35 replies to this topic

[HollowBassman]

Since we are getting(eventually) new dynamic weapon geometry for the Civil War weapons, now would be a good time to pretty up/fix the weapon placement on some of the missile-oriented mechs. It could help sales if our future MRM overlords don't look like they are broken.

A couple examples:






That is how the Trebuchet should look. Left forearm hand and laser centered to the rest of the arm, empty LA missile slot becomes half-box "shield", right forearm longer and raised so that the lasers in each arm are in the same position. These small changes make a huge difference!

Many more examples found HERE

[El Bandito]

And PLEASE increase Victors' missile tube counts. 10/5/2 tubes on the 9S? What is this, 2013?

MRMs might suffer terribly from hit-reg, depending on their coding.

[HollowBassman]

I didn't know we had a missile Blackjack in the game. Never saw one on battlefield; probably because the missile boxes are horrible.



The Centurion is frustrating because you can see the spot reserved for missiles underneath the "dynamic geometry" that just ignores the body lines.



The Quickdraw has a large area reserved for missiles but if you use both hardpoints, it skips the big empty section and adds an ugly box to the side.



Someone at PGI really doesn't like the Dragon.



The Thunderbolt grows an ugly square tumor if you use both hardpoints. Looks cancerous!



Just ignore the shape of the body and tack boxes to its sides.



The Banshee has the laziest lasers in the game. Why are they staggered? If you're going to be lazy at least keep them in line.



Another ugly box just tacked onto the side. Why not use the space directly under the other missiles?

[Mechwarrior4670152]

HollowBassman, on 08 May 2017 - 01:46 PM, said:

I would have to disagree

[Aleski]

You should check the commando's arms and Hellslinger missiles boxes to... So damn ugly and badly implemented.

Ho and the missile box of the Pretty Baby wich is on the hand too. So ugly.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Remember this?



Also pototally not stolen from google

[Novakaine]

[stealthraccoon]

I can't talk about my little army men - the wrist-bracelets on the Commando should be illegal. And if I have a single laser, it's still a double box. If I add a PPC, it goes to one side of the giant wrist box - it used to be centered with a smaller mount. I miss my dual SRM6 COM-3A; if anything should've offset, it should be the lasers.

Edited by stealthraccoon, 09 May 2017 - 08:36 PM.

[El Bandito]

If PGI had a brain they would have implemented Dynamic Weapon Geometry along with Sized Hardpoints. But they didn't, and so we are stuck with this one-size-fits-all-but-looks-hella-ugly abomination.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 May 2017 - 05:29 AM.

[Anjian]

Would be interesting to see if there is any video of how they would work or for a demonstration.

[Lily from animove]

because your mech is supposed to grab thinsg with a hand, and when somehtign is above the hand (like those PPC) hecouldn't even use the hands.
so the "better" picture is the onyl sense making. While Why? is worse by gameplay and hand usage, and "best" is good for gameplay but stiill nonsense.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Anjian, on 09 May 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Would be interesting to see if there is any video of how they would work or for a demonstration.

W
That's going to be the key... How do MRM's function? I will either use the **** out of them, or i will cry rivers of salt. They need to make them effective without being OP.

[CygnusX7]

If it fits, it ships.

[DAYLEET]

HollowBassman, on 07 May 2017 - 06:03 AM, said:

It would be so awesome if the LDG Trebs HUGE fatty Popeye forearms had instead a shield when not in use by weaponry. They are so ugly and the mech look ready to fall forward at the slightest movement.

[HollowBassman]

Lily from animove, on 10 May 2017 - 03:59 AM, said:

because your mech is supposed to grab thinsg with a hand, and when somehtign is above the hand (like those PPC) hecouldn't even use the hands.
so the "better" picture is the onyl sense making. While Why? is worse by gameplay and hand usage, and "best" is good for gameplay but stiill nonsense.

I just realized that you were commenting on the Kintaro pic. The "better" and "best" configurations in the OP weren't necessarily where I would put them if I designed it; I was just mirroring the existing laser positions of the opposite arm because the model, camo, firing location, could all be easily copied from whichever side remained the same. Seemed like an easy fix to make it less ugly.

Honestly, if they would just fix the Trebuchets forearms I would be happy. Once you see the broken looking left forearm and the uneven height between left/right arm lasers you can't unsee it!

[Snowbluff]

El Bandito, on 09 May 2017 - 09:50 PM, said:

If PGI had a brain they would have implemented Dynamic Weapon Geometry along with Sized Hardpoints. But they didn't, and so we are stuck with this one-size-fits-all-but-looks-hella-ugly abomination.

So you're in a thread where people ARE complaining about the 10/5/2 missile arrangement (missiles have sized hardpoints and it's a mess and inconsistent) but you'll still advocate for sized hardpoints for other weapons?

Edited by Snowbluff, 13 May 2017 - 07:00 PM.

[El Bandito]

Snowbluff, on 13 May 2017 - 07:00 PM, said:

So you're in a thread where people ARE complaining about the 10/5/2 missile arrangement (missiles have sized hardpoints and it's a mess and inconsistent) but you'll still advocate for sized hardpoints for other weapons?

Missiles do not have sized hardpoints in this game. Missiles have tube counts. Those things are different.

[Mark Nicholson]

NT Hackman, on 09 May 2017 - 09:17 PM, said:

PGI's "modelers" are some of the most lazy people on the planet. When dynamic geometry rolled around they didn't want to take the effort to make weapons look detailed and/or unique to any mech so they took the easy route and made a bunch of presets that look disgusting and don't even properly conform to the location they're put on. For some reason they put more time and care into removing or straight up covering old geometry that looked good in a failed attempt to showcase what a tumor would look like on a mech.

Unless they hire someone that actually cares the new weapons will suffer from the same problems (misaligned and unappealing laser cubes, cancerous missile tumors, miniature PPCs and autocannons, unpainted sections around weapons, etc.)

At least some mechs still have decent looking pre-cancer geometry (Hunchback's arm and head lasers for example) but will either eventually get the same disgusting treatment as most others or will be completely ignored/forgotten in typical PGI fashion.

They did hire someone who cares. I'm doing as much as I can to get a lot of these things fixed. Revisions on the Victor and Quickdraw missiles should be out very soon.

Part of the issue with missile box placement is that any launcher in hardpoint 1 can't overlap with any launcher in hardpoint 2.
It looks reasonable when you've got a pair of LRM 20's, but less so when you're running a 3rd SRM2.

Another thing to consider is being faithful to the original design; I just found some old Kintaro images that do indeed have those aesthetically awful placements >_<

[CK16]

https://mwomercs.com...-missile-racks/

Please?!

[Mark Nicholson]

CK16, on 13 May 2017 - 07:46 PM, said:

https://mwomercs.com...-missile-racks/

Please?!

You're speaking to the choir. This has bothered me forever, and there's annoying and complicated reasons I've not gotten to it YET.