581 replies to this topic

[Battlemaster56]

Redjack d3, on 05 January 2017 - 10:20 AM, said:

grasshopper IIc

end of thread

[Peiper]

RestosIII, on 04 January 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

Posting the anime-ified versions of the IIC's always makes me think better of them. Thank you.

Art is art. I'm sure Alex will make them more MWO. There's a lot of variety out there. Some can and should look more anime, even if they don't move like cartoons.

[Battlemaster56]

Peiper, on 05 January 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

Art is art. I'm sure Alex will make them more MWO. There's a lot of variety out there. Some can and should look more anime, even if they don't move like cartoons.

Let's hope that he don't choose this Warhammer IIC art


Thing look bloated and not Warhammerish unlike the original art

[Peiper]

Battlemaster56, on 05 January 2017 - 11:00 AM, said:

Let's hope that he don't choose this Warhammer IIC art


Thing look bloated and not Warhammerish unlike the original art

I kind of like the art at the top, but I like the original art too. It's the weird warhammer IIC's in between those times that really urk me. I really don't want to see a warhammer IIC that's all fat and bloated like the Marauder IIC is in MWO. It's the reason I didn't buy one. It's hideous and so different from the original artwork which as positively alien and creative. I'm hoping the other IIC's (like Rifleman, Warhammer, Griffon, Shadowhawk) don't follow the same fattening process.

Do you also prefer the original Marauder IIC?

[Battlemaster56]

Peiper, on 05 January 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

I kind of like the art at the top, but I like the original art too. It's the weird warhammer IIC's in between those times that really urk me. I really don't want to see a warhammer IIC that's all fat and bloated like the Marauder IIC is in MWO. It's the reason I didn't buy one. It's hideous and so different from the original artwork which as positively alien and creative. I'm hoping the other IIC's (like Rifleman, Warhammer, Griffon, Shadowhawk) don't follow the same fattening process.

Do you also prefer the original Marauder IIC?

The original MADIIC art actually gave me a few ideas I tried to perfect with my own mech drawings but failed as the ******-like design is extremely difficult to do, but I love the original and the MWO equally.

As for Rifleman IIC it should be a slightly fatter with bigger arms at best we can hope, Griffin IIC should be around the size of a Vindicator and keep it's 80's anime feel throughout the design, Shadowhawk IIC can't really get an idea off that one the art. Personally I say make it smaller and more sleeker Shadowhawk that's all I can say.

[Ovion]

bocephuskhan, on 05 January 2017 - 06:29 AM, said:

I've been bothered that 3055+ mechs were added without more mechs that were 3050 or earlier. The two that really bother me are that we still don't have a Hatamoto or Charger on the IS side, or Dasher on the clan side.

We're not at 3053, and the rule is at least 1 variant is available in 3053.
Which sort of 'matches up' with the game being 'out' for 3 years (3050 at 'release') sort of thing.
This year we should really bump it to 3054

But yeah - anything past 3053 shouldn't be included at this point.

[Bombast]

Peiper, on 05 January 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

I kind of like the art at the top, but I like the original art too. It's the weird warhammer IIC's in between those times that really urk me. I really don't want to see a warhammer IIC that's all fat and bloated like the Marauder IIC is in MWO. It's the reason I didn't buy one. It's hideous and so different from the original artwork which as positively alien and creative. I'm hoping the other IIC's (like Rifleman, Warhammer, Griffon, Shadowhawk) don't follow the same fattening process.

Do you also prefer the original Marauder IIC?

Spoiler

Oh god, it looks like someone flipped a row boat upside down and taped a bunch of pool noodles to it.

[Valdarion Silarius]

Peiper, on 05 January 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

I kind of like the art at the top, but I like the original art too. It's the weird warhammer IIC's in between those times that really urk me. I really don't want to see a warhammer IIC that's all fat and bloated like the Marauder IIC is in MWO. It's the reason I didn't buy one. It's hideous and so different from the original artwork which as positively alien and creative. I'm hoping the other IIC's (like Rifleman, Warhammer, Griffon, Shadowhawk) don't follow the same fattening process.

Do you also prefer the original Marauder IIC?

Bishop Steiner's revisioned Marauder IIC is the route PGI should have went. It stuck to the original without looking overly ridiculous while retaining that MW:O feel to it. And it doesn't borrow any elements from the reseen look at all. I would love to see some concept art of the Warhammer IIC and the Rifleman IIC from him as well.

Edited by Arnold The Governator, 05 January 2017 - 11:41 AM.

[CK16]

Ovion, on 05 January 2017 - 11:25 AM, said:

We're not at 3053, and the rule is at least 1 variant is available in 3053.
Which sort of 'matches up' with the game being 'out' for 3 years (3050 at 'release') sort of thing.
This year we should really bump it to 3054

But yeah - anything past 3053 shouldn't be included at this point.

Russ has said it's more about tech than chassis date, though yes he does consider the date in the equation but it's not the full picture he said.

I still believe him on saying this year we get our first taste at some 3060+ chassis thay use current tech. He said on twitter he would be surprised if we don't get a few this year (mainly talking about the Mk II). And tbh we need to breakout a bit, we don't need a flood of IIC's to keep the clans having mechs, and we don't need every nostalgic mech added either before we get a few from the future. Look at it already, all the clamoring for a rather dull mech in the Annihilator instead of voting up the Nightstar and/or Devastator, this is kind of proof, IS expecially needs some better options instead of clinging to just nostalgia. We can not keep to this 1 to 1 timeline anymore, most of our options are running out, especially for Clans.

Edited by CK16, 05 January 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[Battlemaster56]

CK16, on 05 January 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

Russ has said it's more about tech than chassis date, though yes he does consider the date in the equation but it's not the full picture he said.

I still believe him on saying this year we get our first taste at some 3060+ chassis thay use current tech. He said on twitter he would be surprised if we don't get a few this year (mainly talking about the Mk II). And tbh we need to breakout a bit, we don't need a flood of IIC's to keep the clans having mechs, and we don't need every nostalgic mech added either before we get a few from the future. Look at it already, all the clamoring for a rather dull mech in the Annihilator instead of voting up the Nightstar and/or Devastator, this is kind of proof, IS expecially needs some better options instead of clinging to just nostalgia. We can not keep to this 1 to 1 timeline anymore, most of our options are running out, especially for Clans.

I feel like they need to build up the light roster a bit for both sides, while it easier to pick out good clan lights, IS on the other hand will be a challenge. I say atleast release 8 lights 4 for clans and 4 for ISm then next year they can add mediums and heavies but this is my opinion.

[Ovion]

Yeah, though in a lot of ways we could do with more tech.

I mean, we're still missing weapons in 3053.
Bumping it to 3060 means there's even more missing.

And there's still options outside of IIC's....
Maybe I should do that list of available mechs at some point....

[Gas Guzzler]

Battlemaster56, on 05 January 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

I feel like they need to build up the light roster a bit for both sides

They do but they can't just release a bunch of lights in a row, need to sprinkle in some heavies/assaults/clan mediums to keep the majority of people interested.

[Battlemaster56]

Gas Guzzler, on 05 January 2017 - 11:55 AM, said:

They do but they can't just release a bunch of lights in a row, need to sprinkle in some heavies/assaults/clan mediums to keep the majority of people interested.

Understand that completely, but right now the list of competitive, and interesting mechs that's available in the medium/heavy/and assault categories is very few(well maybe not assaults). But your completely right about what you said about variety.

[Valdarion Silarius]

CK16, on 05 January 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

I still believe him on saying this year we get our first taste at some 3060+ chassis thay use current tech. He said on twitter he would be surprised if we don't get a few this year (mainly talking about the Mk II). And tbh we need to breakout a bit, we don't need a flood of IIC's to keep the clans having mechs.

Ovion, on 05 January 2017 - 11:47 AM, said:

Yeah, though in a lot of ways we could do with more tech.

I mean, we're still missing weapons in 3053.
Bumping it to 3060 means there's even more missing.

And there's still options outside of IIC's....
Maybe I should do that list of available mechs at some point....

And here's the initial problem with PGI's decision making process. If they stuck to their original IS lineup from last year we could predict which clan mech lineup to expect for 2017 (leading up into the logical order of TRO 3060 mechs). The Warhammer IIC should have replaced the Supernova, then the following should have been the Rifleman IIC to match up the IS line up from last year (to match the is/clan mech release ratio). While I'm positive that they will eventually complete the IIC counterparts, the logical order of how they are releasing mechs is discombobulated now due to the clan hero package.

I'm indecisive if PGI should host public polls on what mechs should be added into the game. On one hand I would like to see current tech 3060 mechs make it to the game, but on the other I believe in adding future tech with the right battletech lore loadouts. I'm one of many that think PGI is procrastinating by not implementing the future tech because they simply don't know wtf they are doing, or they don't want to go through the hassle of rebalancing the entire game due to the future tech.

Edited by Arnold The Governator, 05 January 2017 - 12:21 PM.

[Poyson]

Firemoth. Only one I care about

[Aves Stone]

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Penetrator why no love for this mech?

[Bombast]

Aves Stone, on 05 January 2017 - 02:16 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Penetrator why no love for this mech?

It's 'just another' energy boat, and we've already got two in that weight bracket - The Grasshopper and the Black Knight, both of which have more nostalgia going for them.

If we wanted another heavy energy boat, I'm sure the Penetrator would be the first mech to come to mind for many. Including me. The current trend, for IS mechs anyone, is a request for lighter mechs, Omnimechs, or a proper big gun boat.

[RestosIII]

Aves Stone, on 05 January 2017 - 02:16 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Penetrator why no love for this mech?

'sees the name'

'looks at its picture, specifically, the arms'

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Arnold The Governator, on 05 January 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

Bishop Steiner's revisioned Marauder IIC is the route PGI should have went. It stuck to the original without looking overly ridiculous while retaining that MW:O feel to it. And it doesn't borrow any elements from the reseen look at all. I would love to see some concept art of the Warhammer IIC and the Rifleman IIC from him as well.

As much as I love Bishop's work, the reseen versions of the Marauder, Marauder II, and Marauder IIC are better than that anime-unseen crap. I just wish they had made the IS Marauder more like the reseen.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 January 2017 - 03:34 PM.

[Oldbob10025]

I want to ride into battle on my Craftsman Lawnmower.. Hell we already have a power loader with some weapons on it why not a lawnmower or better yet a nanny robot.. *Sigh*

Being serious I would think the cougar or the Hollander would be great light mechs to have in the game...