368 replies to this topic

[MovinTarget]

Willothius, on 26 February 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Only thing that worries me is Mechs that DON'T have mobility quirks, but DO depend greatly on mobility (due to always running big engines) get left out this way: Linebacker (and maybe KDK?) for example..

You argument would probably be taken more seriously if you didn't implicitly "worry" about the KDK getting a nerf... sure the KDK3 is the easiest of the bunch to call OP but most of them can have really effective builds for FP where you know the map/mode before you commit to your mech.

Having said that, apart from PGI's track record, no one can assume this will roll out perfectly and should give the PTS a go... ...when it comes back up. They are clearly considering (rational) feedback so we should take advantage of that.

Having said that, hypothetically, you *should* have the ability to regain 100% that mobility via skills, you just have to accept it will cost you something instead of being "free"

Edited by MovinTarget, 26 February 2017 - 08:20 AM.

[cougurt]

MovinTarget, on 26 February 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

You argument would probably be taken more seriously if you didn't implicitly "worry" about the KDK getting a nerf... sure the KDK3 is the easiest of the bunch to call OP but most of them can have really effective builds for FP where you know the map/mode before you commit to your mech.

Having said that, apart from PGI's track record, no one can assume this will roll out perfectly and should give the PTS a go... ...when it comes back up. They are clearly considering (rational) feedback so we should take advantage of that.

Having said that, hypothetically, you *should* have the ability to regain 100% that mobility via skills, you just have to accept it will cost you something instead of being "free"

it should be free. it's not like a dire wolf has to unlock the ability to carry large amounts of firepower, it's just inherent to the chassis.

[Wintersdark]

Willothius, on 26 February 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Only thing that worries me is Mechs that DON'T have mobility quirks, but DO depend greatly on mobility (due to always running big engines) get left out this way: Linebacker (and maybe KDK?) for example..

This is a tuning factor, as may as well be left in the "wait and see" pile. Keep in mind, Linebacker relies on speed. Even with less agility, it'd be fine unless it lost a LOT.

As well, PGI doesn't say quirks, just "mechs which rely on agility to be competitive".

Still, yes, it's basically a certainty that there will be balance issues out of the gate as PGI screws up initial mobility baselines on various mechs, so we'll need to test them and report our findings.

[MovinTarget]

cougurt, on 26 February 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

it should be free. it's not like a dire wolf has to unlock the ability to carry large amounts of firepower, it's just inherent to the chassis.

Only because for many of us, up until this point it has always been married to the Engine size. There isn't really any logic in saying the bigger the engine, the more nimble the mech...guaranteed, if anything it should closer correlate to a Car's engine being tuned for accelleration versus top speed or something like that...

Edited by MovinTarget, 26 February 2017 - 10:13 AM.

[Willothius]

MovinTarget, on 26 February 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

You argument would probably be taken more seriously if you didn't implicitly "worry" about the KDK getting a nerf... sure the KDK3 is the easiest of the bunch to call OP but most of them can have really effective builds for FP where you know the map/mode before you commit to your mech.

Well, let 'em nerf the friggin' Kodiak, that's not what I was "implicitly" worried about at all. Heck, I've recently bought them and never mastered any mech so easily!

it was just an example. Mainly because no other Assault that by default comes with a friggin' XL400 came to mind

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

As well, PGI doesn't say quirks, just "mechs which rely on agility to be competitive".

Good point. Thought they had only mentioned "mobility quirks" instead.

Edited by Willothius, 26 February 2017 - 10:35 AM.

[cougurt]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

As well, PGI doesn't say quirks, just "mechs which rely on agility to be competitive".

InnerSphereNews, on 20 February 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

Many ‘Mechs previously balanced around superior Mobility Quirks will instead see those Quirks integrated into the inherent Mobility attributes of the 'Mech. Those inherent Mobility attributes will then be evaluated and adjusted against similar 'Mechs within their tonnage bracket. For example, the Phoenix Hawk will be provided with higher baseline Mobility stats compared to the Blackjack.

isn't that exactly what they said? or am i missing something here?

MovinTarget, on 26 February 2017 - 10:04 AM, said:

Only because for many of us, up until this point it has always been married to the Engine size. There isn't really any logic in saying the bigger the engine, the more nimble the mech...guaranteed, if anything it should closer correlate to a Car's engine being tuned for accelleration versus top speed or something like that...

logically it doesn't make as much sense, but balance-wise i feel it's a lot better. if the main point of this change is to reduce the mobility disparity between inner sphere and clan, then i would suggest simply improving the mobility of inner sphere engines to be equivalent to larger clan engines.

[Wintersdark]

cougurt, on 26 February 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

isn't that exactly what they said? or am i missing something here?

Touche!

Still, resultant profiles can be adjusted on a per-mech basis, so there's no point in fretting until we have a PTS build up and can make some recommendations if any are required.

Quote

logically it doesn't make as much sense, but balance-wise i feel it's a lot better. if the main point of this change is to reduce the mobility disparity between inner sphere and clan, then i would suggest simply improving the mobility of inner sphere engines to be equivalent to larger clan engines.

Not to reduce the mobility disparity. To allow mechs to mount smaller engines without a crippling loss of agility AND the inherent speed and heat sink loss.

This IS a huge buff to the IS, however, because it allows them to mount smaller engines without a loss of agility. There are a couple Clam mechs that can do it too, but because they don't have the same XL vs. STD paradigm, the motivations are different.

But the buff to the IS isn't the only reason to do this. It's a major part of it, but not the only reason. Hence why we've asked for this to happen since the earliest days of MWO, years before Clans were added at all. The simple fact of it is when agility is determined by speed, there's a minimum speed you can have before it's too hard to keep your guns on your target (disregarding your ability to actually close with them etc), and that's silly. it's why you can't effectively run a stock engine Urbie, even if you were ok with the snails pace speed. Because you literally handle like an (unquirked!) Atlas.

As to engines, it doesn't work that way. Mobility is only tangentally related to engine size, so you can't buff IS engines to fix that. May as well just flatly buff IS mech agility via quirks, but that'd be a huge mess when those IS mechs DID mount larger engines.

Mobility linearly correlates to ground speed, and is modified by quirks. Nothing else. Ground speed is a factor of engine size and tonnage, so engine size eventually determines mobility, but because it's not a direct link you can't cleanly buff engines that way.

On the other hand, simply having all mechs have their own base movement profiles removes that problem. It allows PGI to tune the agility of a mech without worrying about multiplicative quirks being better for larger engined mechs than smaller engined mechs[A similar situation to the problem of weapon quirks being of differing value based on how many of a given hardpoint you have] - they simply set the base value where they want it for that chassis. This in turn allows otherwise similar mechs to be differentiated better. There's lots of other advantages to this system, as have been identified (repeatedly) in this thread.

[cougurt]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 08:43 PM, said:

Touche!

Still, resultant profiles can be adjusted on a per-mech basis, so there's no point in fretting until we have a PTS build up and can make some recommendations if any are required.


Not to reduce the mobility disparity. To allow mechs to mount smaller engines without a crippling loss of agility AND the inherent speed and heat sink loss.

This IS a huge buff to the IS, however, because it allows them to mount smaller engines without a loss of agility. There are a couple Clam mechs that can do it too, but because they don't have the same XL vs. STD paradigm, the motivations are different.

But the buff to the IS isn't the only reason to do this. It's a major part of it, but not the only reason. Hence why we've asked for this to happen since the earliest days of MWO, years before Clans were added at all. The simple fact of it is when agility is determined by speed, there's a minimum speed you can have before it's too hard to keep your guns on your target (disregarding your ability to actually close with them etc), and that's silly. it's why you can't effectively run a stock engine Urbie, even if you were ok with the snails pace speed. Because you literally handle like an (unquirked!) Atlas.

As to engines, it doesn't work that way. Mobility is only tangentally related to engine size, so you can't buff IS engines to fix that. May as well just flatly buff IS mech agility via quirks, but that'd be a huge mess when those IS mechs DID mount larger engines.

Mobility linearly correlates to ground speed, and is modified by quirks. Nothing else. Ground speed is a factor of engine size and tonnage, so engine size eventually determines mobility, but because it's not a direct link you can't cleanly buff engines that way.

On the other hand, simply having all mechs have their own base movement profiles removes that problem. It allows PGI to tune the agility of a mech without worrying about multiplicative quirks being better for larger engined mechs than smaller engined mechs[A similar situation to the problem of weapon quirks being of differing value based on how many of a given hardpoint you have] - they simply set the base value where they want it for that chassis. This in turn allows otherwise similar mechs to be differentiated better. There's lots of other advantages to this system, as have been identified (repeatedly) in this thread.

i've been playing since before clans were introduced and never felt that this was an issue. speed is the main reason to pick a larger engine, but that only matters up to a certain point. people don't opt for smaller engines because your lack of speed starts to become a liability, not because your mobility suffers greatly--obviously that doesn't help, but a stock engine urbanmech isn't suddenly going to become usable because it can twist lightning fast.

let's compare the night gyr and the linebacker. while i think the linebacker is a great mech, most people would agree that the night gyr is superior, despite being very slow for a clan heavy. that's because it still hits that minimum acceptable speed where it's not a significant detriment to your survivability, and the small engine affords you massive amounts of firepower. the linebacker, however, doesn't gain an awful lot from its large engine aside from the extra mobility that comes with it. it could most likely lose some of that mobility and still be viable, but that's only owing to the fact that it's a clan mech.

maybe i'm misunderstanding, but i don't see how a flat mobility increase to IS engines would complicate things. could you give me an example of some problems that might arise?

[Trigath]

Does this mean that if I want to play with a Kodiak I don't need to buy 3 different variants to level up (lost of CB) and can instead just buy one? Because if so, this like the best thing ever for this game. Also saves so much mechbays when you only have to get the variants you want. And I don't even have to keep moving modules about, because that s**t is so tedious I don't usually bother and rather play without modules.

[MrKvola]

Trigath, on 27 February 2017 - 04:26 AM, said:

Does this mean that if I want to play with a Kodiak I don't need to buy 3 different variants to level up (lost of CB) and can instead just buy one? Because if so, this like the best thing ever for this game. Also saves so much mechbays when you only have to get the variants you want. And I don't even have to keep moving modules about, because that s**t is so tedious I don't usually bother and rather play without modules.

Yes, it does all that.

What it also does is that it resets the 'mechs you already own and most probably you won't have enough c-bills or XP to level them back up. Oh and also, it about doubles the grind for new 'mechs.

[MovinTarget]

cougurt, on 27 February 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

i've been playing since before clans were introduced and never felt that this was an issue. speed is the main reason to pick a larger engine, but that only matters up to a certain point. people don't opt for smaller engines because your lack of speed starts to become a liability, not because your mobility suffers greatly--obviously that doesn't help, but a stock engine urbanmech isn't suddenly going to become usable because it can twist lightning fast.

let's compare the night gyr and the linebacker. while i think the linebacker is a great mech, most people would agree that the night gyr is superior, despite being very slow for a clan heavy. that's because it still hits that minimum acceptable speed where it's not a significant detriment to your survivability, and the small engine affords you massive amounts of firepower. the linebacker, however, doesn't gain an awful lot from its large engine aside from the extra mobility that comes with it. it could most likely lose some of that mobility and still be viable, but that's only owing to the fact that it's a clan mech.

maybe i'm misunderstanding, but i don't see how a flat mobility increase to IS engines would complicate things. could you give me an example of some problems that might arise?

I think the point they are trying to say is: Mobility bonuses will no longer be free... This means that those bonuses, while now part of the skill trees, will cost something, they will be attainable by *all* mechs... This is *not* just a buff for IS, but it also could have a serious positive impact for many omni-mechs that are a little on the slow side and could do nothing about it since their engines are "locked"... the Adder, DireWolf, and Nova all come to mind, but others may be applicable as well. Heck the Highlander (IS or Clan) could use this due to low engine cap.

So yes, this will open up some general diversity because fast mechs will no longer be able to save points for other traits simply b/c they are fast, they'll have to acquire mobility bonuses just like everyone else and people will have to think a little bit more about if they want extra speed or more tonnage for other stuff since agility won't be tied to their engine anymore. This alone will probably send shockwaves through the Meta-using community where those agility traits are generally sought after. Its one of the things that made the Timber so good.

With this change, a DireWolf in the right hands will be that much harder to take down by a zippy little light. Not, saying a loss was a forgone conclusion vs a light, but a good pilot should be able to get his guns on them anklebiters a bit more efficiently.

...granted, this is all theory crafting at this point, but based on what I understand of the change, unless quirks are applied... same tonnage mechs will have the same base agility stats regardless of engine.

Edited by MovinTarget, 27 February 2017 - 08:42 AM.

[MovinTarget]

MrKvola, on 27 February 2017 - 07:42 AM, said:

Yes, it does all that.

What it also does is that it resets the 'mechs you already own and most probably you won't have enough c-bills or XP to level them back up. Oh and also, it about doubles the grind for new 'mechs.

I keep saying it... instead of refunding XP/GXP, each variant should simply get a pool of available skillpoints based on how far they got leveled. So if you mastered the mech, you get 91 SP when the trees go live. Granted you only get 91 regardless of how many copies of that variant you own, but it would ensure that you get exactly what you put into the mech.

Yes, PGI, I know the new process is more expensive and grind-y, so from your perspective it may not seem fair, however, if you are looking for players to "buy in" to the new system, this is about the only way I see you fully placating all players, casual to whale.

I think a lot of the ire and salt would dissipate if you just did this, moving forward, most people could live with the change, they just want applicable credit for what they've done to this point.

Edited by MovinTarget, 27 February 2017 - 08:19 AM.

[cougurt]

MovinTarget, on 27 February 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

I think the point they are trying to say is: Mobility bonuses will no longer be free... This means that those bonuses, while now part of the skill trees, will cost something, they will be attainable by *all* mechs... This is *not* just a buff for IS, but it also could have a serious positive impact for many omni-mechs that are a little on the slow side and could do nothing about it since their engines are "locked"... the Adder, DireWolf, and Nova all come to mind, but others may be applicable as well. Heck the Highlander (IS or Clan) could use this due to low engine cap.

So yes, this will open up some general diversity because fast mechs will no longer be able to save points for other traits simply b/c they are fast, they'll have to acquire mobility bonuses just like everyone else and people will have to think a little bit more about if they want extra speed or more tonnage for other stuff since agility won't be tied to their engine anymore. This alone will probably send shockwaves through the Meta-using community where those agility traits are generally sought after. Its one of the things that made the Timber so good.

With this change, a DireWolf in the right hands will be that much harder to take down by a zippy little light. Not, saying a loss was a forone conclusion vs a light, but a good pilot should be able to get his guns on them anklebiters a bit more efficiently.

...granted, this is all theory crafting at this point, but based on what I understand of the change, unless quirks are applied... same tonnage mechs will have the same base agility stats regardless of engine.

what i'm saying is that your engine already comes at a very big cost, and past a certain point there's little value in the extra speed alone. of all the mechs you mentioned, only the dire wolf really suffers due to its handling. the adder is actually pretty capable in spite of its small engine, and the nova might be one of the best mechs in the game.

if they want the new skill tree to be successful, they need to either allow for more specialization, or significantly increase the number of nodes. as it is, it's almost identical to the current system.

why shouldn't a fast light have a big advantage over a slow assault under the right circumstances? it's frustrating to be the assault in those situations, but it's only fair.

i just don't see this change having a significant impact on engine choice. there might be a few cases where you would want to drop the engine down a few ratings, but most clan mechs have little to gain from doing so, and most IS mechs are too slow to get away with it.

[Wintersdark]

cougurt, on 27 February 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

i've been playing since before clans were introduced and never felt that this was an issue. speed is the main reason to pick a larger engine, but that only matters up to a certain point. people don't opt for smaller engines because your lack of speed starts to become a liability, not because your mobility suffers greatly--obviously that doesn't help, but a stock engine urbanmech isn't suddenly going to become usable because it can twist lightning fast.

I've felt that way. Speed is why you go faster - speed and heatsinks. But twist and turn cap how far you'll go lower. Once you hit "twisty enough" more doesn't matter a lot - it's icing on the cake.

You're arguing my point against 1453R though, speed IS the real reason you change engines size, because speed is critically important. He fears everyone's going to mount 250's and the game is going to slow to a crawl, but that's ridiculous.

Quote

let's compare the night gyr and the linebacker. while i think the linebacker is a great mech, most people would agree that the night gyr is superior, despite being very slow for a clan heavy. that's because it still hits that minimum acceptable speed where it's not a significant detriment to your survivability, and the small engine affords you massive amounts of firepower. the linebacker, however, doesn't gain an awful lot from its large engine aside from the extra mobility that comes with it. it could most likely lose some of that mobility and still be viable, but that's only owing to the fact that it's a clan mech.

Preaching to the Choir. Both are valid choices, and while most tend to prefer the Gyr, the Linebackers speed has its place (though I argue it has too much speed, as diminishing returns on tonnage:speed means it gives up a lot to get that speed). The timber wolf / Gyr is a much better comparison.

Quote

maybe i'm misunderstanding, but i don't see how a flat mobility increase to IS engines would complicate things. could you give me an example of some problems that might arise?

Mechanically that's hard to do because engines don't give mobility, speed does. From a coding perspective that makes this much more complex. You're not changing a property of is engines, you're adding code to the mobility calculation. You can't just if (IS) add x%, because then large engine is Mecha gain even more agility.

Engines lack the ability to carry modifiers to the mech. Also, setting modifiers per engine still screws with things because speed (and thus mobility) are a factor of engine vs. tonnage, so if you have say 250 rated engines +10% turn rate, that would be a HUGE buff to lighter Mecha using it (they move fast with a 250 and thus have very high base mobility, add a percentage and they gain a LOT) while it isn't helpful for a large mech running that same engine as they gain little.

That's why the decoupling of mobility from the engine size is good. It's also a complex change, but it solves a lot of issues where the current formula messes things up.

[Wintersdark]

cougurt, on 27 February 2017 - 10:10 AM, said:

what i'm saying is that your engine already comes at a very big cost, and past a certain point there's little value in the extra speed alone. of all the mechs you mentioned, only the dire wolf really suffers due to its handling. the adder is actually pretty capable in spite of its small engine, and the nova might be one of the best mechs in the game.

we could argue about specific cases all day, but without knowing where baseline values will be it's an excessive in futility.

Quote

why shouldn't a fast light have a big advantage over a slow assault under the right circumstances? it's frustrating to be the assault in those situations, but it's only fair.

This difference is that ALL lights will have and advantage vs all big assaults, not just fast vs. slow. Speed will still matter, as they can pounce quickly and retreat as fast, but agility will be tunable per weight class and even per individual mech, something that isn't possible right now. I'm not getting involved with theory crafting about where specific values will be (how agile will 100t assaults be?) As that's tunable. It's the fact that after this change, well have more balance ***** across the board

Quote

i just don't see this change having a significant impact on engine choice. there might be a few cases where you would want to drop the engine down a few ratings, but most clan mechs have little to gain from doing so, and most IS mechs are too slow to get away with it.

Clan side, little impact, and what there is will depend on the baseline values chosen. Is side, I'll drop some of my large Cal's for STD's, because I can go slower at the same tonnage without being unable to effectively track targets with my torso weapons like now.

[MovinTarget]

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 10:20 AM, said:

It's also a complex change, but it solves a lot of issues where the current formula messes things up.

...and the only thing worse from a software standpoint than having lots of variables is having those values locked up in a black box that you can't do anything with except apply as needed.

The idea is to hit that design sweet spot where you can tweak a setting to get the desired result without the whole thing coming crashing down on you...

[Wintersdark]

MovinTarget, on 27 February 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

...and the only thing worse from a software standpoint than having lots of variables is having those values locked up in a black box that you can't do anything with except apply as needed.

The idea is to hit that design sweet spot where you can tweak a setting to get the desired result without the whole thing coming crashing down on you...

Exactly!


Right now, any changes to mobility have very varied impacts because of that. Add a +turn rate perk, and mechs with large engines gain massively while mechs with smaller engines don't gain anything. Having all these mobility values being calculated values instead of specified just means they're not really adjustable.

Say PGI feels Mediums need to be more agile as a chassis. Sure, they could quirk all mediums with +10% turn rate, but that means that the mediums which already turn fast (and thus don't really benefit) turn super-fast and the rest still turn slowly(staying too clumsy to benefit). Once that percentage is high enough to allow slow mediums to turn quickly, then fast mediums are just broken. Because we can change engines, it's not enough to just only apply the quirk to "the slow mechs" as a mech can be fast or slow.

In this system, you can tune a specific chassis (or a whole weight class) and have it have a fixed impact. All the mechs just gain or lose whatever amount of turn rate you want.

It's a balance point that can be adjusted simply with a fixed impact. Want a Phoenix Hawk to be more agile, regardless? No problem. Feel the Dire Wolf isn't quite agile enough, but don't want the Kodiak to twist like a dancer? Or want the KDK-2 to turn quicker at low speeds but not over-buff a 400XL equipped KDK-2? No problem.

There's really no disadvantage here. The worst thing that happens is that you lose some customization of mobility [but note, we have mobility skills you can choose to take or not], but that customization of mobility is the least important aspect of engine size except in cases where you want to go low in rating for whatever reason. If the baseline mobility levels are Good Enough without mobility skills, then perhaps you won't take all the mobility skills to be able to take something else. Aaaand then, there you have it, customization again. In exactly the same way you have it with engines now.

[MovinTarget]

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 10:55 AM, said:

There's really no disadvantage here.

Well, that is based on perception, the player that wants the perks of high agility that currently come with a big engine will of course lament the loss of automatic bonuses that they'll have to recoup via spending precious SP.

But I know you Winter...

I know you are lickin' your chops because I've seen the evil DWF monstrosities you've made...

[Wintersdark]

MovinTarget, on 27 February 2017 - 11:12 AM, said:

Well, that is based on perception, the player that wants the perks of high agility that currently come with a big engine will of course lament the loss of automatic bonuses that they'll have to recoup via spending precious SP.

But I know you Winter...

I know you are lickin' your chops because I've seen the evil DWF monstrosities you've made...

>.>

<.<

I have no idea of what you're talking about. =)


Seriously, though, there's a lot of mechs that gain. As Cougurt says above, few players(if any?) go with very large engines for the mobility gain; it's basically always the speed and heat sinks, everyone is "agile enough" for most circumstances. But then all the mechs below that point (and there are WAY WAY more IS mechs down there) stand to gain substantially. While the 75kph agility is fine for a heavy, it's not good enough for a medium that stands to die outright to a single heavy blow somewhere. But getting the increased mobility via engine costs them so much in tonnage that they're still very fragile AND have laughable loadouts.

Which mechs though... well that depends entirely on where the baselines are. I'm really looking forward to mechs being more precisely individually tunable, even if my beloved Direwolf doesn't gain any mobility compared to today with the new skills (which would keep it mostly shelved, as the post-agility nerf turn rate is just a bit too slow for me).

I'm REALLY excited for my Urbanmech. While I acknowledge that when it turns like an Arctic Cheetah, it's STILL not going to be a super competitive mech, well... When I'm able to run a STD 125 but still run around corners very sharply, keep a tight, tight circle on an opposing mech, It'll be a huge buff for it. I pull regular 600 damage games in it now (and I can't get a non-embarassing score with an Arctic Cheetah to save my life); being able to turn much faster will be HUGE.

I'd actually play more lights after the change, as I'm too old to handle lights at high speed, but the loss of agility dialing back the speed makes them utter garbage. I get that competitively, people will stay with max speed lights (and I agree with why) but this change certainly allows viable options that don't really exist right now.

Same feelings with my Mediums. I'd like to target 70kph in an IS medium. That speed leads to a fine agility for a Heavy, but it's strictly insufficient for a medium that *needs* to be able to dodge and weave better.

[UrbanTarget]

Wintersdark, on 27 February 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

I'm REALLY excited for my Urbanmech. While I acknowledge that when it turns like an Arctic Cheetah, it's STILL not going to be a super competitive mech,

HERESY! BLASPHEMY! SPEAK NOT ILL OF THE EXHAULTED URBIE, OUR SAVIOR FROM THE CLANS!

Who appeared along with our Resistance I Pack (okay, he brought up the rear)? Though a mere afterthought, it was the Urbanmechs (and a sh*t-ton of quirks) that began the turning of the tide!

So besmirch not his hallowed name, let his merciful 360 degree gaze be upon you!