38 replies to this topic

[Sinkarma]

I was playing a bunch of mechwarrior4: mercenaries and saw the Fafnir Assault mech was there.



I first saw this mech long ago (before I knew about Mechwarrior) in a mod for some game, someone had made a very similar model... I can't clearly remember what/where.
But when I saw it was in mechwarrior4 I felt so happy. I just love how this mech looks. I am making it my mission to get it in mechwarrior4. The name and style just never left me for years and years.

Though in the mean time I was also wondering what kind of mech would be simmilair to it in MWO? In case its long before it appears or it never appears.

100tons with two large ballistics and a bunch of secondary lasers?

[kesmai]

Yeah!
A new mechpack.
Exactly what I was waiting for.
Thank you op.

[Appogee]

What kesmai said.

In the case of Fafnir... MW:LL has it if you're interested.

[Alistair Winter]

According to Russ, they plan to keep developing MWO for many years to come. Also, they've basically said that they don't care about the timeline anymore and that the Mad Cat Mk 2 will be here eventually.

So yeah, we'll get the Fafnir, at some point, unless the game dies before they can sell enough mech packs. I would imagine sales are steadily going down right now, so I'd expect to see some new tech late this year or at least early 2017. This opens up for heavy gauss, which opens up for the Fafnir.

TL;DR - All signs point to 'yes'.

[AnTi90d]

We'd first need a timeline jump to 3058 to include the newer Inner Sphere weaponry like medium range missiles (MRMs) and heavy gauss rifles (Faffy was made to equip HGauss.)

It isn't going to happen anytime soon.. or maybe ever at all..

[martian]

Sinkarma, on 04 August 2016 - 05:50 AM, said:

Any Idea If Fafnir Will Come To Mwo?

Not anytime soon. The Fafnir is from 3063, while we are in 3053. Of course there is always the possibility of some time jump in MWO, but that's not going to happene tomorrow.

Sinkarma, on 04 August 2016 - 05:50 AM, said:

Though in the mean time I was also wondering what kind of mech would be simmilair to it in MWO? In case its long before it appears or it never appears.

100tons with two large ballistics and a bunch of secondary lasers?

The King Crab (already in MWO) can be armed with a apir of Gauss Rifles and secondary lasers. Or if you want something lighter, the Mauler or the upcoming Cyclops.

[Metus regem]

Ugh... that is a mech I do not want to see any time soon... it's primary weapon system will invalidate the AC/10, Gauss Rifle and AC20 in one go....

Heavy Gauss Rifle:

Range: 180m/390m/600m (Short/Medium/Long)
Minimum range: 120m
Likely MWO optimal range: 600m
Likely MWO Charge up time: .5 seconds to 1 second
Damage:25/20/10 (Short/Medium/Long)
Shots/ton: 4 (one shot less per ton than an AC/20)
Likely MWO Shots/ton: 5-6
Heat: 2
Weight: 18t
Crit sapces: 11


Of course I would expect PGI to just implement the Improved Heavy Gauss, rather than dealing with the scaling damage of the Heavy Gauss Rifle

Improve Heavy Gauss Rifle (iHGR)

Range: 180m/360m/570m
likely MWO optimal range: 570m
likely MWO charge time: .5 seconds to 1 second
Damage: 22
Shots/ton: 4
Likely MWO shots/ton: 5-6
Heat: 2
Weight: 20t
Crit spaces: 11


Either weapon system will out damage the AC/20 in CQB, where the AC/20 should be boss, will have range in line with the current Gauss Rifle and just makes the AC/10 look sad all the way around...

[Spheroid]

@Metus: It won't invalidate anything. All mechs are a combination of their individual weapon systems working together in concert. The HGR simply makes too many sacrifices to replace other ballistics.

To me the HGR will never be good enough to use. I am interested in the LGR for long range sniping in dual mounts though.

Edited by Spheroid, 04 August 2016 - 08:31 AM.

[EvilCow]

Both LGR and HGR were quite popular in MW4.

I don't understand what what they are waiting to introduce new tech, fear of an increase in population perhaps?

Give IS new the toys (LFE, LGR, HGR, MRM, xpulse etc) then reduce/remove quirks to balance. I think most would agree on such a plan.

[GreyNovember]

Sinkarma, on 04 August 2016 - 05:50 AM, said:

100tons with two large ballistics and a bunch of secondary lasers?

... Dire Wolf? King crab?

[Green Mamba]

If they build it the whales will come, from the movie "Field of Mech Packs"

[FupDup]

It'll be a long damn time, given PGI's reluctance (e.g. outright refusal) to add any new tech to the game in spite of allowing out-of-timeline mechpacks.

[Bishop Steiner]

Metus regem, on 04 August 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Ugh... that is a mech I do not want to see any time soon... it's primary weapon system will invalidate the AC/10, Gauss Rifle and AC20 in one go....

Heavy Gauss Rifle:

Range: 180m/390m/600m (Short/Medium/Long)
Minimum range: 120m
Likely MWO optimal range: 600m
Likely MWO Charge up time: .5 seconds to 1 second
Damage:25/20/10 (Short/Medium/Long)
Shots/ton: 4 (one shot less per ton than an AC/20)
Likely MWO Shots/ton: 5-6
Heat: 2
Weight: 18t
Crit sapces: 11


Of course I would expect PGI to just implement the Improved Heavy Gauss, rather than dealing with the scaling damage of the Heavy Gauss Rifle

Improve Heavy Gauss Rifle (iHGR)

Range: 180m/360m/570m
likely MWO optimal range: 570m
likely MWO charge time: .5 seconds to 1 second
Damage: 22
Shots/ton: 4
Likely MWO shots/ton: 5-6
Heat: 2
Weight: 20t
Crit spaces: 11


Either weapon system will out damage the AC/20 in CQB, where the AC/20 should be boss, will have range in line with the current Gauss Rifle and just makes the AC/10 look sad all the way around...

will likely have an eve larger charge up and cooldown that standard Gauss, though, and be as easy to crit and destroy. Being locked in the STs, that's an issue in itself. In CQB, the ability to make snapshots, and the combo of decent PPFLD and recycle rate on AC10s I think means they will not be invalidated, anymore than Gauss obsolete AC10s, now.

Before the charge mechanic, that is exactly what Gauss did to all ACs, though.

FupDup, on 04 August 2016 - 09:52 AM, said:

It'll be a long damn time, given PGI's reluctance (e.g. outright refusal) to add any new tech to the game in spite of allowing out-of-timeline mechpacks.

Lol..you mean the one small modicum of common sense PGI actually had shown?

Yes, let's speed power creep up even more!!! RAC5s for everyone!!!!!

[Metus regem]

Spheroid, on 04 August 2016 - 08:30 AM, said:

@Metus: It won't invalidate anything. All mechs are a combination of their individual weapon systems working together in concert. The HGR simply makes too many sacrifices to replace other ballistics.

To me the HGR will never be good enough to use. I am interested in the LGR for long range sniping in dual mounts though.

No, the iHGR is flat out better to take on an Atlas in the ST over the AC20, it costs 6t more than the AC/20, but gives you more than double the optimal range with more damage and less heat. That means less Heat sinks, making the difference even more significant. Even the HGR is flat out better than the AC/20, even at 390m (44% longer range than the AC/20's 270m optimal range) it's till doing 20 damage, for again less heat, and in a face tanking brawl it's doing 25% more damage than an AC/20....

The Light Gauss, I'm not sure if it will find much of a place in MWO, 750m optimal range but only 8 damage/shot for a weight of 12t.... might be better to pay 2t more and lose 90m optimal range yet gain nearly 50% more damage and stay with the normal Gauss Rifle.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

Lol..you mean the one small modicum of common sense PGI actually had shown?

Yes, let's speed power creep up even more!!! RAC5s for everyone!!!!!

PGI could easily make that weapon wimpy if they wanted to, sort of like how PPCs were one of the king weapons of BT but in MWO they're sorta average right now (sans quirks).

If PGI was to actually take more initiative in ironing out the remaining equipment balance issues, I would be on your side for this particular issue. The problem is that, as shown by history, they won't.

The choice is not between a well-balanced game with few items versus a poorly-balanced game with many items. The choice we have in MWO is between a poorly-balanced game with few items versus a poorly-balanced game with many items.

Under PGI rule, we're not gaining any extra balance by keeping the pool limited. It's gonna be derpy and turbulent regardless of how many or how few items we have, since the people handling it all are not gonna change.

Edited by FupDup, 04 August 2016 - 10:24 AM.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

I don't understand what what they are waiting to introduce new tech, fear of an increase in population perhaps?

You have someone with a bottom-of-the-barrel view of game balance "fixing" the game.

Even the .XML tweaks it'd take to produce 3060-era weapons would be rough on Paul's attempts to balance things.

Actually making stuff like the AT missile systems is outright impossible for the same reason LB-X is unfixed.

[FupDup]

Brain Cancer, on 04 August 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

You have someone with a bottom-of-the-barrel view of game balance "fixing" the game.

Even the .XML tweaks it'd take to produce 3060-era weapons would be rough on Paul's attempts to balance things.

Actually making stuff like the AT missile systems is outright impossible for the same reason LB-X is unfixed.

I've actually seen a great way to add ATM missiles that keep most of their flavor but without needing the ammo swapping. Basically, the damage per missile would scale based on distance. Missiles at very long range would be 1.0 each, missiles at medium range or so would be 2.0, and close quarters would be 3.0. This fits the same damage/range profile as ATM-ER, ATM-Standard, and ATM-HE missile stats.

Idea from 134R.

[Battlemaster56]

If it means more weapons to pop my opponents with then I'm up for the Fanfir. Just tire using the same old weapons right now and the flavor of them is stale ah just want my Heavy Lasers and RAC's.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

FupDup, on 04 August 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

I've actually seen a great way to add ATM missiles that keep most of their flavor but without needing the ammo swapping. Basically, the damage per missile would scale based on distance. Missiles at very long range would be 1.0 each, missiles at medium range or so would be 2.0, and close quarters would be 3.0. This fits the same damage/range profile as ATM-ER, ATM-Standard, and ATM-HE missile stats.

Idea from 134R.

Sure except that's not how a damn warhead works. Unless they were kinetic missiles I suppose... bigger problem is 1 launcher that does SRM splat and LRM spam equally well. Although to be perfectly honest I've never really understood why the clans bothered keeping SRMs around... LBX do critiseeking just as well or better and clan LRMs dont' have a minimum range in TT.

[Battlemaster56]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 04 August 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

Sure except that's not how a damn warhead works. Unless they were kinetic missiles I suppose... bigger problem is 1 launcher that does SRM splat and LRM spam equally well. Although to be perfectly honest I've never really understood why the clans bothered keeping SRMs around... LBX do critiseeking just as well or better and clan LRMs dont' have a minimum range in TT.

I thought all clan weapons are just evolved versions of IS tech at the time and not really breaking any new bounds in weapon development for a good while.