I think a new set of optional parts that mimic separate features of the OP-I but at a cost maybe lower shell def for higher en output.
Actually I would have been okay with that. Maybe an 5 or 6-slot optional part that allows the use of back cannons.
And probably add another consequence on the optional part for the sake of balance, like reducing your overall EN supply by 20-30% (no, add more % for the sake of caterpillar users) or something like reducing overall accuracy on cannons in exchange for the benefit.
Like it would happen anyway.
well it could if the guy trying to crack the source code grim talked about gets a break through but that topics dead already ... aw XD
I had an idea on how to make back mounts useable on all leg types without having to resort to using option parts, while still maintaining a degree of balance and difference between leg types. I'm thinking along the lines of a lock time multiplier for different leg sets.
To illustrate my example, let's say the GL has a lock time of 60 frames (1 second).
If I were to balance it, the following leg types would have different multipliers (I'll round it off just get the point across, this is of course if it is implemented within LR physics).
Heavy Tanks = x.75
Hover Tanks = x1
Heavy Quad = x1.5
Heavy Biped = x2
Mid Quad = x2.25
...
Ultra Light Biped = x4
Light Hover = x4.25
The general rule of thumb is, the heavier the leg class, the better the lock speed of the back mount (Let's just say heavier legs offer greater stability as an aiming platform while moving).
So if you were in a Tank, the GL will just take 3/4 second to lock on to an opponent, while it would take 4 seconds to lock on using a light weight. The variables can differ with further testing, or at least give specific individual stats for each leg to further differentiate them from each other. This makes it harder for faster units to lock on to opponents, while giving tanks and other heavy units greater control over their firepower like they should. For example, a lightly armored leg set having lower multipliers, while another, heavier armored leg set with better overall stats getting higher multipliers. This rules out the use of back cannons for lights for use in close combat due to the longer lock time (They'll still be able to use them to snipe, its just a mater of holding the lock at the opponent as much as possible.) than a tank who may still be able to use high power back mounts at close range due to the faster lock time.
Well, this is one of a few balance changes I'll be making if ever I had the power to modify the game in my own way.
yeah factoring in the leg stability stats is nice and I personally want the FCS to do more maybe like uuuh ... something XD
And as often talked about Rick and I: AC Stability should be proportionate to weight, except for hovers and hover thanks. -_-
a great idea is what I just had!i think there should be a lightweight tank (Thats an oxymoron).They have super fast light weight bipeds.Well I think they shouldve had a tank with the weight and speed of a middleweight biped,but with a little more leg capacity (around 7000).This wouldve ruled for tank fans.
but that would make it IMBA unless its def and stability ratings are trash well then its not IMBA but still a fast tank that is not a charger would be rather powerful >_<
Yeah that does seem a bit imba. IMO, the LHT and BOAR fill in the role of light tank well enough.
As both a thread revival attempt, and the complaint of a fanboy, I wanted to make this post.
Firstly, ever noticed how in ALL the opening movies the action of the AC's looks fluent and alive, rather than moving stiffly like some toy robot with guns? Why does From continue to taunt us with glorious opening scenes, then let us down with run of the mill play? For once id like to see an AC game operate like it SHOULD and COULD if from weren't time wasting slugs with the work ethic of an overweight house cat. Let me give you an example; Ya' know the opening to LR where the AC with the python uses the LB4 to knock the quad through a wall? This implied that a knock-back and perhaps even an environmental destruction mechanic were both in the game. Unfortunately, the first of the two was nowhere to be found, and the second was poorly done in the form of pre-determined destructible bunkers of no significance, if I wanted to blow up a tent, I'd prowl yellowstone park with hand-grenades. Being able to blow up actual buildings (As proudly displayed in nearly ALL scenes of these games) would've made a good game great.
Another expectation From didn't fulfill for me is multiplayer, from what I hear, the online chugs a bit, and from experience, the AI opponents in multiplayer are either to weak or too godly to be of any real competitive value. If AC had used a more intuitive team bases mechanic with better environments (LARGER for one thing, like the big city battlefields seen in some of the movies) and more players per map then this game would be my god. The big multiplayer is even more possible with the next gen consoles as games like Halo and Gears of War have taught us.
Multiplayer aside, there is a BIGGER complaint afoot. The lack of GOOD weapons. You'd think a game that centers around customization would feature useful items to be put together. However, From falls at the first hurtle with two broken legs in this one, because I have every part in LR and only use about 1/10th or LESS of them! How many of these games has From made so far? The answer is alot, so you'd think they would've learned by now. Besides the lack of good parts, some parts are TOO good. I despise games where one thing is god-hand and everything else is overshadowed due to it. This makes the game go bland quickly.
Whats that you say? I complain too much? Well F*** you buddy! I wouldnt be so ticked if From wasen't so terrible at improving on their product. ANOTHER thing I find wrong with these games is the dissuse of alot of the leg parts and even entire leg types. The legs I use are bipeds and quads. This is it. Ive tried tanks and lights and RJs but they all seem stupid when I could make an uber biped and kill everything in the game with 7000 AP to spare. Tanks WOULD be killer if they wouldn't be destroyed by any chump with a blade.
As for cores, 89E and GEA or whatever are the only good EO Ive found in LR, and overboost suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuccckks
Normal cores provide more benafit than any of the special ones.
Also, Id like to take time to curse From for raising my hopes with a hand-railgun, the python was disappointingly bad. Ill stick with SHADE and KRSW.
Seems like a lot of the things you wanted for LR did get incorporated into AC4.
(Just talking from the perspective of AC:LR)
Movement
Yeah, ZOE showed that you can still make sexy mecha on the PS2. But given the differing natures of ZOE and AC, I think it's fair enough.
As for knock-back, it is indeed present in the game in the form of stun. It's not as dramatic as in the FMVs but it does play a big enough part in the game without detracting from the action. Imagine if ACs could in fact fall over in-game. Will there be moments when you'll simply have to wait for the getting-up animation to kick in while your enemy continues to pummel you? I don't think a game that removes control from you in the middle of competitive action is very fun.
Maps
In AC2, if I remember correctly, there was a map where you could destroy buildings. SL also introduced Military District which had destructible structures. I don't think they could have done so much better given the limitations of the PS2. But yes, I do wish that they included more maps like Military District.
Multiplayer
Yep, PS2 ACs are definitely lacking in that department. They really only had 1on1 in mind. I can't speak for the next-gen ACs.
Parts
To be fair to FROM, LR's probably one of the most balanced AC games they've ever done. It's the only AC game I've played where I actually consider every leg type (except RJs) to be tournament-viable.
Yes, the EO department is somewhat lacking. But OB doesn't suck as much as I initially thought. /UL, UL2, ATLAS, and EOS are all very good cores. EOS is probably even top-tier.
And yes, Python completely sucks balls.
Bring back the almost perfect game play of the AC PSX series. I believe that sort of game play made AC unique compared to other mecha based games. PS3 gameplay is too extreme IMO and PS2 is too bland.
The AMS on MTs (or at least what I thought they should be) don't work. This is the most apparent on the high-end MTs in AC3 and the Crest CR-MT85 series from NX to LR, as they both have a cannon like projection prutruding from their core yet they never intercept any missiles.
Their slug guns don't even fire slugs