

The Timber Wolf In Mwo... Easy Kill?
#1
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:42 AM
Based on the current system where we mount objects on specific parts of the chassis and how the XL engines spill into side torsos, it seems like the Timber Wolf would be something really easy to destroy.
Why?
Because the Timber Wolf's iconic silhouette comes from its Catapult and Marauder design mix, it possesses both a large pair of missile rack boxes on the shoulders and a pair of arms. Following the current mounting system, it would seem plausible to believe that the missile racks would be by default the Left and Right Torsos. The Timber Wolf, canonically, is powered by a XL375. According to Sarna, clan versions of XL engines take up an extra two thirds of space, but likewise intrude into the side torsos.
Thus, the clan XL engine should apparently take 10 critical slots (6x 1.66 = 9.96 ≈ 10), likely resulting in 2 critical slots used by the engine in the side torsos.
By now you might have seen where this is going - the Timber Wolf mounts a XL engine, which means it will go belly up as soon as a side-torso is destroyed, but if the big missile racks are placed as side torsos, that makes them an easy target to quickly destroy the engine of a Timber Wolf. An easy solution would be to make the missiles the arms of the Wolf like a Catapult, but then that would intrude on the actual arms.
So this of course poses the question of how can the Timber Wolf be made into something that makes sense without changing the current system? Or will PGI simply do what some people expect and leave one of the most iconic Battlemechs in existence out of the game?
#2
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:45 AM
As a Mad Dog pilot (Vulture to the freebirth toads amongst you) I am going to have a honking great NOSE of a CT that is begging to be shot from every angle. I intend to work around this weakness. Timber Wolf pilots will, likewise, have to learn to work around their weakness.
#3
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:51 AM
#4
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:52 AM
It would be a little strange if one of the most iconic and recognisable mechs in the whole franchise could be killed so easily...
#edit# beaten to it,
Edited by Nathan Xain, 03 December 2012 - 04:52 AM.
#5
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:52 AM
The clan XL engines take 2 crits per side torso; they still require 3 crits to be destroyed. Losing one side troso results in 2 crits dealt to the engine, and the engine will continue to function at reduced capacity
Edited by Redshift2k5, 03 December 2012 - 04:54 AM.
#6
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:53 AM
(Besides, Clan XL engines still need three critical hits to destroy, so one would have to take out both side-torsos to take down a Mad Cat in that manner...)
#7
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:53 AM
2. 3 engine criticals kill a mech
Thus the Timberwolf can survive a destroyed side torso.
There are two ways to go about the large missile pods:
- They can be reduced in size and streamlined with the rest of the torso.
- Treated as separate hit locations as it was in MW4
- Left as is for the obvious disadvantage that it brings
I'm in favour of the first option even if it slightly alters the iconic hunched look.
#8
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:54 AM
I'll highlight them here:
Engines are destroyed when they take 3 Critical Hits. This is true for all Engines. Inner Sphere XL Engines take up 3 Crits in each side torso, meaning side torso destruction inflicts 3 Crits to the Engine, destroying the 'mech. Clan XL Engines take up 2 Crits in the side torso, meaning destruction of a side torso will notdestroy the 'mech, it will "only" significantly reduce its maximum speed and also give it a stacking heat penalty.
At least, that's TT implementation.
#9
Posted 03 December 2012 - 04:56 AM
Edited by Nathan Xain, 03 December 2012 - 04:57 AM.
#10
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:00 AM
#11
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:02 AM
In this regard the Timberwolf should have similar side torso to a catapult.
#12
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:02 AM
Catapult sized center torso *The biggest you can bloody well get on a heavy*
With side torso hit boxes that would make a cataphract look small.
Yea, us catapult users will enjoy turning the Timberwolf into slag instantly.
Bluescuba, on 03 December 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:
In this regard the Timberwolf should have similar side torso to a catapult.
The problem with this idea is that doing that means you wont have enough crit slots to actually build any of its stock variants.
#13
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:06 AM
Sifright, on 03 December 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:
Not sure this is true... I would imagine that it would be totally upto pgi as to how many critical slots each location is given. So the arms of the timberwolf could easily have enough slots for say 1 x lrm20 and 1 x ppc or 1 x erll
#14
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:07 AM
2. The Timberwolf in height e.t.c. should actually be smaller than a Cat, allowing it more dodging.
3. The cockpit will likely be smaller than a catapults as well.
If they don't make it a decent mech, they would be kicking themselves in the face, hard!

#15
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:08 AM
Nathan Xain, on 03 December 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:
Lightfoot, on 03 December 2012 - 05:00 AM, said:
Bluescuba, on 03 December 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:
In this regard the Timberwolf should have similar side torso to a catapult.
Nope - the missile racks are part of the side-torsos; it can be seen on the BT record sheet (viewable here).

#16
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:09 AM
#17
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:09 AM
#18
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:11 AM
#19
Posted 03 December 2012 - 05:12 AM
GODzillaGSPB, on 03 December 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:
Balance rammifications.
If they add more parts, that means that the 'mech would either have more armour than other 'mechs of its weight (not fair) or have to split its armour between more locations (also not fair).
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users