed...

[ScarecrowES]

El Bandito, on 07 July 2016 - 06:11 PM, said:

As I said in another thread.:




They will **** up Bushwacker for sure, at this rate.

On the flip side, look at how utterly faithful every other part of the mech is... every part of the torso, the general shape and position of the arms. Mechs like the Nova, Ebon Jag, Bushwacker, Linebacker... suffer from their original designs for the need to uniformly add torso twist capability. But they gain too, in the end. None of those mechs would function in a game like MWO if they couldn't twist. In WoT, your turretless tanks are generally powerful snipers. I doubt any of these mechs could do that job particularly well. For this game, they're probably better off being taller.

What I'm genuinely tickled about, with the Linebacker, is we finally have some proper reverse-joint legs. I mean... look at those suckers. They're wonderfully functional.

Ironic that a mech that never had hips to begin with should have the best pair of legs in the game.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 07 July 2016 - 06:47 PM.

[Impyrium]

... I do find it funny that whenever Alex does a good job and everybody loves the art, the praise goes flowing in his direction. But whenever he comes up with a design that isn't so popular, it's PGI's fault in general.

[jjm1]

The original linebacker would have been hilariously dumb to see animated. IMO It looks ridiculous just standing still.

Through a process of design and good problem solving, its is now good.

Changes had to be made for both practical and aesthetic reasons, and I am 100% behind those changes.

I don't get of all the useless BT lore stuff that people want to hold on to. A lot of it simply doesn't work in this game, I don't think a lot of ideas that have stuck for this long were originally thought through for longer than a 10 minute lunch break the first time around. Like a clan mech named after an American football position for example. ...right.

[smokytehbear]

It's a fair question, and while I adamantly defend other aspects of the Linebacker that we don't know at this point, to at least give it a chance, this one's pretty obvious. It seems substantially different from the art.

It was enough for me to hesitate on purchasing. I'm sure others might be thinking the same. If something like this question could be brought up in a town hall or tweeted to Russ/design team (I don't have twitter), I would appreciate it.

[El Bandito]

Danghen Woolf, on 07 July 2016 - 06:29 PM, said:

I think the NEED to add a torso twist to every 'mech is a mistake but to be fair to the point and shoot crowd they have to have it because there is not "strafing" in MWO. I would love to have my Black Hawks nice and squat and Jenners to be a little more true to BattleTech but it will not happen. I just wish that we could have tested it before it was completely axed...

ScarecrowES, on 07 July 2016 - 06:47 PM, said:

On the flip side, look at how utterly faithful every other part of the mech is... every part of the torso, the general shape and position of the arms. Mechs like the Nova, Ebon Jag, Bushwacker, Linebacker... suffer from their original designs for the need to uniformly add torso twist capability. But they gain too, in the end.

I completely understand the torso twisting part but the legs are still unforgivably tall. I thought PGI had learned from their Timbie/Mad Dog remake, but apparently they have not.

Edited by El Bandito, 07 July 2016 - 09:34 PM.

[XtremWarrior]

Am i the only one thinking the people complaining about this Mech's height would have been the very same complaining that it is a damn barn-door-sucking-damages too large for it's tonnage if it was closer to the original Art?