2432 replies to this topic

[Battlemaster56]

BoldricKent, on 03 December 2017 - 01:24 AM, said:

Kingfisher- a omni, with std engine. Let see how Claners can match with IS limitations....
Its not a bad mech, but compered to others omnis, even later versions are lacking, a zombie
energy mech...not the common type for clan. I would even buy this one.
Right after Grizzly and Grendel... damm why im getting more exited about clan mech,...no,no
not to the dork side.

[Pariah Devalis]

Battlemaster56, on 03 December 2017 - 12:30 AM, said:

Just did a check of the runner ups of the current 1st place mechs, I also did not count IIC or other unseen mechs because of the HG lawsuit.

IS

Lights: Owens, Anubis, Raptor

Mediums: Deverish, Chimera, Sha Yu

Heavies: Avatar, Argus, Dragon Fire

Assault: Sunder, Templar, Longbow

Clans

Lights: Urbanmech IIC, Solitaire, Hellion

Mediums: Grendel, Vapor Eagle, Battle Cobra

Heavies: Grizzly, Crossbow, Black Python

Assaults: Turkina, Bane, Kingfisher

These are the runner ups in the polls right now. Opinions concerns?

My concern is that the Urbie IIC is before the Hellion.

Yet, considering how lolzy the Urbie IIC is, I think I'd be ok with it?

[Battlemaster56]

Pariah Devalis, on 03 December 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

My concern is that the Urbie IIC is before the Hellion.

Yet, considering how lolzy the Urbie IIC is, I think I'd be ok with it?

Well it does take a 30 ton slot away from the two strong 30 tonners Hellion and Incubus.

But consider the who cult/fetish of the urbie we can atleast add it's little son into the game.

Plus moar Urbies means mire lolz moments to create.

[Dewodahs]

Battlemaster56, on 03 December 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Well it does take a 30 ton slot away from the two strong 30 tonners Hellion and Incubus.

But consider the who cult/fetish of the urbie we can atleast add it's little son into the game.

Plus moar Urbies means mire lolz moments to create.

May as well add the Imp so we can have the urbie's bigger angrier brother

[Battlemaster56]

Dewodahs, on 03 December 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

May as well add the Imp so we can have the urbie's bigger angrier brother

I forgot that mech even exist, but even so I'm not sure how popular that mech is compare to the cult/fetish that is the Urbie.

[Pariah Devalis]

Dewodahs, on 03 December 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

May as well add the Imp so we can have the urbie's bigger angrier brother

Imp and Flashman, yes. Complete the set, we should.

Is there a medium weight Urbitype?

[TheArisen]

Dewodahs, on 02 December 2017 - 11:36 PM, said:

As much as I love the Longbow, I had forgotten about this mech and would actually suggest it more

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

Yeah I agree. The LBow's NAIS variant would be pretty epic but the Viking has a lot going for it.

[Requiemking]

Pariah Devalis, on 03 December 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Imp and Flashman, yes. Complete the set, we should.

Is there a medium weight Urbitype?

The closest I've found is the Hoplite, a 55 ton Battlemech that looks like a UFO on legs. However, funnily enough, it's armament is actually weaker than the Urbie's in some respects, consisting of just an LRM 5 and an AC10.

[TheArisen]

We've had some mech releases and I was wondering if the effectivness of recent mechs would affect how people vote. I was also thinking about how many "no opinion" votes there are and if there was some way to get at least one choice out of them. I know some like FLG vote that way if they don't have a stake in a faction or weight class but not all would be like that.

[InvictusLee]

IMP OR I RIOT>

[Battlemaster56]

TheArisen, on 17 December 2017 - 06:20 PM, said:

We've had some mech releases and I was wondering if the effectivness of recent mechs would affect how people vote. I was also thinking about how many "no opinion" votes there are and if there was some way to get at least one choice out of them. I know some like FLG vote that way if they don't have a stake in a faction or weight class but not all would be like that.

Doubt people will pick good IS mechs for the sake of having something viable. And still going to vote nostalgia over anything viable.

[Pariah Devalis]

Battlemaster56, on 17 December 2017 - 11:08 PM, said:

Doubt people will pick good IS mechs for the sake of having something viable. And still going to vote nostalgia over anything viable.

Correction: We know people won't pick good IS mechs for the sake of having something viable. They then complain on the forums how the mech they paid for isn't a very good one, how they won't pay for another mech pack, blah blah blah. I mean, that mech poll is a sterling example of it. If PGI is listening to that poll, get ready for Hollanders. Because that's a quality light mech! /s

[The Lighthouse]

Pariah Devalis, on 18 December 2017 - 06:13 AM, said:

Correction: We know people won't pick good IS mechs for the sake of having something viable. They then complain on the forums how the mech they paid for isn't a very good one, how they won't pay for another mech pack, blah blah blah. I mean, that mech poll is a sterling example of it. If PGI is listening to that poll, get ready for Hollanders. Because that's a quality light mech! /s

It is not really people's fault actually. It is PGI who does not know how to properly balance the mechs using quirks.

[Pariah Devalis]

The Lighthouse, on 18 December 2017 - 06:42 AM, said:

It is not really people's fault actually. It is PGI who does not know how to properly balance the mechs using quirks.

Bad geometry is bad geometry. You can try and shift blame, but let's look at some sterling examples of late:

Thanatos has the nice torso hardpoints, but it always, always had Barn Door syndrome. While it's a problem that could be somewhat mitigated with massive quirks, that doesn't override its poor geometry and the fact that, even if given +20 armor in the side torsos, they could be isolated and eliminated quickly.

Then we have the Phoenix Hawk. A mech that ticked off nostalgia, yet it has 90% of its guns in relatively easy to hit arms. And people had the gall to whine that it is so unexpectedly easy to disarm. o_o

That Hollander? A super slow light mech with a huge side torso gun. That sounds like a real winner. Because there are Cougars everywhere. Growing out of the weeds. CXL isn't even redeeming it.

Not that Clan mechs are not questionably selected, either. I mean, look at the above mentioned Cougar, or the upcoming Black Lanner: a mech that will absolutely require god tier durability quirks to make up for its 11 tons of pod space on a 55 ton mech. But, hey, nostalgia. Though I'm not sure where that nostalgia came from, given it was injected into MW4 late in the game by a third party company in a post release.

People choose mechs based on feelings, and that's OK. The problem is that people who do that also often not think logically about what to expect from those choices. By all means, beg and scrape for that piece of junk you pine for, but do realize it has some limitations. Limitations that are extremely easy to predict given what we know about how this game plays.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 18 December 2017 - 06:53 AM.

[CK16]

1600+ votes, damn o.O

Stil wonder if we should remake the pool and clean it up abit after releases and a fee for all on chassis selection. Take may top 10 or so per weight class and faction? Also maybe separate IS omni mechs out from the rest and just have check box for IS omnimech, see selection below? *shurg*

That said...still want...
Templar
Sagittaire
Fafnir

Firemoth
Fire Falcon
Hellhound (MW4)
Warhammer IIC
BLook Asp

[The Lighthouse]

Pariah Devalis, on 18 December 2017 - 06:51 AM, said:

Bad geometry is bad geometry. You can try and shift blame, but let's look at some sterling examples of late:

Thanatos has the nice torso hardpoints, but it always, always had Barn Door syndrome. While it's a problem that could be somewhat mitigated with massive quirks, that doesn't override its poor geometry and the fact that, even if given +20 armor in the side torsos, they could be isolated and eliminated quickly.

Then we have the Phoenix Hawk. A mech that ticked off nostalgia, yet it has 90% of its guns in relatively easy to hit arms. And people had the gall to whine that it is so unexpectedly easy to disarm. o_o

That Hollander? A super slow light mech with a huge side torso gun. That sounds like a real winner. Because there are Cougars everywhere. Growing out of the weeds. CXL isn't even redeeming it.

Not that Clan mechs are not questionably selected, either. I mean, look at the above mentioned Cougar, or the upcoming Black Lanner: a mech that will absolutely require god tier durability quirks to make up for its 11 tons of pod space on a 55 ton mech. But, hey, nostalgia. Though I'm not sure where that nostalgia came from, given it was injected into MW4 late in the game by a third party company in a post release.

People choose mechs based on feelings, and that's OK. The problem is that people who do that also often not think logically about what to expect from those choices. By all means, beg and scrape for that piece of junk you pine for, but do realize it has some limitations. Limitations that are extremely easy to predict given what we know about how this game plays.

Yes, they are truly bad mechs. But then, A LOT of mechs are bad mechs. If we are going to implement mechs with good hitboxes, our selections are dreadfully limited.

Like... look at Timber Wolf (Mad Cat), Look at that giant missile pods and very clear CT box. Without agility from oversize engine, it was a bad mech. Now PGI did engine desync and obviously they did not think the implications... so we have crappy Timber Wolf here.

Atlas, Awesome, Warhawk (Masakari), Dire Wolf, Mad Dog (Vulture), Catapult, etc... They are all iconic mechs with terrible hitboxes. But if we are not going to implement them because they would have bad performance for FPS game, people will go revolt.

It is really developer's fault that those mechs are "bad" in game. In MW4 there are a lot of tricks so mitigate hitbox problem, such as separated missile pod hitbox, arms would not go away even with ST destruction... It is purely PGI's fault that they don't even try to solve the problems of the game.


Edit : By the way, Black Lanner was requested a lot because it is on.... MW:LL. And it looks awesome on MW:LL. Well, 'look' only I have to say.

Edited by The Lighthouse, 18 December 2017 - 07:40 AM.

[FLG 01]

Pariah Devalis, on 18 December 2017 - 06:51 AM, said:

People choose mechs based on feelings, and that's OK. The problem is that people who do that also often not think logically about what to expect from those choices. By all means, beg and scrape for that piece of junk you pine for, but do realize it has some limitations. Limitations that are extremely easy to predict given what we know about how this game plays.

This is, unfortunately, true for almost every IS MW:4-original Mech in game. Perhaps you could call the Osiris solid enough, but the others are between 'meh' and 'terrible'. You'd think people got the message by now.
(Then there is the lore. All of them are, at best, sideshow units in the FCCW. The Uziel is not even that.)

Of course we all have our favourites. I for one would love to get a Spartan, but I know it would not be a very good Mech unless quirked heavily. And I know it is not a fan favourite, despite the fact that it actually has some meaningful lore. I am not in denial about those things.

The Lighthouse, on 18 December 2017 - 07:35 AM, said:

It is really developer's fault that those mechs are "bad" in game. In MW4 there are a lot of tricks so mitigate hitbox problem, such as separated missile pod hitbox, arms would not go away even with ST destruction... It is purely PGI's fault that they don't even try to solve the problems of the game.

In TT the Thanatos' hitboxes are not a problem either, of course. You are essentially asking for a different game to make the horrible Mechs not look horrible.

While PGI could handle quirks better, and could implement changes lowering the impact of bad hitboxes, it is too easy to blame them entirely.
It's the community that should know what kind of game they are playing. They should know they will never actually pilot the Uziel no matter how much they say they want it (some true lovers do, I know Jay ). The expectations should be realistic within the framework of MWO.

And yes, there are some Mechs which are too important to ignore, no matter how bad they might be. But here is the thing: nostalgia is subjective. I don't think Thanatos or Hellspawn are iconic; I don't think we desperately need them. And although I have the lore on my side, some people disagree. And that's ok, too, as long as we all accept nostalgia is not an objectifiable factor.

[Marauder3D]

Gas: Thank you for doing this. You deserve props.


I'm pleased to see the Crusader still leading the IS Heavy Mech poll. Since there is no "new" art yet, it would let Alex Iglesias put his own personal touch on an iconic mech, which is a great idea, as the man is mad talented.

Now, in a perfect world, the case in court will get dismissed for the reasons we all know if you have been following it. Should this happen, we need a "Victory over the forces of Evil" Pack:

Light: Wasp

Heavier Light: Valkyrie

Heavy: Crusader

Assault: Marauder II or Longbow

I've quit spending money on this game. (Last $$ on the Javelin, because 3025). However, if they did an all classics pack, I'd open my wallet to support that, and so would many other Grognards.

ONWARD TO VICTORY!

[CK16]

FLG 01, on 18 December 2017 - 07:52 AM, said:

Snip

Well of what is left form the original MW4 roster? (Also think there is a clause there, all MW4 IS mechs are not great >.>)

Lights
Flea- Locust 2.0
Owens -bad, just bad....

Mediums
Chimera-might be ok...to dependant on unknowns
Hellhound-could be solid

Heavies
Argus-could be ok, be like a Dragon imo

Assaults
Fafnir-Probably would end up as the Heavy Gauss platform of choice if quirks help, kind of Kingcrab like profile but better arm height and big guns in flat short torsos. Also HUGE player in the FCCW
Hauptmann-might be ok can carry decent payload. Another big FCCW participant
Sunder-50/50 on if will be good or bad. Depends on artwork and go of torso
Templar-50/50 on if could be good. High tonnage available but low slot space. Artwork dependent for torso weapon points and just how low arms are. Once again big time player in FCCW.

And personally I want some of those assaults

[Metus regem]

CK16, on 18 December 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

Templar-50/50 on if could be good. High tonnage available but low slot space. Artwork dependent for torso weapon points and just how low arms are. Once again big time player in FCCW.

From what I've seen on all of the official (TT source books) art on the Templar, the ST mounts are cockpit height, arms and CT mounts are low mounts. The arm hit boxes look great with those big shoulder to absorb impacts, the ST's actually look very short and narrow, making her XL packing not such a big deal....


Yes I like the Templar, but I am not blind to it's drawbacks, it is very, very, very limited in free critical space, with at least one variant dependent on crit splitting. Most variants also make use to C3 as well....


That said, every mech that I have wanted in MWO, has lived up to the expectations I had for it, from years of TT usage with the unit. I know people say that TT has no bearing on how the mech should preform in MWO, and to a degree they are right, when it comes to the hit boxes, as TT doesn't make use of them in the same way. That all being said, the Phoenix Hawk, Rifleman, Warhammer and Bushwacker have all been exactly as I expected them to be, because I went into them, knowing about their limitations.