36 replies to this topic

[dervishx5]

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Raven

Design year: 3024


http://www.mw5mercs.com/

"The year is 3015,"

[ScarecrowES]

You know... I seriously wonder if they didn't actually mean 3025. 3015 seems like a really odd year to set the timeline.

[Wecx]

Now we know why Russ looked so nervous,

[Bombast]

It seems that all the Mechwarrior/Battletech guys have decided that the Raven needs to happen, regardless of time frame. HBS has done something similar, including the Raven despite it being in the early, early, EARLY prototype phase makes it's inclusion bizarre.

Apparantly, its' the Devs favorite battlemech (For reasons that baffle me personally, but **** it).

But at least HBSs time frame make it possible (Even if a bit fluff-stupid). I don't know what the hell is going on in MW5: Merc. Best scenario is that they meant 3025, like ScarecrowES proposes.

EDIT: Nope, it's 3015ish. They say the 3rd Succession War has been going on for almost 150 years. 2866 (3rd SW start year) + 150 = 3016.

Edited by Bombast, 03 December 2016 - 11:30 PM.

[RestosIII]

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:24 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Raven

Design year: 3024


http://www.mw5mercs.com/

"The year is 3015,"

Meanwhile, at PGI headquarters...

[ScarecrowES]

Bombast, on 03 December 2016 - 11:28 PM, said:

It seems that all the Mechwarrior/Battletech guys have decided that the Raven needs to happen, regardless of time frame. HBS has done something similar, including the Raven despite it being in the early, early, EARLY prototype phase makes it's inclusion bizarre.

Apparantly, its' the Devs favorite battlemech (For reasons that baffle me personally, but **** it).

But at least HBSs time frame make it possible (Even if a bit fluff-stupid). I don't know what the hell is going on in MW5: Merc. Best scenario is that they meant 3025, like ScarecrowES proposes.

Simple typo to make. As far as I know, those 4 little keys are the only place where a timeline is mentioned. I don't remember seeing it in the demo anywhere. Easy enough to fat-finger a 1 instead of a 2. I'd say the actual date is arbitrary to the type of game they're making - however the placement of the Raven establishes a pretty specific timeline.

[ice trey]

I hadn't checked their website yet.

3015.... Goddamn, it's not hard. 3025 and 3015 are largely the same. The only mechs that aren't in 3015 that are in 3025 are the Cataphract and Raven. Either drop two mechs, or bump the era forward by ten years.

Holy smokes.

Edited by ice trey, 03 December 2016 - 11:33 PM.

[Wecx]

ScarecrowES, on 03 December 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

Simple typo to make. As far as I know, those 4 little keys are the only place where a timeline is mentioned. I don't remember seeing it in the demo anywhere. Easy enough to fat-finger a 1 instead of a 2. I'd say the actual date is arbitrary to the type of game they're making - however the placement of the Raven establishes a pretty specific timeline.

You would think that you would proof read your website for such an important release though.

[dervishx5]

ScarecrowES, on 03 December 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

Simple typo to make. As far as I know, those 4 little keys are the only place where a timeline is mentioned. I don't remember seeing it in the demo anywhere. Easy enough to fat-finger a 1 instead of a 2. I'd say the actual date is arbitrary to the type of game they're making - however the placement of the Raven establishes a pretty specific timeline.

It's not a typo. They likely didn't look up the lore (or care).

It's not a big deal. If people get upset over little things like this it's not PGI's problem.

But it is amusing.

[Wecx]

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

It's not a typo. They likely didn't look up the lore (or care).

It's not a big deal. If people get upset over little things like this it's not PGI's problem.

But it is amusing.

I know right, lets throw in a clan mech for an end game boss fight while we are at it.

Edited by Wecx, 03 December 2016 - 11:36 PM.

[Bombast]

ScarecrowES, on 03 December 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

Simple typo to make. As far as I know, those 4 little keys are the only place where a timeline is mentioned. I don't remember seeing it in the demo anywhere. Easy enough to fat-finger a 1 instead of a 2. I'd say the actual date is arbitrary to the type of game they're making - however the placement of the Raven establishes a pretty specific timeline.

It's not a typo. The description, with a little math, puts it firmly at 3015.

I guess, strictly speaking, its not entirely baseless fluff wise. 3024 is the production date for the RVN-3L, and the RVN-1X was presumably running around prior to that.

But it does piss all over the Hatchetman, which should predate the Raven but just a tad, but certainly wasn't running around in 3015.

EDIT: Then again, what does PGI care about a melee mech.

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

It's not a typo. They likely didn't look up the lore (or care).

It's not a big deal. If people get upset over little things like this it's not PGI's problem.

But it is amusing.

I'm curious if you'd say the same thing if Super-Heavies showed up in MW5:Merc. I'd guess not.

Edited by Bombast, 03 December 2016 - 11:37 PM.

[RestosIII]

All jokes aside, in the preview they call it an "unidentified" mech, so they might be calling it a prototype that you just ****ed over royally. Hoping it's a typo though, otherwise this will help me get off the hype high.

[dervishx5]

Wecx, on 03 December 2016 - 11:36 PM, said:

I know right, lets throw in a clan mech for an end game boss fight while we are at it.

The human predilection for using extreme examples to justify personal feelings never fails to make an appearance.

Bombast, on 03 December 2016 - 11:36 PM, said:

I'm curious if you'd say the same thing if Super-Heavies showed up in MW5:Merc. I'd guess not.

Edited by dervishx5, 03 December 2016 - 11:40 PM.

[Bombast]

RestosIII, on 03 December 2016 - 11:39 PM, said:

All jokes aside, in the preview they call it an "unidentified" mech, so they might be calling it a prototype that you just ****ed over royally. Hoping it's a typo though, otherwise this will help me get off the hype high.

Still puts it as being manufactured a decade prior to the Hatchetman, which is disappointing.

It being a prototype is possible, but that makes it a bizarre choice as a trailer mech.

I'm trying not to read too much into it, though it is a nagging little question, isn't it?

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:40 PM, said:

How are clan mechs extreme, but Super-Heavies arn't? There actually are clan mechs in the Inner Sphere in 3015, or at least somewhere in the periphery.

Edited by Bombast, 03 December 2016 - 11:43 PM.

[Aetes Nakatomi]

Pre alpha footage. I would assume MWO will also be zip zooming to the new engine, perhaps the SHD and RVN are the two mechs that perform best in the new environment at present.

[RestosIII]

Bombast, on 03 December 2016 - 11:41 PM, said:

Still puts it as being manufactured a decade prior to the Hatchetman, which is disappointing.

It being a prototype is possible, but that makes it a bizarre choice as a trailer mech.

I'm trying not to read too much into it, though it is a nagging little question, isn't it?

Same sort of nagging questions are bouncing around for me right now through the hype goggles.

What's happening to all the Houses and Clans?

What will the skill tree do to balance?

Is MW:O PvE gone for good, like it seems?

Why is IK getting even more delays?

Are we ever getting picture-in-picture mode for MW:O?

Are they going to keep making more non-canon mechs? (This was all planned perfectly to dampen our outrage on that front. The shiny Mercs trailer is a great distraction)

And many others, including "When will we be able to ask questions if we weren't at MechCon?", which is one of the most important IMHO.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:24 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Raven

Design year: 3024


http://www.mw5mercs.com/

"The year is 3015,"

Deliberate typo intended to see how much whiny, nit picky, forum warriorz would over-react.

????

[dervishx5]

Bombast, on 03 December 2016 - 11:41 PM, said:

How are clan mechs extreme, but Super-Heavies arn't? There actually are clan mechs in the Inner Sphere in 3015, or at least somewhere in the periphery.

It was a condescending smile.

[Bombast]

RestosIII, on 03 December 2016 - 11:48 PM, said:

Same sort of nagging questions are bouncing around for me right now through the hype goggles.

Let me help!

What's happening to all the Houses and Clans?
They'll become more unbalanced individually as people who were shoehorned into a faction just to play go back to their preferred, under/over populated factions. Otherwise nothing.

What will the skill tree do to balance?
Change it. Severely.

Is MW:O PvE gone for good, like it seems?
It was never there to begin with.

Why is IK getting even more delays?
I don't know what that is.

Are we ever getting picture-in-picture mode for MW:O?
No.

Are they going to keep making more non-canon mechs? (This was all planned perfectly to dampen our outrage on that front. The shiny Mercs trailer is a great distraction)
Yes. The real question is how often it will be, and whether it will be scheduled. I think it will be grating for the monthly guessers if now they not only have to bank their hopes on what is, but on what may be.

And many others, including "When will we be able to ask questions if we weren't at MechCon?", which is one of the most important IMHO.
Right now. On Twitter. The answer rate, and the trustworthiness of answers, are unlikely to change on another platform.

dervishx5, on 03 December 2016 - 11:48 PM, said:

It was a condescending smile.

I figured, but the emoticons are terrible and I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you had weird priorities, and weren't just being ******. This is why we need more gifs.

Edited by Bombast, 03 December 2016 - 11:56 PM.

[ScarecrowES]

Bombast, on 03 December 2016 - 11:55 PM, said:

Why is IK getting even more delays?
I don't know what that is.

Inverse Kinematics. Essentially making adjustments to model positioning and animation based on the terrain on which it's supposed to be standing. Making it look as though a mech is standing or walking on an uneven surface rather than making one foot float miraculously in mid air.

The December roadmap seems to suggest that the implementation of IK has not been successful for all mechs, making some of them look weird. PGI cited aesthetics as a primary cause for delay, which implies problem with the look of the result, not the function of the system.