67 replies to this topic

[Flyby215]

Mr 144, on 09 December 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

But it's not the speed...it's a full 20 degrees less articulation than any other mech, regardless of weight class. My initial analysis (which Lefty posted in the OP) lists the HBK and Catapult as the extreme examples, but never intended to be a baseline goal. Those two chassis' are simply the oddities, so were listed seperately. All other mechs fall into a very specific total horizontal targeting range of 130 degrees total....all of them.

What do you think the 'phract brings to the table to warrant it's 110 degree limitation that no other mech, of any class, has? I'm just not seeing a counter argument here?

Mr 144

My argument is that we should not be changing the stats of mechs just because it has an unusual drawback or that pilots find their usual strategy doesn't suit the mech.

Let's try a different angle here (pun not intended).

According to sarna.net, the Cataphract was adapted from parts of the Marauder, Shadowhawk, and Pheonix Hawk; only one of which has the 'chicken leg' design; the Marauder. I would assume that under their desperation, borrowing the leg/torso mounting from the Marauder would be easier than turning the other mechs around and running backward.

From what I can see in Mechwarrior 2 and 4, the Marauder is limited to a 90 degree torso twist. Now to clarify; when you state "110 degree limitation" you are referring to, say, I'm facing north on a compass, the furthest you can turn your torso left is 250 and right 110 (90 degrees either way + 20 from the skill boost).

90 degrees in the other games seemed pretty standard, with the 20+ on the skill. Now if 90 degrees is pretty standard, why is it that all the mechs currently in game have higher twists? Hmm...

Also mentioned on sarna.net is that the Cataphract was intended to stand toe-to-toe with an assault mech; in such a scenario I don't envision targeting convergence much of an issue when you're targeting a big, slow moving target like an assault mech.

But the Cataphract is a full 20 degrees less than everything else? Maybe future mech releases will follow the new trend. Or perhaps the Cataphract is intended to be this way for reasons not explained.

If this is truly a bug or error on the development side, then very well, it must be addressed. Otherwise, I'd rather see how pilots adapt rather than tinkering with the mech to suit the pilots.

[Super Mono]

Flyby215, on 09 December 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

My argument is that we should not be changing the stats of mechs just because it has an unusual drawback or that pilots find their usual strategy doesn't suit the mech.

They want to change it because PGI broke the cataphract's arms to fix a clipping screwup caused by the modelers. Are you actually paying attention to what people are writing in this thread?

[Mr 144]

Flyby215, on 09 December 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

snip....

You're misunderstanding. The degree numbers I'm posting have nothing to do with 'skill boosts'. They are the base stats.

The 'phract has a total of 90 degrees torso twist which is a default standard on all mechs with lower arm actuators (real 'arms'). The Hunchback is the sole exception to this at 120 degree torso twist.

ALL mech's with lower arm acuators (real 'arms') have 40 degrees of horizontal arm movement. I thought there was one with only 36, but I was wrong...ALL have precicely 40 degrees except the phract.

So base standard for mech's with 'real arms' is 90 torso reticule and 40 degrees more of arm reticule movement. This is where the 130 degree targeting ability comes from, although anything past 90 is only arm based (or missle-lock based) on this style mech. This is important, as even in a fire-support role, a 2x using LRMs (yes, I've done this, quite the hoot ) has worse missle-lock targeting than any mech in the game, not to mention less of a ballistic turret range (in the case of the 4x).

Due to a clipping issue with the graphical model (with potential hitbox detection issues I presume) the devs reduced the arm movement of the phract to 20 degrees. It was not like this upon release. At release it was 90+40 like every other base mech. The 'nerf' was purely for technical reasons, not game balance. In other words...a quick band-aid rather than re-model the mech.

For comparison purposes, mechs that do not have lower arm actuators (no side-to-side arm movement) have at worst (Cicada) 120 degrees of torso twist. The trade off here is full firepower at maximum twist angles and zero convergence issues. This is why the catapult is mentioned so frequently, as it has all of these traits in addition to more total twist at 140 degrees. The only mech that can at least partially out-twist the catapult is the hunchback, but with only arm based convergence susceptible arm reticule targeting.

This means, that every single mech there is can out twist the 'phract, either with full firepower torso 120+ or arm only 130+. It's only unique trait is that it's gimped for technical graphical reasons.

The solution proposed, adding 15 degrees of torso twist, would enable a balancing fix that does not require re-modeling of the mech. Doing so, does not 'make it better' than other mechs. In fact it still would technically be 5 degrees shy of 'normal' mech capabilities. It's trade-off for this, is 15 degrees more torso twist than average fully 'arm'd mechs (still less than the no-arm'd mechs), but reduced ability to target lights and such...hence maintaining the toe-to-toe with an assault 'bulldog' type theme.

From a Balancing standpoint, with 105+20, any no-arm'd mech can match, or out-circle a phract, AND the 'phract suffers from convergence, and only arm-based targeting while doing so. A 'standard' mech can still out-circle a 'phract with it's arms, but the 'phract will be able to use his torso reticule in a greater range. Versus fast mechs and lights, the phracts limited 20 degree arm movement still puts it at a severe disadvantage, even compared to a fatlas.

And FYI, I like your flavor comments on frankenmech construction, but historically in mechwarrior games, bird legs allow more torso twist. Flavor is a good point, which kind of fits with the proposed fix....i.e...they just couldn't get the maximum 120 degrees out of the construction, and had to limit the arm movement due to a mis-matched torso. In MekTek 4, there are numbers of precedents with mechs with 105 degree twist. Heck, the Sunder (an assault no-less) has 120 deg torso plus full 40 deg arm just like the hunchie.

The problem isn't playstyle, it's the simple fact that every single mech can out-twist the phract by a significant margin. There are inherent strengths and weaknesses in all the other chassis' in respect to targeting to make a choice on limited articulation. Currently, the 'phract has no trade-off and is sub-par in all targeting aspects.

Mr 144

Edited by Mr 144, 09 December 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[Flyby215]

Mr 144, on 09 December 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

You're misunderstanding. ...

...

Mr 144

Agreed, and well explained. Okay, I concede, the Cataphract should get a little extra torso twist for balancing purposes.

To play devil's advocate, what is 20 degrees anyway? The pilot skills allow for an additional 20% on a mech anyway (which would be roughly 20 degrees I assume) creating a gap between those who have, and those who do not have (including all trial mechs). Does that 20% make a significant difference? Is it fair that trial mech pilots must survive with less torso twist? They must learn to adapt. Hmmm... Cataphract pilots too surely can adapt to the small quirk originating from a "bug" in the design of the frankenmech?

[Mr 144]

My adaptation is extreme alphas. If I can only reliably hit head on...I'm gonna make it count

Mr 144

[Corvus Antaka]

Indk, on 09 December 2012 - 01:02 PM, said:

Its a fire support mech not a brawler.

You're literally wanting to use it the wrong way. Sorry man, that mech isn't for you. It doesn't need more torso twist or arm movement its awesome as is.

And yes, i use it. In fact, I've used it on 75% of the games I've played since it came out.

I too greatly enjoy my catapult. however, I have never understood why the pult has such a huge torso twist range, and most certainly not now vs the brawler cataphract. the twists should be reversed, the catapult is the one that doesnt need the huge twist since it is the intended fire support mech.

As I type this I do so knowing that this will hurt me in my catapult, because as of now I can run forward while firing behind me "almost" and with LRMS this is very useful.

However, it also only further makes the catapult OP.

we still have the K2 PPC mech running around as a mockup of hilarity AC20 / gausspult/ A1 SSRM boats, and for no logical reason - and very much to the detriment of game balance - the torso alignment and snap firing of dual gauss is the best platform for gauss headshots, and the tiny sidetorsos and ability to completely strip the arms of armour while stufifng them full of endo steel criticals only makes the entire situation that much more laughable.

at the same time, arm twist, a huge and important gameplay mechanism in every past mechwarrior game has been completely dropped, and for whatever reason PGI still has not been able to make freelook let us swing mechs with lower arm actuators to fire to their left/right, which again just gimps mechs like the cataphract.

Edited by Colonel Pada Vinson, 09 December 2012 - 10:16 PM.

[Peiper]

The number one reason I was excited about the Cataphract was the paired arm weapons, for the same reason I appreciate the Atlas RS. The Cataphract really has torso twist/arm rotation issues. I don't even use the chest mounted autocannon, but I have to worry about shooting the barrel of the non-existent weapon off? This bugs me to no end.

[Onyx Rain]

I don't know...

This actually makes the arm/torso ballistic combo much better IMO......The convergence snaps together pretty fast, making both hit the target in the same spot or close....so I generally like it/perfer it over mech that keep the convergence further apart longer.

I really don't like trying to aim duel/quad ballistics with the 4x because that little circle jumps around the X so much even when you hold it tight...that It is hard to see exactly where it is and put the shot exactly where you want it when it is close to the X....My eyes are used to focusing on the X, or having the 0 so far away it doesn't interfere with the X.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 10 December 2012 - 08:02 AM.