Okay, one last time I'm gonna be called back here...
Arkhangel, on 11 September 2016 - 08:18 AM, said:
D V Devnull, on 10 September 2016 - 06:22 AM, said:
Disappointing... There should have been variants allowing JumpJets, ECM, and even 'one-on-each-arm ballistics' setups. I'm afraid that I would NOT recommend purchase, directly due to lack of versatility.
~Mr. D. V. "
I used to pilot a 'Dual Arm-Mounted AC10' BushWacker." Devnull
Because, you know, obviously a mech isn't versatile without those things. Honestly, you whining about the fact that a mech that's never had ECM, Jumpjets, and and never had the hardpoint layout it did in MW4 (since they massively screwed things up in that game, a lot) really just calls your own piloting skill into question, rather than the 'Mech's adaptability.
Many of the Bushwackers have great hardpoint layouts, It's also short and slim from the front, much like a Crab. It's also fast for a medium of its size. Granted, yes, it's got a long profile, but so do the Crab and Marauder, and they've worked out just fine. And while there isn't a Ballistic in both arms, there is the capability of shoving one in both torsos. The Bush'll be a jack of all trades, and an excellent Skirmishing mech. It's supposed to be.
In all honesty, though, what really makes or breaks a 'mech isn't the 'mech, or the hitboxes, or the quirks.
It's us, the Mechwarriors. so take some responsibility for once.
It's people like you that gives 'Old Guard' like me a headache, pushing out those who know what MechWarrior had been meant to be. Heck, your post makes me think you yell at newbies in toxic ways as well, driving them away when they were what was keeping the Faction Warfare queues alive.
Have you EVER played "MechWarrior 3"? Have you ever seen the versatility that's possible if you don't have these bloody hardpoint limitations? Do you even know what it is to actually be able to design to your exact play style? I bet you don't have any idea what it was to design and fight in a situation where it happened to be '3059+ timeline', 'True OmniMech' (
As in, no hardpoint limit... Can you imagine the possibilities, all waiting before you, and all the ways you could pilot them?) building, and 'Total War' style? You call my piloting ability into question, but do you even think about those whose natural style doesn't follow the metagame? Not everyone can pilot Meta-'Mechs, or be an Assault Brawler spearheading pushes, so I've already done the best I can with MWO's hardpoint limits on other Mechs. I don't think you've seen me out on the field on a good day either with many of the Mediums and Heavies that I've designed in MWO. And just for the reference, I've piloted a 'Slow-Crawling (
58 KPH!!!), Dual-AC/10-Arm (
without anything else) BushWacker' back in "MechWarrior 3" to rather great effect, playing through missions in rather inventive manners. I wish I had a video for you, but I didn't have enough computer back then for recording, and unfortunately I still don't now. Which reminds me, far too many Mechs on the IS side are either One-Sided-Ballistics or All-Torso-Ballistics. That's something that needs to change, and the BushWacker would have been a reasonable starting point. There is a limit to human adaptability and piloting skill, as not everyone can always be "Cream of the Crop", and there should be a series of Mechs to make up the rest of the adaptability that you speak of. Plus, with IS XL Engines, if someone wants to use Gauss, they should have the chance to build the Mech as to survive the loss of one.
I'll admit, I may not have played "MechWarrior 4" myself. Heck, I understand (
after 9 to 10 months of MWO) all too well that PGI is trying to maintain balance through hardpoint and equipment limits. Hell, I even get we're NOT up to 3059+ yet in the BattleTech timeline! But, their active avoidance of allowing a series of variant forms of the BushWacker that were possible in previous MechWarrior games? It's a complete, utter insult to anyone who really understands what could have been packed into a 55-ton Mech like that one. PGI has taken away the adaptability that I've experienced with a Mech like the BushWacker, and given us a variant set that happens to be less than 'Jack Of All Trades' quality. If PGI had tried to at least do as well as the memory of the BushWacker, there should have been one more variant. Perhaps with hardpoints like...
Head ............... 1 AMS
Left Arm .......... 1 Ballistic
Left Torso ....... 2 Missile, 2 Energy ............ (
I'm sure that not all of these would be usable at once.)
Center Torso ... 1 ECM, 1 AMS, 1 Missile ... (
Yeah, really. You'd have to choose which of the options would be used.)
Right Torso ..... 2 Missile, 2 Energy ............ (
I'm sure that not all of these would be usable at once.)
Right Arm ........ 1 Ballistic
...and call it the "BSW-E1" for a designator. (
If this had to be a Hero Variant, then "BSW-DW" and Special Name of "Dark Warrior"... albeit, I hate giving PGI ideas for '$$$ Grabs', given their 'Track Record'.) It would be allowed 1 less Module Slot than Standard, but would have the ability to use up to a maximum of 4 JumpJets in the design. I figure a maximum of 6 to 8 of those hardpoints would be usable at a time, and this variant would need NO Weapon-specific Quirks. Probably not much of any Quirks, unlike most IS Mechs, directly because of the versatility and 'Jack Of All Trades' ability this might have to it. But not having an option like this? It's sacrilege upon the memory/honor/ability of the Mech.
As for the physical profile, there's already enough conversation on that. I'm not even going to worry about that matter, because I've hit a major headache just unloading my mind at you over the rest. Heck, my gripe anyway is just the difference between MW3/MW4, versus MWO, and the harder time ducking with that rear welt. But I guess the 'BattleTech Animated Series' managed to prevail with its' goofy design there, unfortunately.
~Mr. D. V. "
I need Excedrin now....... Just one Variant more... is it really too much to ask?" Devnull
8
