75 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Dynamic FrankenLegomechs™.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 September 2016 - 09:45 PM.

[BabyCakes666]

god dammit pgi

go fix the other mechs from all the KDK and NG all over the place you got tons of money now

so spend that money and fix the old mechs you did a new model for the catapult

why not the dragon with a new arm that fits an AC20

and the victor that **** is a copy n past deal to fix some tubes

if i could model id do it for you

better yet some one do the work for PGI then send it to them how could they say no

[Chados]

Kasumi Sumika, on 24 September 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

The double barrel gun geometry on Phoenix Hawk is really horrible. Why not just make both second and third gun geometry put on forearm.

This. Oh, Lord..whyyyyy

[Dogstar]

What's even odder is that the Phoenix Hawk isn't the same on all models. Mostly the vambrace is the third choice but on some it's the second.

Also the Cyclops has some crappy LRM tubes and thats a shiny new mech so it' not just the old ones.

[zagibu]

Well, the thing is, a really dynamic weapon system that also looks good if ******* hard. I know that it's not immediately understandable for most people, but if you want to do stuff like "if it's an AC/10 and a different size AC, place it here, and if it's all the same size gun, put all of them in a cluster together there", etc., it's going to be very complicated really, really fast. If you export the models and look at them in a 3d program, you can see that it's already pretty complicated right now, with fixed hardpoints and no special rules whatsoever. Some mechs have 30 and more little pieces just for weapons and blanks. It must be a nightmare to manage.

Maybe it would be better if they went back to only partially dynamic, so that the TYPE of the weapon matters, but not the actual size. If somebody mounts SRMs, SSRMs or LRMs in a Centurion's ST, put 10 missiles tubes there, done. If no missile launcher is present, replace it with a blank. This would greatly reduce the complexity and make it possible for artists to make good looking compromises, that still carry some valuable gameplay information (who really counts tubes in opponents or tries to determine the size of the AC barrel in a fight?).

[MrVei]

I think PGI is kinda getting on the ball, you look at a MAD-3R, it works well on it, you put 3x MGs on it and you get 3 in a tight clump in the center, and you and change out the middle mg for a ac2 or ac5 and they stay in the middle and you don't have that nasty ST hump that can be shot from all sides.

[Navid A1]

Because FFF*** consistency:

[Y E O N N E]

MrVei, on 25 September 2016 - 09:47 PM, said:

I think PGI is kinda getting on the ball, you look at a MAD-3R, it works well on it, you put 3x MGs on it and you get 3 in a tight clump in the center, and you and change out the middle mg for a ac2 or ac5 and they stay in the middle and you don't have that nasty ST hump that can be shot from all sides.

I don't like how staggered the ACs look. Two AC/5 looks awesome since the barrels end at the same spot, but two AC/2 or UAC/5 look goofy with the staggered formation. Anything in the bottom AC slot also looks goofy since it juts out so far.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 26 September 2016 - 04:45 AM.

[MrVei]

Yeonne Greene, on 26 September 2016 - 04:45 AM, said:

I don't like how staggered the ACs look. Two AC/5 looks awesome since the barrels end at the same spot, but two AC/2 or UAC/5 look goofy with the staggered formation. Anything in the bottom AC slot also looks goofy since it juts out so far.

true, and since the rescale of the MADs the AC10 uses the AC20 model T_T the 3rd ac5/2 is in the side vent hole and that is kinda ugly like PGI was only going to give it 2 weapons and added a 3rd last min to up the wow factor to get more buyers.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

we dont have casings flying out of mechs.

we dont have a higher dragon arm.

we also dont have decal numbers.

[Alex Morgaine]

zagibu, on 25 September 2016 - 01:55 PM, said:

(who really counts tubes in opponents or tries to determine the size of the AC barrel in a fight?).

Well, IIRC that was the reason they started dynamic lego weapons in the first place, for people just looking at mechs, not locking on for combat data.

[Herr Vorragend]

I love the MDD LRM5 nose.

[C E Dwyer]

StaggerCheck, on 24 September 2016 - 08:55 AM, said:

There have been some lazy missteps in the past, for sure. I hope PGI fixes them soon, because some have lingered for years now. These are examples of just getting it done, in my opinion, rather than really striving for the best possible outcome.



This Victor has 3x SRM6 racks. Count the missile tubes.



Three Machine Guns on the Hunchback. You gotta look close, but that third MG is mounted in the recoil gear under the massive Autocannon housing. I don't know... maybe a cluster, without the massive geometry would be called for here? Not like three .5 ton Machine Guns need all that space that normally fits a 14 ton weapon, right?

Pet peeve time... the Summoner has enough to deal with in life trying to keep up with the Timberwolf, but this seems a little lame to me...



Summoner with an LRM 20 rack. Ok, I like this, the weapon is a massive missile launcher.



Summoner with a little LRM 5 rack. Ok, a one-ton weapon gets a much smaller housing. Works for me.



[record scratch!] Summoner with an SRM 6 rack... a 1.5 ton weapon. They used the same mounting as the LRM 10-20 racks. The pictures are a little distorted due to my fail Photoshop skills, but you can see by the partial 4 in the background that they are the same size mounting.

Leave my Victor alone, it's been abused long enough, the last thing it needs is modular Missile launchers, I'll deal with it's lack of tubes

[C E Dwyer]

Alex Morgaine, on 27 September 2016 - 09:11 AM, said:

Well, IIRC that was the reason they started dynamic lego weapons in the first place, for people just looking at mechs, not locking on for combat data.

It was people complaining about the missile tubes on Dragons and a few other mechs where the tube count was wrong, also how the weapons sat on inflated hard point locations.

In typical P.G.I style, they managed to make many classic mech like the Centurion and the Catapult look hideous, and for the most part worse, the jagermech and Cataphract, small auto canons that you see now are double the size they would have been had the community not produced the pick forks and burning brands.

All this while not fixing the missile ports on the Dragon..

The Commando is another victim, and because of this modular crap, the phoenix hawk is another classic that looks terrible.

[JC Daxion]

Navid A1, on 24 September 2016 - 08:00 AM, said:

Dynamic geometry ruining classic mech looks?

look no further:

Heh, you know, i actually like that look on the timber.. IMO it looks scary!


the OP's Dragon picture, i am totally with you... It needs to be fixed.



the best part about this though... this is something PGI can do, even if they only fix a couple mechs a month. Sorta like how they have been doing the updates with Camo on older mechs.. When one of the modelers gets time, they can fix the worst offenders.. and it would be a great start,.


I love the idea of this thread.. So why not get a top 5 or 10.. and get some idea's on how to fix them.. PGI seams more than willing to add more polish at this point. Every month for the last 6+ we have seen some fixes on mechs,, this is right in the wheel house and would be a great way to build community/dev relations.





This Tube, needs to be used for the SRM 4 and 6, (and 2's, but who would put a 2 in that? ) So yes,, Swap it to the LRM5 tube size.. that would be a great fix, and a good start.

Edited by JC Daxion, 27 September 2016 - 05:38 PM.

[oldradagast]

Take a look at the two Awesomes (9M and Pretty Baby) that have left arm missile launchers. Last I checked, not only were the launchers scattered all over the arm, some of them were obviously nothing but decal "launchers" that are somehow firing from the left shoulder armor plate?! Yeah, instead of adding a logical missile launcher box, they just slapped missile port textures on an armor plate... come on...

[MW Waldorf Statler]

The Problems
In lore the Mechs build around the Weaponssystems, no Mechs designed for a Mechlab or great Customization
-The Warhammer has is own PPC Model , the Griffin a other PPC model from a other factory ...ACs in a Class very Different in Size and Calibers ...only the Omnimechs have a little this Mechlab Feeling, now all mechs more Omni as the Omnimechs
-for a good Visualization and a mechlab, the best build a new Battletech with Mechs more like to earthsiege HAWCs...
MWO is the first Mechwarrior Game with this great Visualization of Weapons -the MWLL Mod only use Standard variants from the mechs, with no Buildoption, MW4 has no Visualizations of the Weapons that carry...for this great problem ,make PGI a good Job

[Karl Streiger]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 27 September 2016 - 10:46 PM, said:

MWO is the first Mechwarrior Game with this great Visualization of Weapons -the MWLL Mod only use Standard variants from the mechs, with no Buildoption, MW4 has no Visualizations of the Weapons that carry...for this great problem ,make PGI a good Job

have to object - MWLL had a kind of slot size system - http://www.mechlivin...es-Concept2.pdf
go to the last pages -
the relevant comment:
In summary for this facet of the rules:

• A SIEGE slot can hold SIEGE and ASSAULT sized weapons
  
• An ASSAULT slot can hold ASSAULT and LARGE sized weapons
  
• A LARGE slot can hold LARGE and MEDIUM sized weapons
  
• A MEDIUM slot can hold MEDIUM and SMALL sized weapons
  
• A SMALL slot can hold SMALL weapons only

There may be specific overrides on the hard mount slots of certain platforms that allow for a “Two Step Down” allowance; a good example of this is the 4x Light Gauss Fafnir which mounts Light Gauss Rifles (LARGE weapon) in the left and right torso hard mount slots (SIEGE sized slots).


on page 14 there are pictures about the "two step down" rule

This or a similar system have to be applied to MWO if you want to keep the LEGO mechanic
Drop the number of possible hardpoints - and simple take a size

As example the Mauler Ballistic Pod: - 2 AC 2 - could be either:
2 ballistic medium; or 1 assault pod - with Assault Pod as the best option
(so you can mount -

• 1 AC10/LBX10;LGR;RAC5;
  
• or 2 AC 2 or 2 LAC5/LAC2
  
• Heavy Gauss, AC20; Gauss (SIEGE);
  
• UAC5 AC5 RAC RAC2 (LARGE)
  
• MG; MAGSHOT (SMALL)

this is not about balance just aesthetics.

It would increase the difficulty to play the MechLab by a margin - but BT is about asthetics - when i can't mount a PPC in my Stalkers anymore I will be disappointed but i would survive (would have 4 Large Energy Slots then)

The good about lego and slot size is - the number of combination is limited.

You don't need to model the AC10 or AC2 for the Hunchback 4G, but you have to model a single Gauss; 2 AC5s or 2 UAC5s - as well as 4 machine guns - there is no other combination that can be mount there.
When you want to run AC10s or AC2s you have to use the 4H.

This would reduce the omnification of BattleMechs as well - another positive side effect

Edited by Karl Streiger, 28 September 2016 - 03:08 AM.

[Vellron2005]

I would just like to remind everyone here that, to my knowledge, MWO is the FIRST MW/BT game to have dynamic weapon geometry. (I don't know about living legends, only game I did not play)

Give PGI credit for that..

[LordNothing]

Karl Streiger, on 28 September 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

have to object - MWLL had a kind of slot size system - http://www.mechlivin...es-Concept2.pdf
go to the last pages -
the relevant comment:
In summary for this facet of the rules:

• A SIEGE slot can hold SIEGE and ASSAULT sized weapons
  
• An ASSAULT slot can hold ASSAULT and LARGE sized weapons
  
• A LARGE slot can hold LARGE and MEDIUM sized weapons
  
• A MEDIUM slot can hold MEDIUM and SMALL sized weapons
  
• A SMALL slot can hold SMALL weapons only

There may be specific overrides on the hard mount slots of certain platforms that allow for a “Two Step Down” allowance; a good example of this is the 4x Light Gauss Fafnir which mounts Light Gauss Rifles (LARGE weapon) in the left and right torso hard mount slots (SIEGE sized slots).




on page 14 there are pictures about the "two step down" rule

This or a similar system have to be applied to MWO if you want to keep the LEGO mechanic
Drop the number of possible hardpoints - and simple take a size

As example the Mauler Ballistic Pod: - 2 AC 2 - could be either:
2 ballistic medium; or 1 assault pod - with Assault Pod as the best option
(so you can mount -

• 1 AC10/LBX10;LGR;RAC5;
  
• or 2 AC 2 or 2 LAC5/LAC2
  
• Heavy Gauss, AC20; Gauss (SIEGE);
  
• UAC5 AC5 RAC RAC2 (LARGE)
  
• MG; MAGSHOT (SMALL)

this is not about balance just aesthetics.



It would increase the difficulty to play the MechLab by a margin - but BT is about asthetics - when i can't mount a PPC in my Stalkers anymore I will be disappointed but i would survive (would have 4 Large Energy Slots then)

The good about lego and slot size is - the number of combination is limited.

You don't need to model the AC10 or AC2 for the Hunchback 4G, but you have to model a single Gauss; 2 AC5s or 2 UAC5s - as well as 4 machine guns - there is no other combination that can be mount there.
When you want to run AC10s or AC2s you have to use the 4H.

This would reduce the omnification of BattleMechs as well - another positive side effect

didnt know living legends did things like that, we would have probibly seen more of it had it developed its mechlab, rather than get shut down. its certainly an example of the right way to do dynamic geometry. i like to have the option to visually identify a mech's loadout if a lock cannot be established.

Edited by LordNothing, 29 September 2016 - 04:18 AM.