Poll Discussion - 2017 Mechs
#241
Posted 06 January 2017 - 07:05 AM
#242
Posted 06 January 2017 - 07:15 AM
+1 Piranha
#243
Posted 06 January 2017 - 07:20 AM
Requiemking, on 06 January 2017 - 12:44 AM, said:
Since i like pretty much every artwork done by Bishop, i think that's a given.
.
.
.
Not exactly sure what it has to do with the Vulcan though (Bishop's Vulcan design is also really cool)
#244
Posted 06 January 2017 - 07:22 AM
Mhalek Krol, on 06 January 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:
We are getting mechs, regardless. People can *****, and moan, and stomp their feet about halting mech releases in favor of more gameplay depth, but they are completely out of touch with two extremely simple realities:
1. The people who make mechs do not do anything else. Having them not make mechs would do exactly zero to speed up or generate additional gameplay depth to the game. If they stopped mechs, do you think Alex or any of the mech modelers and texturers like Lauren, would suddenly be coding new game modes? It does not work that way.
2. PGI is a business, and it needs to turn a profit. It probably barely breaks any profit at this point, with the current mech selling model. If they stopped selling mechs entirely, the company will be unable to afford to pay its staff, let alone produce things that add depth to the game.
TL;DR: Mech packs are necessary, and not selling them is counter-productive to other goals.
Edited by Pariah Devalis, 06 January 2017 - 07:23 AM.
#245
Posted 06 January 2017 - 09:57 AM
Requiemking, on 06 January 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:
EDIT: Also, Bishop Steiner did an absolutely fantastic redesign for the Lancelot back in 2013. Here he is, in all of his knightly glory.
http://s1280.photobu...09f10d.jpg.html
Nice looking 'mech, shame we have the Rifleman and Jagermech already
#246
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:21 AM
Jay Leon Hart, on 06 January 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:
Nice looking 'mech, shame we have the Rifleman and Jagermech already
Yes, but the Lancelot only really competes with the Rifleman 5D, which it is pretty much better than in every way. Basically, the Lancelot LNC25-01 is what would happen if you gave the Rifleman 5D the Dragon's engine cap and made it look good.
#247
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:26 AM
Requiemking, on 06 January 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:
Because the Inner Sphere has so many of those?
OH wait, all the popular dual gauss assaults are Clan mechs.
Mhalek Krol, on 06 January 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:
Right and you posting this here is going to encourage PGI to develop the game faster. Well done!
#248
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:43 AM
Gas Guzzler, on 06 January 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:
Because the Inner Sphere has so many of those?
OH wait, all the popular dual gauss assaults are Clan mechs.
Well to be fair Gas, the Clans do get the ones with the best weapon mounts (Kodiak 3) with lower weight and cirt space smaller weapons.... But I am not going to debate the Clans OP/UP/Baseline circus that has no place in this thread.
#249
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:11 PM
#250
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:14 PM
Metus regem, on 06 January 2017 - 11:43 AM, said:
Well to be fair Gas, the Clans do get the ones with the best weapon mounts (Kodiak 3) with lower weight and cirt space smaller weapons.... But I am not going to debate the Clans OP/UP/Baseline circus that has no place in this thread.
Nah not getting into balance, but it would be nice to have better options to run dual gauss on the IS side as an assault mech, from a variety perspective.
#251
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:38 PM
#252
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:45 PM
Gas Guzzler, on 06 January 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:
Nah not getting into balance, but it would be nice to have better options to run dual gauss on the IS side as an assault mech, from a variety perspective.
Yup and so the IS needs it's own gauss assault. The Annihilator won't work because it's giraffe neck and if Pgi is nice it might get a 300 engine cap which is still only Dwolf speed.
Cerberus or Nightstar also expand the 95 ton slot that currently only has the Banshee. Gunslinger offers an 85t ecm jj gauss carrier and the Devestator and Thunderhawk are strong contenders as well.
Also the Lancelot has a ballistic variant so it really is just an upengined Rifleman.
Edited by TheArisen, 06 January 2017 - 12:46 PM.
#253
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:55 PM
Gas Guzzler, on 06 January 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:
Nah not getting into balance, but it would be nice to have better options to run dual gauss on the IS side as an assault mech, from a variety perspective.
Totally not disagreeing with you on that, it's why I lean towards mechs like the:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_Hawk
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Devastator
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Nightstar
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gunslinger
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Black_Watch
http://www.sarna.net...us_(BattleMech)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Emperor
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Pillager
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Vanquisher
Any of those would be preferable to the Annihilator.
#254
Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:58 PM
Metus regem, on 06 January 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:
Totally not disagreeing with you on that, it's why I lean towards mechs like the:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_Hawk
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Devastator
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Nightstar
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gunslinger
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Black_Watch
http://www.sarna.net...us_(BattleMech)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Emperor
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Pillager
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Vanquisher
Any of those would be preferable to the Annihilator.
The sad part is if those were added even a few of them to the poll here, think the community would still vote for them over the Annihilator? That is what I see concerning. While the Clan table has shown more interest in for the most part decetn/needed mechs (Firemoth = need clan 20 tonner)
#255
Posted 06 January 2017 - 01:03 PM
CK16, on 06 January 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:
I still say the Piranha would be better (at least for me) than the Firemoth.... But this is just highlighting a continuing problem, there are a lot of mechs for the IS that are very, very nostalgic for people, myself included. But I want them none the less, even if they will be bad. I still want my Stingers and Wasps, yes they will be slow, but they will also be jumpy too. The thing is a lot of the Clan mechs from TT are at their worst, better than the average IS mech, so it is a lot harder to find bad Clan mechs, than it is for the IS to find bad to mediocre mechs.
#256
Posted 06 January 2017 - 03:10 PM
Requiemking, on 06 January 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:
so what?
This is MWO, mechs are generic gunbags, with hardpoint inflation. What they are stock, is largely irrelevant. But fast, spindly, jumpy with a couple pretty high hardpoints? Works for me. Oh... also... looks cool and sounds fun.
Crazy concept, I know.
#257
Posted 06 January 2017 - 03:14 PM
#258
Posted 06 January 2017 - 03:21 PM
CK16, on 06 January 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:
The sad part is if those were added even a few of them to the poll here, think the community would still vote for them over the Annihilator? That is what I see concerning. While the Clan table has shown more interest in for the most part decetn/needed mechs (Firemoth = need clan 20 tonner)
The nostalgic Clan 'Mechs are inherently better designed than their IS counterparts. That is really what is happening.
#259
Posted 06 January 2017 - 03:42 PM
Pariah Devalis, on 06 January 2017 - 07:22 AM, said:
This has diminishing returns though, as nostalgia will (and has for some people) stop selling mechs and with chances for redundancy increasing with each release, it isn't sustainable. Honestly the model reminds me of some Marxist things about increased productivity (productivity being creating new mechs) actually being self-defeating (there is a better word I'm looking for here).
They really need to find a better revenue stream.
#260
Posted 06 January 2017 - 04:40 PM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users