159 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

Ultimax, on 13 February 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

Why not just solve the damned problem by changing the engine cap size? Then the mech can go faster, twist faster - be more agile - but more importantly actually has to pay for that upgrade with tonnage.

I agree, because its just an annoying holdover from TT engine size rules which don't apply here. PGI definitely won't do that though, i think partly from a desire to maintain some of the mechs character (i.e. if it was 3/5 in TT, it has to stay slow in MWO)

[Deathlike]

Ultimax, on 13 February 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

Honestly, I wish we as a community could just pull our collective selves together on this and petition PGI for a real change that isn't subject to whimsy.

This mech's primary issue (and one several other mechs have) - is the Max Engine Cap.


So if that's the issue, why band aid it repeatedly with quirks?
Why give it more firepower when it has oodles?
Why give it a bunch of free movement/agility bonuses through quirks?


Why not just solve the damned problem by changing the engine cap size? Then the mech can go faster, twist faster - be more agile - but more importantly actually has to pay for that upgrade with tonnage.

Honestly, I'd wait for the release before we put on buffs. Gotta do proper iterative balancing instead of preemptive overbuffs that our balance overlord loves to do (see Kodiak, Arctic Cheetah).

I will say that the engine cap for "slower 90 ton mechs" like the Highlander (both IIC and non-IIC) needs to be increased from 325 to 350.

Seriously, there's no logical reason to leave it at a poopy cap.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Ultimax, on 13 February 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

Honestly, I wish we as a community could just pull our collective selves together on this and petition PGI for a real change that isn't subject to whimsy.

This mech's primary issue (and one several other mechs have) - is the Max Engine Cap.


So if that's the issue, why band aid it repeatedly with quirks?
Why give it more firepower when it has oodles?
Why give it a bunch of free movement/agility bonuses through quirks?


Why not just solve the damned problem by changing the engine cap size? Then the mech can go faster, twist faster - be more agile - but more importantly actually has to pay for that upgrade with tonnage.

Because then everyone is going to want higher engine caps for their favorite mechs and then everything will have a max engine rating of 400 by the time everyone is happy.

[Ultimax]

Snazzy Dragon, on 13 February 2017 - 10:30 AM, said:

Because then everyone is going to want higher engine caps for their favorite mechs and then everything will have a max engine rating of 400 by the time everyone is happy.

And?

The main issue are some of the Omni-mechs locked into huge engines, they'd be the only ones really affected by lifting or increasing caps.


Otherwise its a self fixing problem. Bigger engine = more tonnage.


That's a lot cleaner of a solution then quirking the hell out of everything with crappy engines so they don't feel like piloting a building.

[Gyrok]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

The Supernova quirks were in the Clan PTS pdf!

be even some on the Boiler... with slightly stronger quirks on the variants here, but that's just me. Overall they are weaker than the Highlander IIC.



Any thoughts?

They must not want to sell any of these...

[Bishop Steiner]

Gyrok, on 13 February 2017 - 03:48 PM, said:

They must not want to sell any of these...

it's a Supernova... did anyone actually want it or think it would be good to begin with?

[DrSaphron]

Glad I didn't shoot myself in the food with the pre-order on this lemon. Condolences to those that did...

[Lupis Volk]

DrSaphron, on 13 February 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

Glad I didn't shoot myself in the food with the pre-order on this lemon. Condolences to those that did...

I had it with the Archer, Now the Clammers got a Archer lemon.

[Lily from animove]

1,42s beamduration? thats still ****** beyond believe. make that at leats 30% or go home, because no one sersious uses cerLL on such a profile with such beamdurations.

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

Honestly... can we just skip the Supernova... do a Flea with it, and skip to the Assassin, instead?

Seriously.... I don't think I've seen one person actually excited for this robot. I mean I liked it in MW3 and Mektek because it looked kind of cool (sorry Alex, but your truer to TT choice of proportions for MWO... means it really doesn't rustle my jimmies, here).... but in neither game did anyone run it remotely like stock..... heck I think I had 6 UAC5s in MW3..... and IS LLs in Mektek.

I ran it stock because it was fun, but wiht the way how cerLL in MWO work, thats an absolute bummer that will kill yourself more than it will do any good.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

it's a Supernova... did anyone actually want it or think it would be good to begin with?

I wanted it, but no I did never thought it would be good. The WHK isn't good, and the Supernoa isn't much different from the warhawk except jumpjets. but it looks cool.

but the current design with less than 3 E used in an arm will probably make it look crap, because the arms will look awkward without the Lasers placed there. I wish the arms had a chasss around the laser pods so that not using the lasers would keep the arms visuals.

Edited by Lily from animove, 14 February 2017 - 02:12 AM.

[Hydr1um]

I wanted a SNV-1(s) just because I love the paint job and it's a clan battlemech. It's not going to be my primary mech by any stretch but it'll fit in the #4 slot behind the Timber trio.

Plus every mech is viable in quickplay and I spend a fair amount of time there when my unit is quiet.

I mean, I get it, you spend money on it and then people come and tell you it's bad so you end up defending it as hard as possible because you don't want to look like an idiot. That's just the nature of confirmation bias, hell confirmation bias alone is what fuels the console wars.

Let's tell it like it is, I spent 40 bucks because I like the paint, like the aesthetics, gets some premium time thrown in and I wanted a laser vomit assault in my #4 slot. Let's not try and argue that this thing is the next coming of christ, it's a mediocre mech that will perform its duties and nothing more.

Edited by Hydrinite, 15 February 2017 - 12:46 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Hydrinite, on 15 February 2017 - 12:43 PM, said:

I wanted a SNV-1(s) just because I love the paint job and it's a clan battlemech. It's not going to be my primary mech by any stretch but it'll fit in the #4 slot behind the Timber trio.

Plus every mech is viable in quickplay and I spend a fair amount of time there when my unit is quiet.

Some are just more pleasurable to drive than others... with all the firepower on those arms, seems like it could be frustrating.

[Hydr1um]

Gas Guzzler, on 15 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

Some are just more pleasurable to drive than others... with all the firepower on those arms, seems like it could be frustrating.

Oh you'll never catch me attempting to defend this mech as "the way". I fully understand I'll be piloting a less than optimal mech when I take this out, don't care. You'll catch me styling on you for 1 volley before I shutdown and get instantly cored. But for those glorious .5 seconds you'll think I was a god.

Edited by Hydrinite, 15 February 2017 - 12:49 PM.

[NRP]

Looking forward to player impressions when this thing drops. Maybe it will have the best hit boxes in the history of the universe and be tanky as hell?

[Hydr1um]

NRP, on 15 February 2017 - 12:49 PM, said:

Looking forward to player impressions when this thing drops. Maybe it will have the best hit boxes in the history of the universe and be tanky as hell?

It looks like it could have some interesting jump interactions but I'm just gonna ride on the "I hope PGL trolled us with the quirks pdf." train.

[C E Dwyer]

Alistair Winter, on 12 February 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

Doesn't matter.

It will be balanced better by the time I can buy it for C-bills.

if we have any C-bills left after the new skill tree arrives lol

[NighthawK1337]

The only thing that'll save the Supernova is some godly heat quirks or duration quirks.

[VitriolicViolet]

it wont be a good mech, not when its a furnace on legs, but if that Galaxy paintjob comes out well i may not be able to resist. Damn its a nice looking camo in the art.

Edited: i would have already got it if Scorch hadnt been so bad.

Edited by VitriolicViolet, 15 February 2017 - 05:33 PM.

[50 50]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

The Supernova quirks were in the Clan PTS pdf!



For some reason PGI regards the -B and -A variants as superior to the -1 and -3 Variants. Noticeably absent are the -C and the Boiler, which makes sense as they should be superior, but honestly I would have expected this level of quirks on at least the -C, and maybe even some on the Boiler... with slightly stronger quirks on the variants here, but that's just me. Overall they are weaker than the Highlander IIC.

Any thoughts?

I had a theory when something similar was done with the Kodiak and quirks were noticeably missing from some variants.
I thought it might have been to set a high and low mark so when the changes came they could work out changes up and down until there was a good middle ground.

Not going to read too much into it at the moment given the skill test was meant to remove a lot of quirks.
Now the release has been delayed, we may see some differences on release, maybe not and it could change in a month anyway.

It is going to be a hot mech, no doubt about that. It might get some overheat quirks for reduced damage.

[50 50]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

it's a Supernova... did anyone actually want it or think it would be good to begin with?

You didn't?
I mean as mech pr0n goes. Wahey!

[Bishop Steiner]

50 50, on 15 February 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

You didn't?
I mean as mech pr0n goes. Wahey!

I don't really get the appeal of chubby chick porn