34 replies to this topic

[Joshua Obrien]

Too bad the Cannons are stumpy and stubby and look more like Cannots. Damn Now I don't even care. Not sure why they gave this mech the Jager treatment for.

[Prototelis]

You're mad because they made it a little more viable?

[Angel of Annihilation]

Don't worry, people decided to whined enough that PGI is going to lengthen them so you get to look cool. Doesn't matter that it is going to add 20% surface area to the ST hitboxes. Doesn't matter than they will stand out as a focal point to shoot at. Doesn't matter that you will be able to shoot them from any angle making you unable to shield a damage ST. Doesn't matter that it is a straight up nerf to the mech because hey it is going to look really cool in the mech bay. I mean looking good in the mech bay is much, much more important than actually being good in a match right? Hmmm wonder if it will still be a good mech for us once they look cool?

[Joshua Obrien]

Prototelis, on 28 May 2018 - 04:26 PM, said:

You're mad because they made it a little more viable?

I'm not mad at all. You're conflating disappointment with anger. But nice try sir <3

Viktor Drake, on 28 May 2018 - 04:27 PM, said:

Don't worry, people decided to whined enough that PGI is going to lengthen them so you get to look cool. Doesn't matter that it is going to add 20% surface area to the ST hitboxes. Doesn't matter than they will stand out as a focal point to shoot at. Doesn't matter that you will be able to shoot them from any angle making you unable to shield a damage ST. Doesn't matter that it is a straight up nerf to the mech because hey it is going to look really cool in the mech bay. I mean looking good in the mech bay is much, much more important than actually being good in a match right? Hmmm wonder if it will still be a good mech for us once they look cool?

Then for clarity make the damn cannons look stumpy and flat on the artwork instead of giving us false ideas of what the damn thing is going to look like? Remember when they made the jagers arms tiny? Sure it was technically a small buff but literally no one liked it.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Joshua Obrien, on 28 May 2018 - 04:30 PM, said:

Then for clarity make the damn cannons look stumpy and flat on the artwork instead of giving us false ideas of what the damn thing is going to look like? Remember when they made the jagers arms tiny? Sure it was technically a small buff but literally no one liked it.

Concept art is just that, "Concept" art. It is just there to give the viewer the idea of what something may look like. Rarely does the final product turn out exactly like the concept, something we have seen over and over again in MWO. There are tons and tons of mechs that look much better in the Concept than they do once the 3-D model comes out so I don't know why people are surprised that there were changes.

Also you have to consider viability as well. Before the mech released, many people pointed out that the longer and larger mounts as shown in the introductory screen shots and previews would be a huge flaw in the design. Luckly PGI listened at that time and change it to what we have now and the end result is a damn good mech that offers good competitiveness. Yet people want to take a voluntary nerf to look cool? That I don't get.

So sure, it doesn't have the the long shoulder mounts that look cool and I get that many of us base at least some of our buying decisions on the aesthetics of a mech but the mech is in a good spot right now. It is fun to play and competitive and is still one of the best looking mechs in the game so why would anyone want to make the mech worse performing? I mean sure, it might end up only being a small nerf but based on other mechs with when they mount the Mickey Mouse ears, chances are the mech will go from fun to play and competitive to not worth playing in the time it takes for you to download a patch. What is worse about this mech having that problem is unlike the Timber Wolf and the MCII, you can't not mount something in the ST, not and still have a viable loadout.

[Vanguard836]

Viktor Drake, on 28 May 2018 - 05:33 PM, said:

Concept art is just that, "Concept" art. It is just there to give the viewer the idea of what something may look like. Rarely does the final product turn out exactly like the concept, something we have seen over and over again in MWO. There are tons and tons of mechs that look much better in the Concept than they do once the 3-D model comes out so I don't know why people are surprised that there were changes.

Please go look at the 1st screenshots that were put out, the mounts were at the correct height, wrong length, a bit too big. The laser pods are what we currently have now. This was a drastic change.

Viktor Drake, on 28 May 2018 - 05:33 PM, said:

Also you have to consider viability as well. Before the mech released, many people pointed out that the longer and larger mounts as shown in the introductory screen shots and previews would be a huge flaw in the design. Luckly PGI listened at that time and change it to what we have now and the end result is a damn good mech that offers good competitiveness. Yet people want to take a voluntary nerf to look cool? That I don't get.

I have seen way less people point this flaw out than people complaining that it didn't look correct. The thing about "good competitiveness" is that the same people will drop this mech like last weeks newspaper as soon as something better comes out.
More importantly, they didn't change it because of the few that complained that the pods would be a target.

Viktor Drake, on 28 May 2018 - 05:33 PM, said:

So sure, it doesn't have the the long shoulder mounts that look cool and I get that many of us base at least some of our buying decisions on the aesthetics of a mech but the mech is in a good spot right now. It is fun to play and competitive and is still one of the best looking mechs in the game so why would anyone want to make the mech worse performing? I mean sure, it might end up only being a small nerf but based on other mechs with when they mount the Mickey Mouse ears, chances are the mech will go from fun to play and competitive to not worth playing in the time it takes for you to download a patch. What is worse about this mech having that problem is unlike the Timber Wolf and the MCII, you can't not mount something in the ST, not and still have a viable loadout.

It would also set a precedence that the art and model would be significantly different than one another, why should anyone pre-order if what is shown in the end doesn't look like what you bought ? You buy a sedan and end up with a coupe (or vise versa), would you be happy considering you payed for one and got the other ?

Also note that way more people have praised the upcoming changes than the fraction that have complained.

Edited by Vanguard836, 28 May 2018 - 06:13 PM.

[Vanguard836]

Joshua Obrien, on 28 May 2018 - 04:22 PM, said:

Too bad the Cannons are stumpy and stubby and look more like Cannots. Damn Now I don't even care. Not sure why they gave this mech the Jager treatment for.

They're tweaking the model to have the longer cannons.
https://twitter.com/...247061559984129

[Joshua Obrien]

Vanguard836, on 28 May 2018 - 06:14 PM, said:

They're tweaking the model to have the longer cannons.
https://twitter.com/...247061559984129

Then I'll get it, it just feels bad when one of the coolest mechs in the history of battle tech gets circumcised.

[MechaBattler]

Joshua Obrien, on 28 May 2018 - 07:01 PM, said:

Then I'll get it, it just feels bad when one of the coolest mechs in the history of battle tech gets circumcised.

It's not like you're going to be looking at yourself as you pilot it. Unless you're planning on playing in 3rd person.

[CK16]

They are going to fix it, check on Twitter or around here for the updated model look.

[Squirg]

Despite what anyone says, the look of your mech is pretty important imo. Even if you can't see it when you're piloting, even if it might make it worse, it doesn't even matter in qp.

Just wish they would fix the walk animation, it stumbles around like a drunk uncle.

[Joshua Obrien]

MechaBattler, on 28 May 2018 - 07:28 PM, said:

It's not like you're going to be looking at yourself as you pilot it. Unless you're planning on playing in 3rd person.

Then why use decals and paint jobs? It's not like you're going to look at your mech.

[ViperEH]

Squirg, on 28 May 2018 - 08:04 PM, said:

Despite what anyone says, the look of your mech is pretty important imo. Even if you can't see it when you're piloting, even if it might make it worse, it doesn't even matter in qp.

Just wish they would fix the walk animation, it stumbles around like a drunk uncle.

The walk animation is awful. Legs are ok it makes zero sense the upper torso sways side to side as a weapons platform. Certainly don’t play in 3rd person but I hit F3 to enjoy the view in the way to the fight at times. I hope that is addressed. One of my favorites and that sway...

[El Bandito]

Blood Asp is a good mech, and that is all I care about. It is not the meta god some people had predicted, but it does the job better than most Assaults.

[Stone1116]

Squirg, on 28 May 2018 - 08:04 PM, said:

Just wish they would fix the walk animation, it stumbles around like a drunk uncle.

Honestly, I can tolerate the "one drink too many" swaying of the blood asp. I'm just glad that PGI didn't give it the bow legged syndrome that plagues the uziel or MCII legs, or the waddle animation of some of the other chicken walker assaults.

[Jay Leon Hart]

I can cope with the waddle.

The torso guns? I wanted the sexy looking guns - what we got was an asymmetrical mess and I screamed blue murder about it.

PGI settled on keeping the snug-fit, stubby cannons. I was OK with this, and chose not to cancel or downgrade my ore-order.

Then, out of seemingly nowhere (honestly, I saw a lot less about the torso guns ones the Blood Asp released, people seemed happy) Russ announces another "fix" AKA nerf to make the torso guns mechanically worse, even if they look nicer. Which is debatable.

I could live with an increase in length - profile is what matters most with those mounts, for peaking/poking/hill humping, to longer barrels wouldn't be too bad. *BONUS* that it would become closer to the TRO art, which has recessed shoulder guns.

But to make them higher *and* longer? Just no. I paid for what was released. I did so in good faith that everything was already "fixed". So did many others. The Nightstar was fixed to match the concept art (and retain slightly more performance) *before* it was released.

Can you imagine the shitshow if the Blood Asp is altered post-release, with no prior official warning (no, Twitter is not official warning, nor are fan-made threads) ? It will be glorious! PGI may have to actually dole out mass post-release refunds, if enough people make noise about it.

#SaveTheBloodAsp

[Nightbird]

Chill, PGI already said they're going to give you the cool casket you're asking for

[Antares102]

Joshua Obrien, on 28 May 2018 - 10:40 PM, said:

Then why use decals and paint jobs? It's not like you're going to look at your mech.

Dekkels and paint jobs can make sense of you have a common design for all mechs of a unit.
Corporate identity of some sort. Some units really have some cool uniform camos.

Also painting your entire mech black also gives you a slight edge on various maps when it comes to spotting you especially combined with ECM.

Edited by Antares102, 29 May 2018 - 08:41 AM.

[MechaBattler]

The difference is that decals will not get you killed. Unless of course you're playing on a really dark map and have a big bright green emblem on you mech. But actual hitboxes will greatly effect how your mech performs. And you can't remove them like you can with decals. So you're forcing the entire playerbase to endure worse hitboxes because it didn't meet your aesthetic ideal of what it should look like.

[Antares102]

MechaBattler, on 29 May 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

So you're forcing the entire playerbase to endure worse hitboxes because it didn't meet your aesthetic ideal of what it should look like.

Well said, mate, well said.