457 replies to this topic

[HellShredder]

Wow, all of these mechs look wonderful. I can't wait for the beta!

[Victor MacGregor]

Beauty and grace personified. It will be an honor to ride. the Cicada

[Luke78]

Awesome

[hellshock26]

This is one mech i would be happy to play as because it looks so cool!

[desertghost]

im really looking foreward to this game mechs were only on consoles loke xobox and playstation but im glad to find out that there will be one on pc

[Adridos]

desertghost, on 02 June 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

im really looking foreward to this game mechs were only on consoles loke xobox and playstation but im glad to find out that there will be one on pc

Mechwarrior, Heavy Gear, etc. were all PC games.

And Armored Core and other "mech" games on consoles are not simulators - different genre.

[Mavek]

Just curious...will MW:O be using the 'armless' rules?

The Cicada in TT never had anything in its arms...so we used to shift the armor from the arms to other places and consider all rolled arm hits as misses.

Im less concerned about 'misses' than whether or not for the purpose of armor allocation, in this game, does this mech even have arms to waste armor on? Or maybe if it does, do players simply torso twist to take a few shots on the arms to save the armor on the torsos?

Edited by Mavek, 02 June 2012 - 10:36 AM.

[SnakeTheFox]

The armament on this concept art look a little different than what the default mech is armed with. If the colored green "eyes" on the left and right are 2 medium lasers, and the central red "eye" is a small laser, then what is the 3-barreled weapon on the left torso (but not on the right)? I'd guess a rotary autocannon 2.

[Adridos]

SnakeTheFox, on 02 June 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

...then what is the 3-barreled weapon on the left torso (but not on the right)? I'd guess a rotary autocannon 2.

UAC/5, not rotary, those are a lot newer tech.

But we all agree the design of that weapon is a bit off.

[SnakeTheFox]

Adridos, on 02 June 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:

UAC/5, not rotary, those are a lot newer tech.

But we all agree the design of that weapon is a bit off.

Why would an ultra autocannon be, uh, rotary though? I mean there's no mistaking it for a rotary weapon aesthetically, as I understand it (lore-wise) normal and ultra autocannons are single-barreled weapons of varying rates of fire while rotary guns are the eponymous "gatling" type weapons, with multiple barrels spinning to increase RoF.

Edit: And I'm aware of a few errant pieces of fluff art floating around depecting non-rotary ac's as being rotary, but I believe those are the exception not the rule.

Edited by SnakeTheFox, 02 June 2012 - 04:41 PM.

[LuisPa]

Like the bug: /sɪˈkeɪdə/ or /sɪˈkɑːdə/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicada

Edited by LuisPa, 02 June 2012 - 08:27 PM.

[Tungsten Cheek]

It's pronounced sih'-kuh-duh or another acceptable pronounciation is sih-kay'-duh. The "C" is always soft though.

[Adridos]

SnakeTheFox, on 02 June 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

Why would an ultra autocannon be, uh, rotary though?

They aren't rotating. They just have three barrels in a triangular composition.

[LtPoncho]

A mix of Auto Cannon and Med/Small Laser would compliment the speed of this platform, and deal with any heat issues while maintaining a steady rate of fire/DPS.

Edited by LtPoncho, 04 June 2012 - 07:30 PM.

[Randalf Yorgen]

one of my prefered mechs, although a Shadowhawk would be even sweeter

[Arrendis Culome]

How do you pronounce Cicada anyway?

sih-kay-dah.

( /sɪˈkeɪdə/ or /sɪˈkɑːdə/)

[Major Bill Curtis]

Mavek, on 02 June 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Just curious...will MW:O be using the 'armless' rules?

The Cicada in TT never had anything in its arms...so we used to shift the armor from the arms to other places and consider all rolled arm hits as misses.

Im less concerned about 'misses' than whether or not for the purpose of armor allocation, in this game, does this mech even have arms to waste armor on? Or maybe if it does, do players simply torso twist to take a few shots on the arms to save the armor on the torsos?

According to the canon record sheets, the Cicada does, in fact, have arms. You can even see them in every illustration and miniature of the 'mech: they're those little wing-like structures where the arms would be. They're just little damage absorbers --- very useful.

TL;DR: Cicada = not an armless 'mech

SnakeTheFox, on 02 June 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

Why would an ultra autocannon be, uh, rotary though? I mean there's no mistaking it for a rotary weapon aesthetically, as I understand it (lore-wise) normal and ultra autocannons are single-barreled weapons of varying rates of fire while rotary guns are the eponymous "gatling" type weapons, with multiple barrels spinning to increase RoF.

Edit: And I'm aware of a few errant pieces of fluff art floating around depecting non-rotary ac's as being rotary, but I believe those are the exception not the rule.

Because there are only 3 barrels and it's not spinning, that's how you know it's not a RAC The RAC is also not around in 3049 (not until 3062), nor is it announced in the official equipment list for MW:O, which has stuck to canon 100%.

It's likely they chose a multi-barrel design to show that the Ultra AC fires more quickly than a standard AC.

And the art depicting Ultras as multi-barrel isn't exactly errant: Kraken Cygnus Burrock Urbanmech IIC (in the TRO illustration but not the model - so too are the Canis and the Hunchback IIC (hard to see in this pic)) Corvis (just like the Cicada we have). These are canon illustrations and models, and each one depicts an Ultra AC as multi-barrel; plenty of others depict the Ultra as single-barrel, or at least with a jacket occluding any indication of multiple barrels.

TL;DR: the Cicada doesn't have a RAC in 3049, but having 3 barrels is perfectly fine for an Ultra AC.

Edited by Major Bill Curtis, 05 June 2012 - 10:00 AM.

[Adridos]

Randalf Yorgen, on 04 June 2012 - 07:44 PM, said:

...although a Shadowhawk would be even sweeter

Couldn't agree more.

[Aufklarer]

/sɪˈkeɪdə/ or /sɪˈkɑːdə/

[SnakeTheFox]

Major Bill Curtis, on 05 June 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

According to the canon record sheets, the Cicada does, in fact, have arms. You can even see them in every illustration and miniature of the 'mech: they're those little wing-like structures where the arms would be. They're just little damage absorbers --- very useful.

TL;DR: Cicada = not an armless 'mech



Because there are only 3 barrels and it's not spinning, that's how you know it's not a RAC The RAC is also not around in 3049 (not until 3062), nor is it announced in the official equipment list for MW:O, which has stuck to canon 100%.

It's likely they chose a multi-barrel design to show that the Ultra AC fires more quickly than a standard AC.

And the art depicting Ultras as multi-barrel isn't exactly errant: Kraken Cygnus Burrock Urbanmech IIC (in the TRO illustration but not the model - so too are the Canis and the Hunchback IIC (hard to see in this pic)) Corvis (just like the Cicada we have). These are canon illustrations and models, and each one depicts an Ultra AC as multi-barrel; plenty of others depict the Ultra as single-barrel, or at least with a jacket occluding any indication of multiple barrels.

TL;DR: the Cicada doesn't have a RAC in 3049, but having 3 barrels is perfectly fine for an Ultra AC.

I consider them "errant" because, in a proverbial ocean of canon BT art and models depicting mechs, the ones showing ultra weapons as rotary are in the minority to ones that show them as single barreled.

I'd also like to mention that there is no such thing, at least in current technology (which lore states ACs stem from), of a modern multi-barreled but non spinning/rotary weapon system, because in all honesty, from a purely technical standpoint, multiple barrels not linked to a rotary design wouldn't be a singular firearm as they surely would not share a central ammunition feed like a minigun would, and would need to be fed individually, and thus would merely be a series of seperate guns linked to a central trigger. This conflicts with lore, which states the "ultra" autocannons are merely a single weapon system with a higher rate of fire due to an upgraded loading mechanism. If that is in fact an UAC5, which I'm sure it is, it would imply an UAC5 is actually three AC5s that are linked to one trigger, which is in conflict with their descriptions.

I understand rotary weapons do not technically come into play for a few years, I'm just pointing this out more to demonstrate that I think most BattleTech art, including this Cicada redesign, is likely a case of a "lore writer" and "fluff artist" disconnect over what exactly their weapons actually are. The writers think they're fast firing autocannons, and some of the artists think they are multi-barrelled.

Edited by SnakeTheFox, 07 June 2012 - 12:56 AM.