43 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

During the MWO production update stream yesterday, it was emphasized that PGI does listen to the community, and when there is a consensus and a realistic request, PGI will try to implement it. As such, I'm to going to try to point out one issue with the upcoming Fafnir, in hopes you guys will agree, and will result in PGI listening.

OK! So, the last two IS packs (Hellspawn, Thanatos) were really poorly received, and a disappointed customer will not become a returning customer. The goal is not asking for all mech packs to be super duper Pay2Win on release though, it's to ensure that on a scale from Bad, Mediocre, Decent, Good, and Great, each mech pack should be at least Decent to ensure paying customers are not disappointed. It goes without saying, the Hellspawn/Thanatos are Bad-to-Mediocre depending on variant.

Let's get started: Which of these two Fafnir models would you rather pilot? Vote here




I hope you voted the left, because while both models have distinct, impossible to shield side torsos, the right model has 25% wider STs than the enormous STs on the left. The right is PGI's current model.

However, is using the left model sufficient to make the Fafnir a decent mech? If the right model results in a bad performing mech, the left model only results in a bump to mediocre performance. I believe Armor quirks will still be needed on top to achieve decent performance.

For the left model, the STs will be easier to shield, but will still need +30 armor quirks so that WITH TWISTING, you can preserve your ST against two laser alphas. Half of the third alpha will take your ST off even with max skill survival tree.

For the right model, the STs will need +50!!! armor quirks so that WITH TWISTING, you can preserve your ST against two laser alphas. Half of the third alpha will take your ST off even with max skill survival tree.

Other quirks if added can make the Fafnir better than a decent mech, but other quirks don't matter at all without minimally durable STs.

Please vote above, and reply here if you agree or disagree with my assessment. Thanks for reading!

[Athom83]

I mean, I liked my Thanatos variants I got from preorder. I just haven't been playing much in general lately to rally use them (will be changing coming Solaris).

[Tarogato]

One on the right looks more Fapnir-y to me. I've very happy with PGI's model.

Or I just acquired lower standards after what they did to the poor 'Lanner.

[Jackal Noble]

You act as if it's a surprise that the Thanatos and Hell spawn were both ill received and have bad/odd hitboxes.
Faf is gonna be fine Chicken Little.

Edited by JackalBeast, 03 March 2018 - 10:04 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Ok this is kinda comedic.

>+50 armor quirks required
>+30 armor quirks required even with a model shrink
>Mech already comes with ECM, Cockpit level hardpoints, up to quad ballistics in side torsos, likely dual HG quirks

I can see it getting some quirks that are a little weaker than Annihilator's and pilots having to focus on making use of their high mounts and high PPFLD options and easy first strike capability from the ECM.

[Jackal Noble]

If you had to choose, armor the bonus to only the CT and arms or only to the side torsos, what would you pick?

[Nightbird]

To clarify Tarogato, you like how it looks, but what about your assessment for battlefield performance? Are STs fine and no armor quirks needed?

[LT. HARDCASE]

Would you rather have the left and Thanatos armor, or the right and Annihilator armor?

I mean the right is getting Annihilator AT BEST, so talking +30 left and +50 right gets us nowhere.

Edited by LT. HARDCASE, 03 March 2018 - 10:28 AM.

[Nema Nabojiv]

Nightbird, on 03 March 2018 - 09:54 AM, said:

I hope you voted the left, because while both models have distinct, impossible to shield side torsos, the right model has 25% wider STs than the enormous STs on the left. The right is PGI's current model.

Voted right because it looks more Fafnir-ish and its not about quirks or meta.

[LT. HARDCASE]

Nema Nabojiv, on 03 March 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Voted right because it looks more Fafnir-ish and its not about quirks or meta.

You'd vote against your own benefit for....?

[Nema Nabojiv]

LT. HARDCASE, on 03 March 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

You'd vote against your own benefit for....?

For aesthetics.

We have enough bad looking mechs as it is, no need to have yet another.

[Nightbird]

Fafnir-ish? Even in the lore images, the STs are about the same width as the CT from the front. PGI's rendition has the STs that are 50% wider than the CT. Is that really more faithful than mine?

[Bishop Steiner]

Hmm.... do I want my Mechs to actually look like the Mech's they claim to be, and deal with some not being "up to snuff for comp play"....

Or have hideously bastardized models that are "more better for high end play" but end up jsut being Generic Looking Gundams?

Well, if I'm being honest, what little I play anymore is on my Clan Acct.... (Nova cat i just too much fun), so it doesn't make a huge impact on me... but if I wanted generic robots, I'd play Titanfall, Hawken, etc......

So...maybe accept that not every GetterRobo is meant for/ideal for comp play and move on? (Would those be BetterRobos?)

*shrugs*

Whatever. Folks here are going to screech no matter what.

Nightbird, on 03 March 2018 - 11:07 AM, said:

Fafnir-ish? Even in the lore images, the STs are about the same width as the CT from the front. PGI's rendition has the STs that are 50% wider than the CT. Is that really more faithful than mine?

call me a noob, but isn't a wide CT generally undesirable on any mech? And with Volume... what doesn't go into the CT.. has to go somewhere. Since it's designed around Heavy Gauss, and no IS XLs.... meh. Don't forget the CASE, though.

[Jackal Noble]

#NovaCatsad

[Nightbird]

Bishop Steiner, on 03 March 2018 - 11:10 AM, said:

Hmm.... do I want my Mechs to actually look like the Mech's they claim to be, and deal with some not being "up to snuff for comp play"....

You're looking at the lore images, and saying PGI's STs are proportionally correct?

[Nema Nabojiv]

Well the right one does look more like a proper fafnir from my wet dreams MW4

[Nightbird]

Nema Nabojiv, on 03 March 2018 - 11:23 AM, said:

Well the right one does look more like a proper fafnir from my wet dreams MW4

Are you sure you're not including the side of the ST? From the front, the ST ends at the red line around the barrel.

[Sniper09121986]

JackalBeast, on 03 March 2018 - 10:56 AM, said:

The NightBird Special

Also, you should add "The NightBird Special" to your poll.

Already better, but the legs are too damn long. What about this?

[Humpday]

The hitboxes aren't going to be as bad as one might think. While still not GOOD due to the things inherent size, they are not terrible.

Your quarter turn shot here shows you have the ability to hide a torso with out a full 90 deg twist. If someone tries to burn your CT you can wiggle your nose and get decent spread. You can also save a hurt torso pretty easily, from the loose of these shots.

This is unlike mechs like the Mauler and Atlas which suffer from inability to hide the torsos.

Don't get me wrong, people are still going to shoot for your big torsos, but at least you have the option of mitigating it, combine that with decent torso agility(please PGI), and armor quirks. Should turn out to be a decent 100tonner.

I don't think it'll be as "bad" as my initial thoughts led me to believe.

Edited by Humpday, 03 March 2018 - 11:37 AM.

[DaZur]

Being s war buff... I hate when folks want to re-write history in the name of "equity" and "viability".

This game is based on Battletech/Mechwarrior. The mechs, their inherent design (for good or bad) are what maintains their unique visages and in many cases battlefield roles.

Long and short, these are the mechs, warts and all... A good pilot will learn how to maximize its potential and will not be for it to be altered in name of "equity".

I've wasted more breath elsewhere arguing with folks who think the Mitsubishi Zero is too easy to dispatch who know nothing about the historic of the plane, its advantages and disadvantages and nuisances, who just want to "buff" it because they think it should be in the name of parity/equity/balance.