165 replies to this topic

[Odanan]

Promptus, on 27 November 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

I'm holding out for my Rhonda Snord hero-mech.



Eff yeah. Shooting you all while blasting Elvis tunes.

You mean something like this?

[Adeptus Odren]

John Kerensky, on 27 November 2012 - 11:29 PM, said:

I understand you guys have to monetize. I really do. A game that doesn't make money is a game that dies. I swear, I get it (that's one of the reasons I bought the founder's pack!). What I don't understand is going back on your word. Are boosts and vanity items really insufficient to fund the game? Or are you guys just the latest victims of corporate greed? Well know this: that $60 you got out of me for founders is the first and last money you, or your publisher will ever receive from my wallet. I refuse to patronize those who betray my trust.

I got a Founder's pack, just like you. I don't feel betrayed and am glad they're coming up with a new Hero mech, even if it's non-canon. Great selection of hardpoints - definitely not overpowering - and a backstory to boot. Not bad at all.

Tarskin, on 28 November 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

Hero mechs... should be based on actual canonical heroes described in novels/lore. I strongly oppose this invented thing which is purely intended as a profit source for PGI.

To each his own. I'm glad they're expanding on their own version of the Battletech universe. Think of PGI as the Dungeon Master and, as everyone in D&D knows, the DM is god in the campaign world.

[Bors Mistral]

It's nice that we're getting another hero mech. However, it seems too much like a CTF-3D without jumpjets and simply one energy point replaced by ballistics.

PGI, please don't stick to fluff, put jumpjets on that thing to make it more interesting. If you do that, I'll personally shell out for one.

Also, since I'm in the wishy-washy mood, please include in the game something like the skying mechanics from Tribes

[MeerKatV]

Derek Icelord, on 27 November 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

So now you're making up Hero 'Mechs, PGI?

Of course not! Grigory Kovalenko is on Facebook , he's real!

https://www.facebook.com/BrambelClaw

Seriously though, I"m ok with this one - I have the 3D but wished for one more ballistic point. This Hero mech makes a lot more sense than the Wang (which lost a claw when it got into MWO and caused one Centurion variant to disappear).

The 3D is still distinct enough w/ it's hardpoints and JJ's to complement Muromets. And no, I don't consider the latter to be overpowered which is the warning sign of a pay-2-win mech.

Edited by MeerKatV, 28 November 2012 - 06:31 AM.

[Flapdrol]

Urza Mechwalker, on 28 November 2012 - 02:33 AM, said:

peopel are too fearful of anything. Slightly different hardpoints will not ruin the game! Its not liek they are giving us a mech with ECM slot BAp slot, jump jet slots, 6 energy slots 4 missile slots and 4 ballistic slots, with a base engine of 320.

The yen lo wang in fact was a VERY underpowered mech. THis cataphtrac is also less versatile than the others. SO people need to stop moaning for nothing.

Fact is a triple UAC5 build will get you a DPS higher than any other mech in the game with very little heat. Versatility means nothing, in fact it's a downside. This thing will be the best heavy mech in the game hands down. This is pay to win, subtle maybe, but still pay to win.

I really dont see why they did this. Founders mechs only have the cbill bonus, founders pack sold well, yen lo wang was useless and people still got it just to farm cbills.

Edited by Flapdrol, 28 November 2012 - 06:53 AM.

[MeerKatV]

Flapdrol, on 28 November 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Fact is a triple UAC5 build will get you a DPS higher than any other mech in the game with very little heat. This thing will be the best heavy mech in the game hands down. This is pay to win, subtle maybe, but still pay to win.

I really dont see why they did this. Founders mechs only have the cbill bonus, founders pack sold well, yen lo wang was useless and people still got it just to farm cbills.

But the 4x already has 4 ballistic hardpoints & can already mount 3xUAC5's - what would be the Muromets advantage?

[Flapdrol]

MeerKatV, on 28 November 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

But the 4x already has 4 ballistic hardpoints & can already mount 3xUAC5's - what would be the Muromets advantage?

It cant, uac is 5 slots, arms have 9 slots each.

So that's the advantage, the 4x cant the muromets can.

Edited by Flapdrol, 28 November 2012 - 06:57 AM.

[Adeptus Odren]

Flapdrol, on 28 November 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Fact is a triple UAC5 build will get you a DPS higher than any other mech in the game with very little heat. Versatility means nothing, in fact it's a downside. This thing will be the best heavy mech in the game hands down. This is pay to win, subtle maybe, but still pay to win.

I really dont see why they did this. Founders mechs only have the cbill bonus, founders pack sold well, yen lo wang was useless and people still got it just to farm cbills.

triple UAC5 will only be a benefit to you if your target is willing to take it like a man. otherwise, i see no inherent advantage (other than a massive alpha) - not to mention that your combat duration will be much lower than a mech with just a pair of UAC5s.

Edited by Adeptus Odren, 28 November 2012 - 07:04 AM.

[Gremlich Johns]

Wanna know more about Ilya? look here

[Flapdrol]

Adeptus Odren, on 28 November 2012 - 07:01 AM, said:

triple UAC5 will only be a benefit to you if your target is willing to take it like a man. otherwise, i see no inherent advantage (other than a massive alpha) - not to mention that your combat duration will be much lower than a mech with just a pair of UAC5s.

Yeah obviously it's not going to be a jenner killer. But just look at the numbers.

The UAC/5 is one of the best weapons to have. Very high damage per second on safe speeds (second only to AC20 and large LRM packs), highest dps of any weapon in the doublefire and very high (5:1) damage/heat. So it's a great weapon to boat. No mech allows you to mount more than 2, now comes a real money only mech that can mount 3.

[Jakob Knight]

ciller, on 28 November 2012 - 03:39 AM, said:

Im not russian and I kinda want to purchase it! Buuuut I probably wont. Waiting for a catapult hero or a new assault (then its hero version) if I get another. The Wang is enough for me for now.

Heh. The CPLT Hero mech will probably come when they introduce Arrow IV, as the 3050 model of the mech uses it.

As for hero mechs, I agree. I recently bought the Wang, but not because of it's supposed 'op'-ness. I bought it because it filled a role I needed in my mech stable more than other mechs would have, and the extra bonuses in C-Bill production are really secondary to that. If I see another Hero mech that I think fits another need, then I might drop some more MCs for one, but for now I don't see any real need that can't be filled with the 'normal' 'mechs out there.

Edit: One thing about the hardpoints. With two ballistic in the arms and one in the torso, it's going to be hard to aim all three with accuracy. One of the hidden strengths of having all the ballistic in the arms is you don't have to worry about half your shots going one way, and half the other.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 28 November 2012 - 08:21 AM.

[Monky]

Urza Mechwalker, on 28 November 2012 - 02:33 AM, said:

peopel are too fearful of anything. Slightly different hardpoints will not ruin the game! Its not liek they are giving us a mech with ECM slot BAp slot, jump jet slots, 6 energy slots 4 missile slots and 4 ballistic slots, with a base engine of 320.

The yen lo wang in fact was a VERY underpowered mech. THis cataphtrac is also less versatile than the others. SO people need to stop moaning for nothing.

It's clear you don't know anything about game balance. I'm saying that not to be rude, but because it needs to be said. You are hand waving legitimate problems away with 'oh people are too afraid of change'. I've played nearly a year of world of tanks, which made this same mistake, starting with innocent little tanks that where underpowered like the Yen Lo Wang, and ending up with ridiculous, game breaking tanks like the type 59 (they had to remove it from sale to reduce the numbers of it in game, because it literally became World of Type 59). given current game balance, with a 3xUAC5 and 3x Medium Laser combo, you will be able to out-DPS any other mech in the game, barring maybe an LRM boating atlas D-DC whos target just sits there and takes it. You can repel fast movers with your medium lasers, and absolutely destroy slower mechs, while having a reasonable amount of ammo and AMS, the build is on the first page if you don't believe it. And no, you can't build that with other chassis/mechs, 2 UAC5 is the current maximum on any other chassis including the 4X.

Of course, people with the hand waving attitude will simply brush right by this, saying 'maybe it'll be ok' or 'maybe there will be some unknown weakness to this' but there won't. What there will be, is a lot of players running around in a minmaxed build wrecking people with extremely high, heat managable DPS, probably in groups. This is exactly how the Type 59 situation turned out too - players would buy them, group up, and wolf pack around, usually getting 3/4ths of the kills in a match and making it unplayable for everyone else. I know, because I did that. I don't want MWO to become that, and I wish you guys would see the reality that's coming down on us all.

The real kicker is - this entire argument is unnecessary. Most people just plain want the CBill boost, meaning they could just use accessible loadouts that are available for C-Bills and do just as well. It also keeps canon relevent by allowing more potential hero mechs, since most hero mechs aren't very different from stock builds, so no hardpoint changes should actually be necessary in the vast majority of cases. What it boils down to, is they chose the riskier strategy as far as preserving gameplay balance, the more psychologically manipulative method of implimenting it, and the least reverent for what battletech/mechwarrior is, while having the perfectly legitimate option to do all three of those things right and still do just as well.

Edited by Monky, 28 November 2012 - 11:29 AM.

[Flapdrol]

Yeah, I really think Piranha has taken this into account when they made this mech, either that or they want to make a good buck off of the minmaxers before nerfing the uac/5 into oblivion.

[AlexWildeagle]

Looks up at the sky, no the sky isn't falling. Relax.

Mech may cause balance issues and it may not. You can't run around worrying bout the sky falling. If it causes the issues you fear PGI will correct it. But until that time I'm not going to throw a fit or predict doom or gloom. And to me its more the pilot then the mech. I've seen a single jenner kill a completetly undamaged Atlas, does that make the jenner OP'd? Or is it just a matter of piloting?

I'll give it a try stock, but I have this real issue with wanting to customize everything. The only stock mechs in my hangars are the founder mechs I never used.

I just wonder how long we'll have to wait?

[Monky]

Like I said, handwavers will ignore the hard earned truth. I'm not saying the sky is falling, but it's certainly got some serious cracks in it, and it might be a good idea to do something about that -before- it comes down.

I'm glad structural engineers don't have the same mindset as people around here, or every skyscraper and dam ever made would have collapsed into dust.

[AlexWildeagle]

Monky, on 28 November 2012 - 11:42 AM, said:

Like I said, handwavers will ignore the hard earned truth. I'm not saying the sky is falling, but it's certainly got some serious cracks in it, and it might be a good idea to do something about that -before- it comes down.

I'm glad structural engineers don't have the same mindset as people around here, or every skyscraper and dam ever made would have collapsed into dust.

What hard earned truth? Its not even out yet and you're all doom and gloom.

Actually how do you think structural engineers learned before computer modeling?

[Flapdrol]

AlexWildeagle, on 28 November 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Actually how do you think structural engineers learned before computer modeling?

They just did the math by hand, and the math says 3x uac5 is OP.

They def did not build a skyscraper to see if it would fall down.

Edited by Flapdrol, 28 November 2012 - 01:08 PM.

[Phatel]

GoGo Yubari, on 27 November 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

And considering the confusing and vaguely offensive mixing of the cultural insignia/metaphors on the YLW, I'm sure this one will be decorated with a painted Finnish machine gunner on the chest.

Just kidding, guys!

The paint job is straight out of cannon. So please be sensitive in another thread.

[Unclecid]

new hero mek..kool...though i am sure it will probably be waay too overpriced just like the Wang...ah well fools are always easily parted from their money.

i dont get why PGI would have to make up a hero mek this early in the games development.
their are plenty of canon hero meks out there for the current announced stable.

how about PGI stops wasting time making up fictional varient and use that time to add MORE of the announced meks.

what was wrong with adding the Commando from the CHI?

or one of the Jenners heros?

or a Hunchie?

or a Dragon?

or a Cat..i mean comon...Butterbee?

what about using an existing cataphract hero?

or even an atlas?

and there are even more CANON hero meks for the announced chassis that havent made it into game.

how about we concentrate on getting those in and using existing canon heroes before we make up anymore overly munchie meks?

[Phatel]

I have often wondered why they don't make all the variants available for purchase with cbill boost for MC, that would just pull in cash I would think and leave the non paying folk to the cbill boostless others.