13 replies to this topic

[Lajur Kas]

Taking a quick trip down memory lane has me thinking on my favorite Sleipnir build with a UAC10 in each torso and great big engine!

At the time, if machine guns were mounted first, they would support the autocannons in the upper weapons slot. Similar to the early dual-Gauss Kodiak.

And then, one day...

...those MG didn't support the AC! How could it be? Build gone, time to move on.

But then I thought, much later...If it disappeared, perhaps it could return!

MG, followed by UAC10. Nope, stays in the slot, but drops with a flop. Bummer.

Time to rebuild the 4xLB10X, I guess...drop one in the left torso...and there it sits held up by that low machine gun!

Well, all right...let's try it out! On to the right torso!!! Where the MG won't support the AC? How can this be? It works on the left but not the righty? Dang!

It doesn't have to be HG or an AC20 lifted up. Heck, I understand if it cannot be the UAC10s returned to me. But would you consider matching the right torso, to left that I see? Fast paced LB10X peaking in a Sleipnir might be a fun change of pace for you and me.

Edited by Lajur Kas, 03 May 2022 - 12:43 PM.

[Hobbles v]

As far as I know. It's been like that day since the cyclops came out.

It's a trend for big IS ballistics. Always seem to favour the low mounts.

[Kanil]

Hobbles v, on 03 May 2022 - 12:57 PM, said:

As far as I know. It's been like that day since the cyclops came out.

It's a trend for big IS ballistics. Always seem to favour the low mounts.

It's because you can't fit multiple big IS ballistics in a single torso. You can't put two UAC/10s in a torso, so PGI only models a UAC/10 in a single mount. Clan weapons have fewer slots, so everything outside of the 20s can be bumped up -- hell you can fit 3 CUAC/10s in a torso.

The default mount is usually where the artwork places the weapon, which is typically lower, but on the Marauder for example you can use MGs to bump the guns down, should you want to do that for some reason.

The situation with the Sleipnir and LB-10X is weird though. All four mounts have models for the guns, but you can only bump them up on one side...

Edited by Kanil, 03 May 2022 - 01:08 PM.

[ScrapIron Prime]

The Banshee is like this too. You can put a large energy weapon high up on the LEFT torso, but not on the RIGHT torso. On the right side, the top slots are limited to 2 slot weapons unless you fill the whole torso with PPCs... which would be insane. Pretty, but insane.

[Lajur Kas]

Hobbles v, on 03 May 2022 - 12:57 PM, said:

As far as I know. It's been like that day since the cyclops came out.

Nope, loved that build. I'd be lying if I said I could remember how long it was possible...

Kanil, on 03 May 2022 - 01:07 PM, said:

It's because you can't fit multiple big IS ballistics in a single torso. You can't put two UAC/10s in a torso...

To clarify, it was a single UAC10 in each torso. Just moved to the top mounts by adding machine guns first. Also, the modeling was fantastic!

Kanil, on 03 May 2022 - 01:07 PM, said:

The situation with the Sleipnir and LB-10X is weird though. All four mounts have models for the guns, but you can only bump them up on one side...

I've tried to make a build that utilizes the bump up on the left side,but haven't found anything I like. Even if they made the right torso the same as the left, the two LB10X up high might be no good...but it would be fun to try.

[Lajur Kas]

ScrapIron Prime, on 03 May 2022 - 01:38 PM, said:

The Banshee is like this too. You can put a large energy weapon high up on the LEFT torso, but not on the RIGHT torso. On the right side, the top slots are limited to 2 slot weapons unless you fill the whole torso with PPCs... which would be insane. Pretty, but insane.

Very interesting. I don't have any Banshee with energy weapons in the left torso...but I tried it on my right side energy BNC-3E and BC-3S.

• The -3E will allow you to use lighter energy weapons to bump up a LPL but it will not allow you to do the same with any of the PPC models. Even two LPL won't force a L-PPC to the top mount...?
  
• The -3S will allow you to use lighter energy weapons to bump up the L-PPC and S-PPC to a top mount, but even LPL won't move up any of the heavier PPC.

I can understand certain types of variances due to design (looking at you Orion.) But with a mech that is known to mirror torsos like the Sleipnir. How easy would it be to change if there was any desire to? Click, click, done...or a major investment of time?

[w0qj]

There's a recent modern trend of putting into IS mechs (now that UAC5 recently buffed):
LT: UAC10 + UAC5
RT: UAC10 + UAC5

eg:
Annihilator ANH-2A
Anything less than 100ton Assault makes this somewhat engine-gimped IMHO (Nightstar NSR-9P, Cyclops Sleipnir, Mauler, etc.

[Note: Thanks to Brauer!
Those are not new builds, they've been around a long time and the 2xUAC10/2xUAC5 builds were prominent during maintenance mode.]

Edited by w0qj, 05 May 2022 - 03:13 PM.

[Kanil]

Lajur Kas, on 03 May 2022 - 04:30 PM, said:

To clarify, it was a single UAC10 in each torso. Just moved to the top mounts by adding machine guns first. Also, the modeling was fantastic!

Yeah. I was just offering why IS big ballistics typically are stuck to a single mount, while Clan ones have more options.

As for the Cyclops, I don't know how long ago this bumpable UAC/10 existed, but if it was right after the UAC/10 was added, then I would guess that PGI gave the UAC/10 the UAC/5 (or LB-10X?) model temporarily, which is bumpable. Then the Cyclops got the CW weapon pass, the UAC/10 was given it's own model, and it was only added to one hardpoint on account of mounting two is impossible, and the UAC/10 was no longer bumpable.

But that's very much just a guess on my part.

[Lajur Kas]

w0qj, on 03 May 2022 - 06:05 PM, said:

There's a recent trend of putting...
LT: UAC10 + UAC5
RT: UAC10 + UAC5

...Anything less than 100ton Assault makes this somewhat engine-gimped IMHO.

Yep, it's back to the dual HG, dual LB20, or quad LB10 problem...so slow!

Any idea of the who, what, where, or how something like the LB10 torso imbalance is cleared up? Would this be considered a bug?

[Lajur Kas]

Kanil, on 03 May 2022 - 08:02 PM, said:

...(or LB-10X?)...which is bumpable.

Not with machine guns on the right torso;) Would you consider that a bug?

Kanil, on 03 May 2022 - 08:02 PM, said:

Then the Cyclops got the CW weapon pass, the UAC/10 was given it's own model, and it was only added to one hardpoint on account of mounting two is impossible, and the UAC/10 was no longer bumpable.

I can't remember...were all UAC10 modeled on the UAC5 and only updated after the CW weapons pass? My recollection wants to tell me it was the UAC10 model we have now that was showing up in the high mounts on the Sleipnir...but that memory of mine is pretty sneaky at slipping in bad information here and there.

[Dogstar]

Kanil, on 03 May 2022 - 08:02 PM, said:

Yeah. I was just offering why IS big ballistics typically are stuck to a single mount, while Clan ones have more options.

As for the Cyclops, I don't know how long ago this bumpable UAC/10 existed, but if it was right after the UAC/10 was added, then I would guess that PGI gave the UAC/10 the UAC/5 (or LB-10X?) model temporarily, which is bumpable. Then the Cyclops got the CW weapon pass, the UAC/10 was given it's own model, and it was only added to one hardpoint on account of mounting two is impossible, and the UAC/10 was no longer bumpable.

Don't forget that there's a version of the Cyclops with only a single ballistic hardpoint in the RT (I forget which one) which means they've modeled the high point on the right, but there's no variants with a single on the left and thus no need to model the high point on the left.

Edited by Dogstar, 04 May 2022 - 09:25 AM.

[Kanil]

Lajur Kas, on 04 May 2022 - 07:06 AM, said:

Would you consider that a bug?

...

I can't remember...were all UAC10 modeled on the UAC5 and only updated after the CW weapons pass?

I'm not sure it'd be considered a "bug" per se, you put a MG and a LB-10X on your 'mech and both of them show up. But I'm not PGI, so I'm not sure my opinion is worth anything. They could change it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

https://mwomercs.com...s/1859#retrofit

I don't know what weapons were used as placeholders, that was years ago, but it does seem that the Cyclops definitely had placeholders for a time.

[Lajur Kas]

Dogstar, on 04 May 2022 - 09:25 AM, said:

Don't forget that there's a version of the Cyclops with only a single ballistic hardpoint in the RT (I forget which one) which means they've modeled the high point on the right, but there's no variants with a single on the left and thus no need to model the high point on the left.

Thanks for the feedback. Flip flop it though...the left torso has the model in place for the LB10X, it is the right torso that doesn't appear to...

Kanil, on 04 May 2022 - 03:02 PM, said:

I'm not sure it'd be considered a "bug" per se, you put a MG and a LB-10X on your 'mech and both of them show up. But I'm not PGI, so I'm not sure my opinion is worth anything. They could change it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

https://mwomercs.com...s/1859#retrofit

I don't know what weapons were used as placeholders, that was years ago, but it does seem that the Cyclops definitely had placeholders for a time.

Yep, it does come across that the UAC10 changes were based around modeling, or a lack of it...the link was a nice trip down memory lane:)

As for the LB10X...yeah, it's not broken. An imbalance maybe...I'd use "quirk" but that's taken;) How about wonky!

[Brauer]

w0qj, on 03 May 2022 - 06:05 PM, said:

There's a recent trend of putting into IS mechs (now that UAC5 recently buffed):
LT: UAC10 + UAC5
RT: UAC10 + UAC5

eg:
Annihilator ANH-2A
Anything less than 100ton Assault makes this somewhat engine-gimped IMHO (Nightstar NSR-9P, Cyclops Sleipnir, Mauler, etc.

Those are not new builds, they've been around a long time and the 2xUAC10/2xUAC5 builds were prominent during maintenance mode.