2372 replies to this topic

[Valdarion Silarius]

Oh yeah that reminds me....Shouldn't the Shadowhawk IIC be on this list? I think it's a little too late now but hell, at least it's another clan medium option.

[Gas Guzzler]

Arnold The Governator, on 20 March 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

Oh yeah that reminds me....Shouldn't the Shadowhawk IIC be on this list? I think it's a little too late now but hell, at least it's another clan medium option.

Yeah, I mean the fact that no one has mentioned it until now means its probably not that popular, but I'll add it.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 March 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

That sounds wrong, I alpha'd all the time in MW4 and never had that problem.

Huh, weird. I wonder why everyone complains about alphas in this game then. Its almost like they are full of ****.

[Hit the Deck]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 08:50 AM, said:

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

I always liked how Omen looks which is not surprising since Alex was the one who drew it.

I really want him to design new 'Mechs for BT, like that one whose original art is drawn by Alex I guess. This is pre-MWO and look at those arms and hardpoint placement. The torso is just a bit too wide.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 20 March 2017 - 09:26 AM.

[Metus regem]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 March 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

Huh, weird. I wonder why everyone complains about alphas in this game then. Its almost like they are full of ****.

My guess is two reasons:

1) For the Lore guys, it just didn't happen very often in lore, as it wasn't the best option...

2) People are not happy with the combination of high alpha damage and perfect convergence, meaning even mechs that should be tough like the Awesome or Atlas go down like cannon fodder lights in other MW games.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 March 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

Huh, weird. I wonder why everyone complains about alphas in this game then. Its almost like they are full of ****.

It's one of those really lame honor systems people try to impose on the community of any given PvP game

"DON'T USE THAT MECHANIC BECAUSE IT'S DISHONORABLE!"

Environment kills in For Honor is one of the more recent examples. It's a feature of the combat but people will actively call you the worst scum to walk the face of the earth of you dare to use a tool that the developer intended to be a part of the combat

[Gas Guzzler]

Snazzy Dragon, on 20 March 2017 - 09:25 AM, said:

It's one of those really lame honor systems people try to impose on the community of any given PvP game

"DON'T USE THAT MECHANIC BECAUSE IT'S DISHONORABLE!"

Environment kills in For Honor is one of the more recent examples. It's a feature of the combat but people will actively call you the worst scum to walk the face of the earth of you dare to use a tool that the developer intended to be a part of the combat

Right, alphaing is dishonorable, but hiding behind a hill in an assault while your medium mechs tank for you so you can vomit LRMs for 5 minutes straight is the way of the warrior.

BUT I DIGRESS.......

[Widowmaker1981]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

My guess is two reasons:

1) For the Lore guys, it just didn't happen very often in lore, as it wasn't the best option...

2) People are not happy with the combination of high alpha damage and perfect convergence, meaning even mechs that should be tough like the Awesome or Atlas go down like cannon fodder lights in other MW games.

But in previous MW games convergence was also perfect...

i think its a combination of the fact that netcode was much worse, so you had to lagshoot (which is NOT a good thing, but made people feel tankier) and the hardcore complainers had a single player game to play, so didnt complain because the AI didnt play to win.

personally, i refused to play previous MW games in multiplayer partly because i had crap internet, and mainly because not hitting where im aiming due to lag infuriates me to no end.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 20 March 2017 - 09:34 AM.

[Metus regem]

Widowmaker1981, on 20 March 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

But in previous MW games convergence was also perfect...

i think its a combination of the fact that netcode was much worse, so you had to lagshoot (which is NOT a good thing, but made people feel tankier) and the hardcore complainers had a single player game to play, so didnt complain because the AI didnt play to win.

personally, i refused to play previous MW games in multiplayer partly because i had crap internet, and mainly because not hitting where im aiming due to lag infuriates me to no end.

That's fair, personally I don't mind a little deviation based on weapon locations and general inaccuracies in weapons... meaning I'm not against a CoF like the one used in WoWS. It just takes a little getting used to, to be able to place shots where you want them, even 20-ish K/M out... Yes it is frustrating to miss when it is a do or die moment, but the unpredictability adds an element of fun, for me at least.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 March 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

Yeah pretty sure I one-shot a Hellspawn in MW4 recently, I was in a Fafnir or something and alpha'd. I got a mission failure for alpha striking a second time, one of those arbitrary things in MechWarrior about not being able to alpha strike all the time, had to do the mission again on chain fire.

...... that must be a mektek thing. Never encountered that in the original versions that I can recall.

[TheArisen]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

That's fair, personally I don't mind a little deviation based on weapon locations and general inaccuracies in weapons... meaning I'm not against a CoF like the one used in WoWS. It just takes a little getting used to, to be able to place shots where you want them, even 20-ish K/M out... Yes it is frustrating to miss when it is a do or die moment, but the unpredictability adds an element of fun, for me at least.

Yeah but a CoF like in WoWS is normal because guns weren't super precise but here we've got super advanced robots. They should hit where I aim at a mere 500m, not 14 KM like WoWS.

[Metus regem]

TheArisen, on 20 March 2017 - 09:44 AM, said:

Yeah but a CoF like in WoWS is normal because guns weren't super precise but here we've got super advanced robots. They should hit where I aim at a mere 500m, not 14 KM like WoWS.

'cept in the universe where those weapons are from, it is mentioned that some of the mechs use iron sights, now I don't know how much shooting you've done over the course of your life, but hitting every-time in the same spot at 500m is pretty darn hard to do with iron sights....

And if some mechs use iron sights (it's mentioned for the 3025 era Stinger, specifically for the arm mounted MG's), how hard do you think it would be to hit a moving target at 500m, let alone in the exact same spot, with weapon systems that are mounted meters apart?

That's why I said I'd be okay with set deviation between weapon mounts, as in the shoulder mounts on the battle master will never converge at one point, yes they will strike the same component, but not in the exact same pixel. What I would prefer is if we had a targeting ciricle that was the size of an Atlas' torso at 400m, all shots will land in that circle, but not perfectly at the same pixel.

[Widowmaker1981]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

What I would prefer is if we had a targeting ciricle that was the size of an Atlas' torso at 400m, all shots will land in that circle, but not perfectly at the same pixel.

So, hitting a light at 400m would be literally completely down to RNG, and aiming at anything else would be 100% center mass all the time?

No thanks, that sounds awful.

[Metus regem]

Widowmaker1981, on 20 March 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

So, hitting a light at 400m would be literally completely down to RNG, and aiming at anything else would be 100% center mass all the time?

No thanks, that sounds awful.

That's fair, personally I find 100% weapon accuracy and pixel perfect convergence kind of dull and unimaginative, not to mention it take all the skill out of aiming.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 10:29 AM, said:

not to mention it take all the skill out of aiming.

How?

Now if you are talking about piloting impacting aim that is a different story because that is just shifting the skill of aiming to some other skill.

[Metus regem]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 March 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

How?

Now if you are talking about piloting impacting aim that is a different story because that is just shifting the skill of aiming to some other skill.

It's pure point and click, you don't really have to figure out how much you need to lead a target with anything other than an AC/10 or PPC. You don't have to account for deviation between weapon mounts... I don't mind everyone having the current aiming mechanics we currently have, I would like an option to make aiming harder for myself and make it more immersive with the IP.

[Widowmaker1981]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 10:29 AM, said:

That's fair, personally I find 100% weapon accuracy and pixel perfect convergence kind of dull and unimaginative, not to mention it take all the skill out of aiming.

Adding a cone of fire would not add to the skill of aiming, it would simply add luck, in fact one your size would reduce skill (one hypothetical person now is a crack shot and can hit a running light at 400m with an 80% chance of sucess, another is a decent shot and gets it close every time, hitting maybe 40% - with your CoF those two players are now identical. It removes decision making in the sense that with the circle that wide, you would always have to aim dead center mass. no point even looking at open components, just luck. It would replicate TT, sure. but i wouldnt play it.

Now, the same arguments dont all apply for fixed, mount based convergence solutions, but i dont really like those either because of the benefit they give to mechs with tight groups of hardpoints over ones with them spread out.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 10:54 AM, said:

It's pure point and click, you don't really have to figure out how much you need to lead a target with anything other than an AC/10 or PPC. You don't have to account for deviation between weapon mounts...

That's all aiming in FPS is......cone of fire that widens depending on certain factors doesn't make it any harder, it shifts the need of aiming skill to piloting (since you aren't actually compensating for anything with your aim). Now recoil would be a better method of actually impacting aim but that gets a little odd when talking about firing multiple weapons and how that would work.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 20 March 2017 - 11:06 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Metus regem, on 20 March 2017 - 10:54 AM, said:

It's pure point and click, you don't really have to figure out how much you need to lead a target with anything other than an AC/10 or PPC. You don't have to account for deviation between weapon mounts... I don't mind everyone having the current aiming mechanics we currently have, I would like an option to make aiming harder for myself and make it more immersive with the IP.

Uh, you have to lead AC5s and AC20s as well. You also have to lead anything at 700+ meters, especially when trying to hit a specific component. And actually, if you are leading a target with PPCs, you DO have to take into account weapon mounts especially if your mech is wide.

If you want it more complex for yourself that is your choice, I wouldn't mind more immersive aiming for MW5 tbh.

[FLG 01]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 March 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

When have you ever heard someone say "man, my favorite mech is the Men Shen"?

It does have its fans in TT, quite some actually being a high prestige Capellan Mechs with no stops pulled, deployed by the most elite units like Death Commandos and Warrior Houses.
And if it weren't Capellan, I'd love it too. Heck I like it because it is a larger, meaner Raven - which is part of the appeal for many as the Raven is a favourite of many Capellan fans.

If the votes have nothing to do with this fandom, the implications of the votes are even more important: if people who didn't know the Mech voted for it, it means they actually made the effort to look the Mech up, they actually thought about this Mech and its role in MWO.

So they reflected their choice before they casted their vote. Now that is something I take over the "it was in MW:4, it must be iconic"-routine any time!