65 replies to this topic

[Genesis23]

scaling looks better than anticipated, i admit, but still... this mech shines or fails on its hitboxes alone. if the CT is only that incredibly small thingy in the mittle of the giant ST, the mech is unusable with xl and also too fragile for LFE for that matter. if the "giant gunboobs" for the lack of better words ar part CT and ST, it could be quite tanky for its weight if you manage to spread the dmg around.

[Genesis23]

D V Devnull, on 05 December 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Here's a question... Why are all the Heat Sink Amounts "0/(#)", instead of "#/(10)"??? Is there STILL an error in the Mech Stats Flyout? I think some of those are meant to indicate a larger number of Heat Sinks than they're showing?

~D. V. "Somebody at PGI needs to fix that." Devnull

no error. the amount outside brackets are non-engine heatsinks, the ones in the brackets are the additional, manually installed engine heatsinks you can put in. those mechs with 0/(0) have no heatsinks other than the ones included in the engine because they dont need any more to get them going, because they allready have the minimum required 10 heatsinks.

(small example: on a locust this would probably look something like 2/(0) because their small engines do neither have space for more engine heatsinks nor do they reach the minimum required amount with the engine alone to start with.)

EDIT: checked on smurfy, it should be 3/(0) for a locust because the XL 190 has just 7 internal heatsinks and no space for additional ones. so you need 3 heatsinks outside the engine.

Edited by Genesis23, 05 December 2017 - 11:42 PM.

[D V Devnull]

And then I had to *facedesk* really hard...

MrKvola, on 05 December 2017 - 11:25 PM, said:

D V Devnull, on 05 December 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Here's a question... Why are all the Heat Sink Amounts "0/(#)", instead of "#/(10)"??? Is there STILL an error in the Mech Stats Flyout? I think some of those are meant to indicate a larger number of Heat Sinks than they're showing?

~D. V. "Somebody at PGI needs to fix that." Devnull

There is no error. Just read what it says before the numbers - "<DBL/SINGLE> HEATSINKS /(ENG)". The engine does not have to have 10 heatsinks, so the number in the brackets indicates the number of engine internal heatsinks. The other number shows external heatsinks installed.

Genesis23, on 05 December 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

D V Devnull, on 05 December 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Here's a question... Why are all the Heat Sink Amounts "0/(#)", instead of "#/(10)"??? Is there STILL an error in the Mech Stats Flyout? I think some of those are meant to indicate a larger number of Heat Sinks than they're showing?

~D. V. "Somebody at PGI needs to fix that." Devnull

no error. the amount outside brackets are non-engine heatsinks, the ones in the brackets are the additional, manually installed engine heatsinks you can put in. those mechs with 0/(0) have no heatsinks other than the ones included in the engine because they dont need any more to get them going, because they allready have the minimum required 10 heatsinks.

(small example: on a locust this would probably look something like 2/(0) because their small engines do neither have space for more engine heatsinks nor do they reach the minimum required amount with the engine alone to start with.)

Neither of you have been In-Game in a while, have you? Take a look at the ScreenShots of the HellSpawn Quirks on Page 1 again, particularly at the depiction of the Heat Sink Counts and Engine Size. Right now, the number indicating External Heat Sink Count is being displayed where the Engine Heat Sink Count SHOULD be. Further, the Engine Heat Sink Count is flatly NOT being displayed! I'm not talking about the resizable Mech Stats on the bottom. I'm talking about the ToolTip pane that flies out and shows up when you're floating on Mech Images in the Selection Screen area. I don't know why PGI broke the damned thing, but I know it needs fixing when all the Mechs show ZERO External Heat Sinks in that particular spot, and it shows less than 10 when your Engine Size is 250 or more!!! For example...

• HSN-7D & (S) --- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(0)"
  
• HSN-7D2 --------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(5)"
  
• HSN-7P ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(4)"
  
• HSN-8E ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(0)"
  
• HSN-8P ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(3)"
  
• HSN-9F ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(0)"

...and they're ALL running on an XL 270 Engine!!! This means that the following SHOULD be showing in all the ScreenShots...

• HSN-7D & (S) --- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(10)"
  
• HSN-7D2 --------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 5/(10)"
  
• HSN-7P ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 4/(10)"
  
• HSN-8E ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(10)"
  
• HSN-8P ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 3/(10)"
  
• HSN-9F ---------- "DBL HEAT SINKS/(ENG) = 0/(10)"

...and yet they're NOT, directly due to a Long-Standing Bug that PGI has failed to fix as of yet! We already know that an XL 270 can NOT carry extra Heat Sinks in itself, so all the rest MUST be External to the Engine. But, on top of this, we should be able to see the Engine's Current Heat Sink Count as we're picking out our Mech to use/configure. This blasted bug is preventing doing that through the particular dialog that I'm speaking of. I can pretty much leave the both of you to mentally visualize and understand what this means for all the other Mech Chassis that exist out there. Please, go harass whichever PGI Developer is responsible for this Bug failing to be fixed!

~Mr. D. V. "I wish I could tell somebody I was thankful for this new headache, but it hurts way too much to like it." Devnull

[byter75]

What's the point in the 7P? Compared to the others it has no jj, no ecm, no survival quirks, no weapon quirks and the worst agility. I'm not sure why it's getting hit so hard with the nerf stick compared to the others, is its more numerous torso mounts really that valuable compared to what every other hellspawn can bring to the table?

[Genesis23]

byter75, on 06 December 2017 - 01:11 AM, said:

What's the point in the 7P? Compared to the others it has no jj, no ecm, no survival quirks, no weapon quirks and the worst agility. I'm not sure why it's getting hit so hard with the nerf stick compared to the others, is its more numerous torso mounts really that valuable compared to what every other hellspawn can bring to the table?

i think that is because it has the most energy hardpoints, which apparently leads to the assumption it has the highest offensive potential and therefore needs no quirks at all. at least thats the only explanation i can come up with.

[byter75]

Genesis23, on 06 December 2017 - 01:34 AM, said:

i think that is because it has the most energy hardpoints, which apparently leads to the assumption it has the highest offensive potential and therefore needs no quirks at all. at least thats the only explanation i can come up with.

I had mostly ruled that out because the hero has 1 more energy hardpoint with ecm & jj and it still has the survival quirks and better agility (though still lower than the others).

[arcana75]

byter75, on 06 December 2017 - 01:11 AM, said:

What's the point in the 7P? Compared to the others it has no jj, no ecm, no survival quirks, no weapon quirks and the worst agility. I'm not sure why it's getting hit so hard with the nerf stick compared to the others, is its more numerous torso mounts really that valuable compared to what every other hellspawn can bring to the table?

Chris Lowrey highlighted in the Hellspawn thread in General Discussion that there was a bug in the quirks: It's supposed to have some. I quote:

Quote

Mobility values on the 7P appear to be bugged. Intent is to have the ground bound version be the most mobile of the bunch. Will look into it first thing in the morning.

I PO'ed this, and am genuinely surprised at the size and side profile of this mech. BOY is it tiny and slim!! I think I'll have fun with it I'd like to see the hit boxes though and where the CT is. Given the profile, torso twisting will be quite effective.

Edited by arcana75, 06 December 2017 - 02:32 AM.

[Slambot]

Looks like I was very correct in passing on this mech. Its a big target for its tonnage without significant quirks. I mean even the shadowcat gets better quirks and is SMALLER. What is it with the huge, boxy-torsoed IS mech releases? I don't get it.

[FupDup]

Slambot, on 06 December 2017 - 03:31 AM, said:

Looks like I was very correct in passing on this mech. Its a big target for its tonnage without significant quirks. I mean even the shadowcat gets better quirks and is SMALLER. What is it with the huge, boxy-torsoed IS mech releases? I don't get it.

The Shadowcat actually lost most of its quirks. But yeah it ends up better thanks to Clam tech, high mounts, and better hitboxes (although not great).

Edited by FupDup, 06 December 2017 - 03:57 AM.

[Arkhangel]

@Slam: from the front, sure, the Scat's a lot fatter on the flanks though.

[Alan Hicks]

Since MW4 I always liked the Hell-spawn. It was small but very functional, like this seems to be.

I want one ! You do not know until you try it. Congratulations to all those who will get it first.

[McGoat]

I find it interesting how many people "played" this mech in MW4, it must have been in single player as it was at best a troll mech in any sort of league play, even then that was prior to pr1 in the glory days of the hill bug. However, since nothing from MW4 translates to MWO that has no real bearing on it's usability here. Example - MkII was an excellent jump sniper because we had the ability to crouch. The Uziel was good too, in experienced hands, with 2erppc and a light gauss - again jump sniping at speed (it's still good here in that respect) but good luck fitting that loadout with any sort of speed.
I would like to see in game footage of it moving, jumping, shooting... Hell that'd be nice with all mech releases...

[C E Dwyer]

To me the fact they even bother putting a 5 structure bonus in one location, in a game that has so many crit seeker weapons that can be boated, just shows they remain utterly clueless about their product.

[Grayson Sortek]

McGoat, on 06 December 2017 - 06:21 AM, said:

I find it interesting how many people "played" this mech in MW4, it must have been in single player as it was at best a troll mech in any sort of league play, even then that was prior to pr1 in the glory days of the hill bug. However, since nothing from MW4 translates to MWO that has no real bearing on it's usability here. Example - MkII was an excellent jump sniper because we had the ability to crouch. The Uziel was good too, in experienced hands, with 2erppc and a light gauss - again jump sniping at speed (it's still good here in that respect) but good luck fitting that loadout with any sort of speed.
I would like to see in game footage of it moving, jumping, shooting... Hell that'd be nice with all mech releases...

I miss the days of MW4 and MW4 mercs. Maybe PGI should consider putting the ability to crouch in the damn game? They can't do melee and they can't do leg-environment programming... fine. At least put crouching in!

[Gasoline]

It seems to have the same hitboxes as the Shadowcat. The missile bay is basically the whole left torso. The nose is divided in the center and right torso. The arm missile pods... better to ignore 'em, then again no one usually aims for the arms if it's not an Urbie. XL might work, especially if you use the arms to shield. Those missile pods at least make a decent shield.

I'm surprised that it even got a few armor quirks... so maybe PGI will revisit the useless structure quirks of the Thanny? Few quirks overall was basically a given since a few variants have ECM.

[Alvar Von Kenesthor]

Ok, so one of the most asimetric mechs. With the weirdest CT hitbox, at 45 tons and with jumpjets.
WITHOUT GODDAMN LEG ARMOR/STRUCTURE QUIRKS?!?!

GG PGI, G freaking G.

This thing is going to dissapear from the battefield faster than the Hunchback 4SP once the nerf-hammer appeared...

Edited by Alvar Von Kenesthor, 06 December 2017 - 08:52 AM.

[D V Devnull]

Slambot, on 06 December 2017 - 03:31 AM, said:

What is it with the huge, boxy-torsoed IS mech releases? I don't get it.

Maybe it's a joke on the phrase "Cheapskate"? Perhaps "CheapBox"?

~D. V. "This joke is all I can think of..." Devnull

[Arkhangel]

Alvar Von Kenesthor, on 06 December 2017 - 08:51 AM, said:

Ok, so one of the most asimetric mechs. With the weirdest CT hitbox, at 45 tons and with jumpjets.
WITHOUT GODDAMN LEG ARMOR/STRUCTURE QUIRKS?!?!

GG PGI, G freaking G.

This thing is going to dissapear from the battefield faster than the Hunchback 4SP once the nerf-hammer appeared...

You do realize 4SPs are still commonly used anyways, right? given regardless of quirks, they're one of the best setup mechs toughness, hardpoint, weapon and speed wise?

[arcana75]

Arkhangel, on 06 December 2017 - 06:23 PM, said:

You do realize 4SPs are still commonly used anyways, right? given regardless of quirks, they're one of the best setup mechs toughness, hardpoint, weapon and speed wise?

One of my fav assaults, the Marauder IIC, has no enhancements either.

[Pilotshark]

Is not displaying the hero mech names in game a new "feature" now? the last several mech packs released have stopped displaying the hero mech names in game and instead showing the chassis name. This has been increasingly happening since the assassin and supernova.

Example:

The Supernova hero is not displaying in game as the hero name "Boiler" Instead, it is displaying in-game matches as "SNV-BR". Seems like I saw the same omission with "Spirit Bear" and "Sleipnir" hero recently as well but I think those may have been fixed. Will keep an eye out.