46 replies to this topic

[S O L A I S]

They should have left it the way it was. Clearly you are an example of how people are never going to be happy. Such a small thing to be worried about really.

[Navid A1]

S O L A I S, on 21 June 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

They should have left it the way it was. Clearly you are an example of how people are never going to be happy. Such a small thing to be worried about really.

I was fine with the old model.

I was also fine when they said that they wanted to change the model to be consistent with the concept art.

But what they have delivered is an abomination that not only is not close to the concept but creates both visual and gameplay issues.

Edited by Navid A1, 21 June 2018 - 10:30 AM.

[S O L A I S]

Navid A1, on 21 June 2018 - 10:30 AM, said:

I was fine with the old model.

I was also fine when they said that they wanted to change the model to be consistent with the concept art.

But what they have delivered is an abomination that not only is not close to the concept but creates both visual and gameplay issues.

An abomination? Really? Tad dramatic.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

I don't know why the 3D modeller couldn't just follow the proportions of the perfectly acceptable concept art.

Drunk at work?

Who knows...

[KrazedOmega]

Wait, what? Why would they go through the trouble of remodeling the weapon pods if they weren't going to match them to the concept art. That was the whole damn point. They're way too tall now and look worse then they did before.

[The6thMessenger]

Jesus, that's horrible.

[Infamati Et Obliterati]

Just going to place this observation here... Pre patch... you saw blood asps fairly regularly in the QP drop queue... Now, they are becoming a rare bird. That says all we need to say about its current performance.

[lazorbeamz]

Noone really knows how that blood asp looks like. Because it doesnt exist in real life remember?
Just a concept art of a single person and its just a random drawing.

[ilKhan_OrHan]

Posted this in another thread -

Make the dual hardpoints 1/1 size ratio and take out the space between, leaving the same distance as any other set of hardpoints grouped next to each other on most if not all mechs. Very simple and sensible edit that has highest probability of occurring of all suggested changes at this point.

[Slow and Decrepit]

That's all I want. They just needed to take out the middle/vertical section on the gun pods, not the length, just the height and it will more or less match the art. Not sure as to why they choose to make them so tall with the patch. Probably Russ having final say......

[Luminis]

KrazedOmega, on 21 June 2018 - 06:01 PM, said:

Why would they go through the trouble of remodeling the weapon pods if they weren't going to match them to the concept art. That was the whole damn point.

Because this way, everybody loses. The people that were happy with the stubby mounts and the people who wanted the Mech to look exactly like the concept art when they pre-ordered.

Can't please everyone, but leave it to PGI to find a way to annoy both sides.

[Stinger554]

S O L A I S, on 21 June 2018 - 11:15 AM, said:

An abomination? Really? Tad dramatic.

Not really it looks horrible and basically regulates this mech to gathering dust in the hanger bay. It's also the first time I've ever actually requested a refund from PGI. My rancor looked like some dumb greenskin decided to put huge *** dakka barrels on it.

[Jay Leon Hart]

ilKhan_OrHan, on 22 June 2018 - 01:10 AM, said:

Make the dual hardpoints 1/1 size ratio and take out the space between, leaving the same distance as any other set of hardpoints grouped next to each other on most if not all mechs. Very simple and sensible edit that has highest probability of occurring of all suggested changes at this point.

The change with the highest probability of occurring is no change at all, since they've already changed it twice.

The change with the next highest possibility of occurring is reverting to the release model, since it already exists.

Any change that requires an adjustment to the model is highly unlikely at this point.

[Nightbird]

Jay Leon Hart, on 22 June 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

The change with the highest probability of occurring is no change at all, since they've already changed it twice.

The change with the next highest possibility of occurring is reverting to the release model, since it already exists.

Any change that requires an adjustment to the model is highly unlikely at this point.

Actually highest likelihood change is ST quirks. I hope they add it to the CT though, so it buffs the non-ECM variants.

Edited by Nightbird, 22 June 2018 - 12:14 PM.

[Navid A1]

Nightbird, on 22 June 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

Actually highest likelihood change is ST quirks. I hope they add it to the CT though, so it buffs the non-ECM variants.

ST armor quirks means more score for the enemy you know... when those pods are getting shot without you even seeing whats over the hill, there is no point.

The problem is even worse in case you have Gauss in there.

Edited by Navid A1, 22 June 2018 - 12:17 PM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Nightbird, on 22 June 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

Actually highest likelihood change is ST quirks. I hope they add it to the CT though, so it buffs the non-ECM variants.

That's not a model change though

[ilKhan_OrHan]

Jay Leon Hart, on 22 June 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

The change with the highest probability of occurring is no change at all, since they've already changed it twice.

The change with the next highest possibility of occurring is reverting to the release model, since it already exists.

Any change that requires an adjustment to the model is highly unlikely at this point.

I doubt they will revert to release model again as now they are very consciously aware that that model did not look like lore much. If more people would push for ST size reduction to resemble concept art like I outlined, they MAY listen and make the simple adjustment.

[Christophe Ivanov]

Ya know, I said it before and well, my idea is we go back to PUBLIC TESTING before releases. I believe if we do this, we can catch nagging stuff that can very well help PGI out in a better quality releases. Just saying.

[Dogstar]

No amount of public testing would have got them out of this cluster$%^&

The trouble is that PGI keeps swinging between 'we don't negotiate with players' mode to 'lets change this because one player complained about it' mode with no consistency at all.

Either listen or don't listen PGI, but only listening randomly is terrible.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Is it really beyond PGI to have an official poll for this type of thing, where you can only vote if you actually paid for the thing? That would cut down on so much noise...