Jump to content

Countdown To Warhammer Iic Release!


83 replies to this topic

#41 Aidan Crenshaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 1,989 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 04:29 AM

The way I see it, it's better to start low and tune the values up if the chassis comes out underperforming, than to start high and swing the nerf-hammer once the chassis releases for c-bills.
Nonetheless, I think the mobility is a tad low. But we'll see.

#42 Grus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Devil
  • Little Devil
  • 3,991 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 04:37 AM

So extra thick... joke quirks... and torso turn of only 75°? Yeah that's a no for me.

#43 admiralbenbow123

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 440 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 15 February 2019 - 05:32 AM

Most of the variants actually have nice quirks. I'll have to agreee that the mobility stats aren't the best though.
Also, what is the name of the holiday bonus hero?

#44 Trashtier

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Carnivore
  • The Carnivore
  • 614 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 08:17 AM

+15 percent ppc velocity is no joke, especially with clan ppc. I plan on demonstrating why in a faction play match very soon.

#45 Charles Sennet

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 340 posts
  • LocationCurrently obscured by ECM

Posted 15 February 2019 - 10:11 AM

For a light-assault, those agility numbers are just dreadful.

#46 - World Eater -

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 940 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 10:43 AM

Those legs reminded me of JNCOs.

#47 BLOODREDSINGLE

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wrath
  • The Wrath
  • 352 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationOklahoma, USA

Posted 15 February 2019 - 01:47 PM

So.... Why no love for 1440p wallpapers? Are all of you PGI using 1080p monitors????

#48 Pariah Devalis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clan Cat
  • The Clan Cat
  • 7,641 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAboard the NCS True Path

Posted 15 February 2019 - 03:26 PM

That is one smol assault mech. I can understand a lack of armor quirks given its size. However, it still has torso twist, accel, and decel stats that are just... not good at all for a mech its weight.

#49 Jay Leon Hart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 4,669 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 03:36 PM

No WHM / WHM-IIC size comparison? That's an odd decision...

#50 Psykmoe

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 04:00 PM

View PostJay Leon Hart, on 15 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

No WHM / WHM-IIC size comparison? That's an odd decision...


They probably took the Cataphract picture and realized "dear god the 'phract is huge, if we post pics of any other 70 tonners it'll look like we can't even scale our mechs right"

Edited by Psykmoe, 15 February 2019 - 04:01 PM.


#51 Jackal Noble

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bludgeon
  • The Bludgeon
  • 4,858 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 15 February 2019 - 04:46 PM

Make it bigger and more agile.
give it torso twist quirks and armor quirks for the arms for flavor.
done.

#52 Audacious Aubergine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Death Wish
  • The Death Wish
  • 991 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 05:06 PM

View PostJay Leon Hart, on 15 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

No WHM / WHM-IIC size comparison? That's an odd decision...

It's because the way they do the size comparisons now is to walk the mech around in the testing grounds and stand next to the ones that exist in there, most likely because the current mech bay view perspective doesn't allow for accurate size comparisons

#53 ImperialKnight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,623 posts

Posted 15 February 2019 - 06:42 PM

Has PGI thrown their "volumetric normalisation" out the window already?

How can a 80 tonner be this small? It's shorter and skinnier than the Cataphract, a 70 tonner. And it's like half the frontal profile of a fellow 80 tonner, Awesome.

Unless the side profile is super thick, like a Marauder??

#54 Cazador88

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 125 posts
  • LocationHungary

Posted 15 February 2019 - 07:23 PM

Nah, with that size it wont need any kind of quirks or twisting, once the enemy sees you they'll be dumbfounded and be like "Dafq is tha.. (Dead). :D

#55 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 25,847 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 15 February 2019 - 07:40 PM

View PostImperialKnight, on 15 February 2019 - 06:42 PM, said:

Has PGI thrown their "volumetric normalisation" out the window already?

How can a 80 tonner be this small? It's shorter and skinnier than the Cataphract, a 70 tonner. And it's like half the frontal profile of a fellow 80 tonner, Awesome.

Unless the side profile is super thick, like a Marauder??

I think the Whalehammer IIC's many little greeble details might be artificially increasing the mech's volume rating without adding much surface area for you to shoot at. That's my guess at least.

#56 Juodas Varnas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Scarecrow
  • The Scarecrow
  • 7,532 posts
  • LocationGrand Duchy of Lithuania

Posted 16 February 2019 - 01:39 AM

Wow, it's ******* tiny, honestly it looks pretty much the same size as the 70 ton IS Warhammer (at least from the Cata's comparison)... Actually, it looks SMALLER than the IS warhammer?!

What the hell...

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 16 February 2019 - 01:40 AM.


#57 Khalcruth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Hero of Steiner
  • Hero of Steiner
  • 673 posts
  • LocationYou gotta lose your mind in Detroit Rock City!

Posted 16 February 2019 - 07:10 AM

So an 80 ton Clan mech smaller than IS 70 ton mechs. Sure, that seems fair.

#58 LT. HARDCASE

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 2,681 posts
  • LocationDark Space

Posted 16 February 2019 - 10:44 AM

So the volumetric scaling doesn't exist any more, and we're back in the Wild West days as far as how large mechs will be.

View PostAudacious Aubergine, on 15 February 2019 - 05:06 PM, said:

It's because the way they do the size comparisons now is to walk the mech around in the testing grounds and stand next to the ones that exist in there, most likely because the current mech bay view perspective doesn't allow for accurate size comparisons

They have the raw mech files, which we see every time they stream them painting mechs on Twitch. I've even seen them stand mechs next to each other in those programs, so they should be using that to do the size comparisons.

#59 Antares102

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,304 posts

Posted 16 February 2019 - 11:04 AM

View PostKhalcruth, on 16 February 2019 - 07:10 AM, said:

So an 80 ton Clan mech smaller than IS 70 ton mechs. Sure, that seems fair.

With the mobility and torso yaw of a 90t mech.
Being smaller doesnt help you when you cant get away.

#60 admiralbenbow123

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 440 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 16 February 2019 - 11:05 AM

View PostLT. HARDCASE, on 16 February 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

So the volumetric scaling doesn't exist any more, and we're back in the Wild West days as far as how large mechs will be.


They have the raw mech files, which we see every time they stream them painting mechs on Twitch. I've even seen them stand mechs next to each other in those programs, so they should be using that to do the size comparisons.


Personally, I don't see anything bad in the way they do the scale comparisons now.
And doing it in testing grounds takes a lot less time than comparing their models in other programs.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users