202 replies to this topic

[Felix von Buelow]

-Pik-, on 17 October 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

Well, I canceled my Nightstar preorder.

First underwhelming asthetics, like the still strange looking arms, asymetric hardpoints, not good looking walking animation.

Secondly gameplay concerns, its a slow 95t IS, with a huge CT, huge ST pylons and very wide shootable arms when coming around a corner. It's got no offensive and very limited defensive quirks and having full actuators in 4 out of 5 standard mechs severely limit loadout choices. You can build a better laser vomit in a BNC-3M and better Daka or Gauss vomit in a Mauler.
You can watch the preview stream here, watch them struggle find valid builds. The best variants are the 9P for 4 ballistics and the 10p with ECM (still 2xuac2 / 2xuac5 or 4ac5 isn't exactly what I call firepower in a 95t mech), both Piranha creations in the reinforcement pack ($$$).

I was pretty hyped about the Nightstar, wanting an Assault Marauder, but spending 35$ for 1 good variant isn't exactly my style.

ggwp no re

I have a few good builds no other IS mech can do better, but then I won't share with you

Plus, it is also a good thing the NSR has minimal quirks because they are only a bandaid anyways, right? So when you need a bandaid something is broken. If you don't need bandaids/quirks you are fine.
That also means that you are less dependent regarding quirk changes/nerfs.
The best mechs have minimal to no quirks so I can't see why the lack of them is a bad sign. The opposite is the case.

Edited by GhostNemesys, 17 October 2017 - 05:08 AM.

[Esarai]

I appreciate PGI acting so fast to fix something so many were disappointed in.

Now that I see the straight arm version, I see what they were going for and why they did it, and retract my initial statements about it. The slant-arm version is less functional, but hella pretty. I like it a little bit better from the aesthetic side, but the straight-arm version is more functional and apparently what most of us were expecting.

Personally, I think the optimal solution would be to keep a slight slant, maybe only 5 degrees instead of the 15-20 the Nightstar had before. That way the people who were expecting high mounts are happy, and the people who like the ominous aesthetic of the slanted arms are happy.

Probably too late for this, though, but PGI if you're reading this, it'd make a huge difference.

Edited by Esarai, 17 October 2017 - 08:19 AM.

[The Boneshaman]

FLG 01, on 16 October 2017 - 03:57 PM, said:

It's also the lore guys who got what they wanted because that's what the arms are like in canon. To go against the lore just to make a Mech worse in MWO is just plain silly. Or, as you'd put it: *****.

the arms straight out is not cannon they are slightly bent down. I have 2 miniatures that were not modified my friend has 1 and his arms are not straight even if you look at the original TRO the arms are not straight out. they had it spot on in the original pic. I think the new one looks like a special ed chicken trying to flap its wings. thanks meta turds.

[FLG 01]

The Boneshaman, on 17 October 2017 - 05:59 AM, said:

the arms straight out is not cannon they are slightly bent down.

Emphasis on "slightly". As in "minimal" or "nowhere near what PGI initially did".

Arm lasers are more or less on cockpit level, arm gauss rifles just below that. And PGI's current rendition is pretty close to that. At least a lot closer than the old one.

Again:

[-Pik-]

GhostNemesys, on 17 October 2017 - 05:02 AM, said:

I have a few good builds no other IS mech can do better, but then I won't share with you

Plus, it is also a good thing the NSR has minimal quirks because they are only a bandaid anyways, right? So when you need a bandaid something is broken. If you don't need bandaids/quirks you are fine.
That also means that you are less dependent regarding quirk changes/nerfs.
The best mechs have minimal to no quirks so I can't see why the lack of them is a bad sign. The opposite is the case.

Then it seems you found a mech that works for you. It will still work ok in QP because it still is a big assault with big guns. So gl and hf.

I theorycrafted about it since I early adopter preordered it. In the end I had to admit that I couldn't come up with a build that justifies the purchase (apart from the 9P which was not in my standard pack). I thought maybe they would change the hand actuators, but no luck.
That wouldn't stop my purchase but the added disappointing asthetics killed it for me in the end. And I think defensive quirks are needed for this mech the way it looks right now.

You either buy a mech because it will be good like the Arctic Wolf or because of the nostalgia/lore like maybe the Nova Cat and sometimes even both like the MadCat MkII.
The hardpoints and geometry tell me it won't be that good and the model doesn't tickle me as a Nightstar fanboi.

But I would really like to hear some builds you came up with, could be interesting.

[Nightbird]

Nightstar still needs hand actuators removed before it is a buy from me. New model looks great! Good work PGI.

[-Pik-]

Are the arms on those miniatures slightly pointed forward or is it just the perspective?

[Luscious Dan]

Looked better before, IMO (and matched all the previous art/minis). Thanks to everyone who whines incessantly until we get more rigid and unnatural looking mechs that sacrifice style for like 1% better performance.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 17 October 2017 - 06:52 AM.

[Felix von Buelow]

-Pik-, on 17 October 2017 - 06:32 AM, said:

But I would really like to hear some builds you came up with, could be interesting.

Hmm, I am looking forward to

Dual Gauss, 3 ERLLs (doable on the KGC but with knuckledragger Gauss or on the MAL with its barn door front profile plus lower hardpoints)
Quad AC5, 1 PPC and ECM (No MAL or KGC has ECM)
Quad UAC5s (better front profile than the barn door of a MAL)
Dual Gauss, 2 LLs, 3 ERMLs (Again better profile than a MAL)
Dual Light Gauss, 2 LLs, 4 MLs (maybe you'll find a better chassis for that but its the 9J anyways...)

[Gas Guzzler]

I think the Mauler is actually going to win out at the dakka game.

[MrEdweird]

Luscious Dan, on 17 October 2017 - 06:52 AM, said:

Looked better before, IMO (and matched all the previous art/minis). Thanks to everyone who whines incessantly until we get more rigid and unnatural looking mechs that sacrifice style for like 1% better performance.

If you want to talk aesthetics, talk about the animations or the assymetrical hardpoints. The mech looks just as good with slanted arms as without for me and I don't really care. And since TRO and MWO art said the arms should be like that, then they should be like that.

[Felix von Buelow]

Gas Guzzler, on 17 October 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

I think the Mauler is actually going to win out at the dakka game.

But the NSR has more armor + additional structure quirks on the CT which the MAL lacks. I will gladly stare your MAL down :-P

[Pariah Devalis]

I am wondering why people want the NSR to get special treatment with the removal of hand actuators. You can still slap 2 Gauss and 4 ERMlas on the sucker, all with in line guns to cockpit. You don't need the room for Gauss + PPC in the arms, anymore, given the linking, and with the upshifted arms, it will be pretty great as a ridge humper. Though those butt fins are rather large.

[-Pik-]

GhostNemesys, on 17 October 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:

Hmm, I am looking forward to

Dual Gauss, 3 ERLLs (doable on the KGC but with knuckledragger Gauss or on the MAL with its barn door front profile plus lower hardpoints)
Quad AC5, 1 PPC and ECM (No MAL or KGC has ECM)
Quad UAC5s (better front profile than the barn door of a MAL)
Dual Gauss, 2 LLs, 3 ERMLs (Again better profile than a MAL)
Dual Light Gauss, 2 LLs, 4 MLs (maybe you'll find a better chassis for that but its the 9J anyways...)

Dual gauss, 3 ERLLs -> while a good build imo, you had to put that on the 9s and that's the only one which can equip 2xuac20. That's why I personally would not put Gauss on that.

Quad 5s, i find a bit underwhelming when you can put 5 5s on a MX90, yeah you are a barn, but atleast you don't have to worry about convergence and you got shielding arms to cool down, also only on reinforcement mechs.

Dual Gauss, 2 LLs, 3 ERMLs -> was the build I would have run on my 9FC, but I think you had to go down to a LFE325 with no heatsinks to make it work, not sure...

Dual Light Gauss, 2 LL, 4 ML -> haven't thought about something like that, could be fun, 54 damage little bit on the low side imo

again no flame, just my opinion, do what works for you...
If you got the reinforcement, I think tripple uac10 9P will be by far the best build of all Nightstars...

man, just writing this makes me melancholic, I kinda wish I was wrong about this mech...
Accepting Ultimate Pack Donations!

Edited by -Pik-, 17 October 2017 - 07:46 AM.

[Felix von Buelow]

-Pik-, on 17 October 2017 - 07:43 AM, said:

again no flame, just my opinion, do what works for you...
If you got the reinforcement, I think tripple uac10 9P will be the best build of all Nightstars...

man, just writing this make me melancholic, I kinda wish I was wrong about this mech... Accepting Ultimate Pack Donations!

I don't take it as flame but rather constructive criticism, no worries :-)
I'll report nevertheless, cheers!

[-Pik-]

Pariah Devalis, on 17 October 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

I am wondering why people want the NSR to get special treatment with the removal of hand actuators. You can still slap 2 Gauss and 4 ERMlas on the sucker, all with in line guns to cockpit. You don't need the room for Gauss + PPC in the arms, anymore, given the linking, and with the upshifted arms, it will be pretty great as a ridge humper. Though those butt fins are rather large.

Being an IS mech, you cant put 20s in the arms and the strongest 7 Slot weapons are Gauss or UAC10, that leaves 1 Slot for an MLaser, everything under 7 Slots quickly becomes underwhelming for an 95t Assault and most versions only have 1 balistic slot in each arm.
Removing the hand actuators would have opened for Gauss+2ML or Gauss/LPL and greatly improved build diversity...

And 2xGauss, 4 ML I can run on my Warhammer 6R too, for 25 tons less or 2xGauss, 6ML on a Mauler 2P, for 5 tons less if you want an assault gauss vomit (with balistic/laser quirks)...

Edited by -Pik-, 17 October 2017 - 07:57 AM.

[Trilobiteer]

Wow the Nightstar looked cool before, now it just looks uncomfortable.

After looking at the pictures posted above it seems that the tabletop model's guns are visibly below the cockpit with the arms angled or in some cases bent downwards at a solid 15 or so degrees such that the top of the hands are in line with the bottom of the "chin" of the mech which would appear to be exactly as it was in the original MWO depiction of this mech.

Working with massively old artwork and poorly detailed models Alex and the team once again nailed this design and the vocal minority had to ruin it for what? 2m of extra ridgeline poke on a mech that already has a massive hunchback and poor peeking profile? The ability to lose those arms quicker when you torso-twist? I just don't understand what they thought this was going to fix except for making the mech look worse.

And you know the worst bit? Most of the guys who complained about this will be back in their Mad Cat MkIIs, Marauder IICs and Kodiak 3's by month's end leaving only the people who genuinely like the Nightstar to be stuck with these personally awkward and ungainly aesthetics.

Edited by Trilobiteer, 17 October 2017 - 07:57 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Trilobiteer, on 17 October 2017 - 07:52 AM, said:

Wow the Nightstar looked cool before, now it just looks uncomfortable.

The Nightstar looked derpy before, now it looks mean.

Differing opinions, I guess.

[Trilobiteer]

Jay Leon Hart, on 17 October 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

The Nightstar looked derpy before, now it looks mean.

Differing opinions, I guess.

Fair enough, maybe they could try a 5 or 10 degree slant? Try to meet both crowds halfway? I just feel like it looks too stiff and rigid atm, like a person holding their arms and fists up in line with their face at 90 degree angles and trying to fight like that.

[Esarai]

Trilobiteer, on 17 October 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

Fair enough, maybe they could try a 5 or 10 degree slant? Try to meet both crowds halfway? I just feel like it looks too stiff and rigid atm, like a person holding their arms and fists up in line with their face at 90 degree angles and trying to fight like that.

I'm right there with you. Perfectly straight looks odd, while the 15-20 degree slant was too low for the performance crowd. 5-10 is the best of both worlds.

Probably too late to change, but I think it'd make everyone happy.