71 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Alright, this is possibly the last update before the new years and I'm unsure whether or not I'd want to grind the Thunderbolt (the chassis is curious, but potentially underwhelming) so I cannot guarantee much there. I have not actually finished grinding the Spider (specifically the 5V) and I'll probably finish it begrudgingly at some point. So, I just want to get this stuff off my chest before I continue...


Spider (SDR):
Best variant: 5D
Worst variant: 5V
Interesting variant: None
Best feature: Has the only ECM+JJ capable variant
Worst feature: Very few options for customization
Major Changes: Light mech buffs, ECM "changes", hitbox "revision", MG damage adjustments, JJ shake

I'll start from the best to worst, because I will explain and detail various problems with PGI/Paul's balancing with regards to this chassis and how woefully this chassis is complained about at both extremes, neither which are entirely correct and are more hyperbolic than my sarcasm and my cynicism.

The 5D is obviously the mech of choice, because of the nature of ECM. ECM itself is problematic, but it doesn't make "legitimate" weapons like lasers, PPCs, ACs, etc. not operate, so it's more of a problem of the current state of hit registration.. which arguably is more exacerbating the problem on Spiders (and not as much on other lights).

The Spider's profile is not bad, considering some of the existing issues other lights have... Jenner has its large CT hitbox, Raven has the larger than model leg hitbox, and the Commando has large arms.. and the Lolcust is just bad. So, comparatively speaking, the Spider has it good.

Spider excels at mobility... it is something that can't be said for too many mechs. JJs are not optional IMO, they are mandatory because the derived hardpoints are few and far in between. I've seen in my slight mech crush of the Commando that the Spider is less of a brawler than the Commando, and I still feel this is true after experimenting with them.

With that said, some people have gone the lengths to go with a PPC+laser combo, but there aren't many variations or options when you look at the hardpoints. The 5D's best quality is to be able to TAG other targets in a much more annoying fashion with ECM and JJs... where you could pretty much troll with the best of them with a missile boat teammate. There are only so few roles that the 5D can do, and it only gets worse from here.

The 5K has gone on an interesting journey. MGs were the most underpowered thing in MWO for a long time, and it may still be the case now. Before the MG nerf, the peak of the MG's power was mainly good for shredding internal armor and although now it is far less effective, the purpose of the 5K is to be a very annoying and aggressive troll... scaring the living daylights of every mech that is in critical. This mech is primarily most effective at short range, and although some people are willing to try something different like put in an AC2 or something bigger, the mech's speed will be compromised... but the mech's small frame should not harm it from long distance. If played correctly, you could gain a better K-D ratio on the 5K over the 5D, although it is expected that the 5D lives longer because it can snipe w/o much retaliation due to ECM. I guess that's better than staying the DOA mech that it initially was...

WARNING: What you will read at this point is going to a rant/slam about mech balance and related stuff. Please understand that I know mech balance is delicate, but in this case this wasn't even a thought or consideration made here to this chassis and it is not an understatement that sometimes the developers don't play their game well enough to understand the nuances of weapons and chassis. If Paul even reads this, that would be a shocker, but I don't expect or anticipate any changes made due to my rant. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!

The Spider-5V... I don't have any nice words to say about it. It simply sucks. AFAIK this is the earliest mech that "traded" hardpoints for more JJs (see Quickdraw-4G as another prime example). There have been various mechs that trade hardpoints for other stuff (like the Atlas-K for a 2nd AMS, Stalker-4N for no apparent reason, the Pretty Baby, the initial version Cicada-2A's # of module slots and the X5, and more) and you would think it could be a good idea except for the obvious problem.... 2 HARDPOINTS IN THE CT IS EXTRAORDINARILY LIMITING.

There is very little design options you could go with on this model. Some have even tried the route of going with a heavy standard engine (250 or more) to make the most of "zombie mode" like the Centurions... but the Centurions had more CT armor AND had a higher firing location (I'm not sure if its entirely accurate, but Centurions are tall, the Spider is not).

The thing is... having 4 (max) module slots does not solve its deficiencies... and it makes consumables an expensive proposition (outside of the UAV, which generally pays itself when you make the most of it). It doesn't make this mech magically better no matter how you spin it.

If you wanted to snipe with it, it's actually suboptimal. The 5D has ECM to make it harder for the enemy to spot you. The 5K at least allows you to brawl with the MGs when you are being challenged... but the 5V, you don't have weapons that fire frequently and in bunches. Medium Pulse Lasers would normally fit the bill, but the range on it makes it a terrible proposition... and it only gets worse with Small Pulse Lasers.

The thing about Jump Sniping with Lasers is that although you are given many JJs, you don't have the vertical torso twist to shoot further down as you would like. This combined with how JJ shake operates (you want to fire when the JJs are not in use), you need a lot more control over your firing ability and as currently constituted it isn't good enough.

My initial reaction and solution to this is to add another energy hardpoint. I'd rather have it on one of the arms (it doesn't matter which) to be comparable to the Spider-5D, minus the ECM. That way, this mech can be salvageable. If not, putting it on the head would not be too bad. Still, increasing the vertical torso twist is optimal and isn't necessary if the arm energy hardpoint is added.

As a result of my understanding, I believe that the 5K needs a buff, either directly or indirectly. MGs need a buff because of its annoying spread since not all the bullets are focused at the point you are hitting at. MGs work exactly like lasers (despite the graphics) but the Cone of Fire effect was added for no logical reason. If MGs are not going to be adjusted anytime soon, ADD one more energy hardpoint... to the CT of the 5K. 2 med lasers should be "good enough" for a light mech to punch holes in enemies (1 LL isn't always optimal for tonnage considerations) for the 4 MGs to make the most of it.

IDEALLY, these changes need to be made before it's graphical dynamic mech update... whenever that happens to be.

I think it's irresponsible to release a variant (5V) that is arguably worse if not THE worst compared to the Lolcust, and that's saying a lot. Spiders are supposed to have a role, but have "less than" the usual fare for light mechs. Killing a Spider-5V is not something to write home about, and it'll put veterans and newbies out of their misery pretty quickly. It's just a bad design and there's nothing positive to say about them. You are better off ignoring them unless they make it easy for you to nail them.

In any case, that's it for this year (I'd hope and I'd like to think so). Perhaps I'll get 200 more kills til the 7000th kill soon in a new mech... I'm not even sure if CW is worth waiting for... /sigh

[Deathlike]

I would've gotten around to posting earlier, but other stuff is occupying my time so I can't say that I've been playing as much as I normally would (nothing new describes a lot sometimes).

So, onto the Tbolts.


Thunderbolt (TDR):
Best variant: 9SE
Worst variant: 5S (Phoenix)
Interesting variant: 5SS
Best feature: Fair alternative to the 65 tonners (in the current game), and class tree kinda like the Cataphract
Worst feature: Side torso oriented to one side, easy to cripple like the Hunchback
Major Changes: None yet (PP pack, official release for all in Dec 2013)

The mech itself isn't too shabby.. it's sturdy enough to take damage as it doesn't have the Jager's side torso problems or the Catapult's large CT "nose". However, it suffers the kinds of problems that a Hunchback would. Taking down the side of the mech that the missile rack would normally appear, you cripple the most of the firepower on the mech. This is not a good thing at all. It's hard to determine whether you want to go XL or Standard... it seems to make some better sense going standard as you want to use one side of the torso for sacrifice while the other lives. Also, using torso twist to using the large arms as shields can help in the matter. Still, the mech requires a bit of skill and isn't really a choice in higher level play due to its inherent deficiencies.

The cockpit placement is "unique" like the Thor/Summoner, so it may be difficult for people to "get acquainted" with their placement relative to their vision.

The 9SE reminds me a lot of the Cataphract-3D in the sense that JJs is the only thing that sets it apart from the other variants. Unfortunately that's about it. The torso weapons are reasonably high, but I think the Cataphract has it better relative to its cockpit vision. Also, it's kinda hard to take advantage of the missile slots though... because adding them will increase the side torso profile... the missile racks appear and disappear depending whether you have missiles, which kinda define the mech... in general weakness. Still, it is the most productive variant as far as I can tell.

The 5SS is like a slightly better "poor mans" version of the Awesome-8Q. In fact, you might thing it hardcore enough to try it out... the results can be better than the 8Q itself if you can manage the heat. The only weirdness is that most builds should really focus on trying to "even out" the weapons, so that you want to be relatively effective on both sides of the mech... trying to minimize convergence problems (because, it's hard to avoid this problem). I lean towards the right side as the "stronger" side as the left side's missile rack is virtually worthless... which if you put PPCs on the left side, and medium lasers everywhere else... it can be your "cheap" version of the Awesome with a greater skill cap. It's not as bad as it sounds, but of course, this mech is not for everyone.

The 5S is intriguing, but it is the only variant that can be crippled faster than the others. The missile rack is on the other side so all your direct fire weapons (energy+ballistics) are on one side. Since it doesn't have JJs like the 9SE, it is literally a one trick pony. The Hunchback comparison is pretty much spot on when you realize that the majority of the serious weapons are on the left side. If anything, the 5SS is the right-side Hunchy while the 5S and 9SE are lefty Hunchies. You can still be semi-effective in the 5S, but let's be honest... it's not really in a good place.

IMO, to improve the mech, it will need a torso twist increase, probably to 105-110 (base) torso twisting with a slight increase on the other end (from 20 to 25) when it comes to the torso pitch. Right now it simply suffers from "easy access" weakness where using a standard engine seems to make the most sense... the side torsos are the best points to attack this mech. It needs a torso twist compensation to address this problem... otherwise it stands to be just another mech.

I'm unsure when the next post will occur, but it won't be soon. I'll consider other mechs as I will just collect more C-bills for that day...

[Deathlike]

I will be posting about the Firestarters very soon, but I was fortunate enough to take advantage of Double XP weekend to breeze through the Dragons... which is the point of this entry.

A little background:

Dragons was the 2nd Heavy mech released in this game, so it's one of the mechs in the aging old PC Gamer camo list (and the last one on the first 8 MWO mechs that I wanted to master).

This particular mech has been like some sort of underdog... kinda like how I feel about Quickdraws. Some people swear by them, and I kinda understand. On the other hand, it is one of the harder mechs to master... mostly because its options are kinda minimal and its surviveability is mostly on par with a medium mech (which, I guess it's the 60 tonner curse or something).

So, without further adieu...

Dragon (DRG):
Best variant: Flame, 1C
Worst variant: 5N (includes the Trial Champion Mech)
Interesting variant: Flame
Best feature: Jack of all trades. Fast and agile.
Worst feature: Master of none. Easy to kill due to poor battlefield awareness and hitboxes.
Major Changes: Hitbox changes... and not in a good way.

The viability of this mech using XL engines is high... but the most recent hitbox change for them has changed their status a bit... and not exactly for the better. The Dragon's nose is one of the most visible and easily identifiable aspect for this mech... so to take it "on the nose" is not a good thing. Kinda like an old saying... "Dragons must not be seen, but heard." The quickness and mobility of the mech is nice, but it's not that much different than the Quickdraw. If anything, the Quickdraw has a decisive advantage over the Dragon... due to jump jets (as of this post/writing). Dragons have to rely on some form of ballistic to be effective and despite the overheating nature of the Quickdraw, the Dragon can't hide its large nose in combat.

I had the most success in the 1C... and the hardpoints obviously favor that completely. I hate to admit that I had to comply with the meta in order to succeed.. so there was always a variation of 2 PPC + AC5 to compete, and for the most part it worked out. In the case of the 1C, it was simply two med lasers for backup.

The thing about the side torso hardpoint is that it is high mounted... like the Stalker, this is most beneficial and allows you to take less damage, and allows you to sacrifice the arm as necessary.

Speaking of the arms.... they are really large. Putting those arms near any arty/airstrike is literally asking for the arm to be blown off or take massive damage. That isn't a good trait, considering the bulk of the offense is in the arms. The missile CT that is common in the builds are... not that useful in general. The mini-exception is the 1N.

The 1N really tempts you to just stuff it with Streaks or SRMs and you kinda build around that. The only "discrepancy" is how you don't get the properly pair the energy hardpoints... reducing convergence a bit. It's kinda nice.

I don't know what I can say about the 5N that is redeeming. The Champion build suffers greatly from the Gauss Rifle change... but moreso that large lasers tend to require your focus onto the mech a bit. Now, you don't literally have the stare at the mech due to being on the arms... and arm lasers have always been solid (because, you need flexibility as much as you can), but for a hit and run mech, having your torso exposed for at least 1 second is technically a second too long. Some people would consider going full dakka on this, since this is the Dakka Dragon... but remember how big the arm is? Going full dakka on the arm can be cool because of the arm articulation, but on the other hand, you can lose that firepower quicker than the Shadowhawk-2H. I've seen MGs on some builds, and for the most part... MGs require full blast or they aren't effective.. and that brings me to another point...

If you have a large torso, and the hitbox change makes the side torsos more hittable (which is bad for an XL engine) AND the arms is where the bulk of the firepower is at... then wouldn't you think this mech is not durable? If you said yes, well, you're right. However, knowing that you still have speed on your side, you can try to minimize your exposure to your opponents. Like the Quickdraw... the Dragon actually is NOT a newbie-friendly mech. Far from it. It is a mistake by people to think it is... because it takes a completely particular mentality to drive it well. I didn't have much problems driving it as much as surviving in it. It takes a lot of understanding of this game to survive the blows and distributing the damage as evenly as you can...

As for the heroes...

The Fang is essentially an "optimized" version of the all the basic variants. The hardpoints are nothing special, but the problem actually happens to be that it's technically inferior to the Flame. It's value compared to the Flame should be lowered a bit, which makes it a lame competitor. If the Flame didn't exist, the Fang would be more popular... but that may never happen unless some work is redone.

The Flame has been known to be popular... although I'm not sure of the extent of its popularity (it's not better than the Ilya), but it's always been that way since its release. It's essentially an ideal 1C, with the energy hardpoints on the arms (which is not a bad thing) and the ballistic on the shoulder, which is its defining feature. The dakka mess you could have with that is good, but remember... it's still a Dragon.

A "proper method" of rebalancing the Fang (and another basic variant) to become more useful is to move one of the ballistic hardpoints from the arm to the side torso... kinda like the Flame. That would immediately improve the Fang's status (and ideally the 5N would receive that benefit). There is no proper ability to fit a pair of UAC5s (AC5s are the only option) so it'll improve the Dragon's standing in the game, although it won't really help its durability.. but it'll go a long way of making it a better mech, despite a reduction in convergence.

So.. the Dragon is a true "hard mode" for an "overweight medium".

Speaking of Mediums... only this weekend (of 2/21/14), the Centurion-A champion is being given away for free. Now, I have gotten around to do some testing with it, particularly with SRMs and have been very disappointed... three things come to mind.

1) The most recent Cent hitbox change has caused it to be cored much more easily. I'm not sure if I can quite recommend it the same way I did before... because that was where most of its durability came from. Now, it's "just another medium", and that's sad.

2) SRM hit detection is weird. The damage is bad, but there's something in the code that causes damage to go offcourse when the launch point is the same when group firing them. I don't know why that is. Chain fire seems to work better, but it makes for some difficult damage dealing at times. I would think the Kintaro or Stalker benefits from this since their missile hardpoints are all over the place...

3) BAP vs ECM change has some effect on the mech. I know people will go use Streaks on them, and that's a natural reaction to SRMs being bad... but using BAP with SRMs (preferably ASRMs) at 150m will allow you to crush the D-DCs with their ECM (well, if there's only that ECM in the area...) It is something worth thinking about, but it won't be that great vs light mechs with ECM (unless they overheat and shutdown).

Until then... more Trollstarters Firestarters please!

Edited by Deathlike, 21 February 2014 - 06:22 PM.

[Aluminumfoiled]

Yes. I don't go near a cap point in a Dragon. The arty smoke alone make the arms fall off I think. Super soft arms in a strike.

[Deathlike]

MicroVent, on 21 February 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

Yes. I don't go near a cap point in a Dragon. The arty smoke alone make the arms fall off I think. Super soft arms in a strike.

It might be that the arms are rather low to the ground... which is part of the problem.

Anyways, apparently the Firestarter is my 20th mech (of 28 mechs currently). So.. /throws random party. YAAAAAAAYYYY!

It is a rare moment in MWO's history where a light mech was actually entertained as a good thing. The Locust for that matter was the most depressing day for light mechs, as trolling them in a Commando was thoroughly enjoyable (maybe I should have went with the Kintaro)? Regardless, anything that piques my curiosity of what a Commando be like with JJs? Look no further. Was it any good? As you'll read further, the answer is yes, and yet no.

Firestarter (FS9):
Best variant: A
Worst variant: Is there a bad one? Perhaps the H.
Interesting variant: Ember
Best feature: Only 35 tonner that has arm articulation.
Worst feature: Large arms are easy to shoot off. Also, torso weapons have the worst range going up and down.
Major Changes: Just released this month (2/18/14) - or a week ago, if you are considering the date of this post.

This mech was apparently the only thing that kept me interested for a bit, following the short-notice double XP weekend (well, it was coming at some point). Seeing the first mech in the series, Ember was the hero mech showing lots of potential in the chassis. It was the scourge that the Spider-5K wished it could be, but wasn't. It was the chassis that was the end all or be all of the Jenner's reign?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!111! Far from it.

First thing I've noticed was some of the specs of the mech. It was actually superior to the Commando in torso twisting left and right... which allows the lasers to be more effective. On the other hand, it really does suffer from the lowest up and down torso movement in the game... which the Atlas seems to have a slightly better advantage (not by much though). So, what you find is that it suffers in the same way the Spider-5V suffers from its torso lasers (except the 5V needs it WAAAAAAY more than the Firestarter). It's very hard to JJ and shoot with these unless you have distance from the target unlike many things in the game where being above the target is important, the Firestarter has that behavior in reverse. You want the enemy to be above you... otherwise, you simply cannot be as effective.

Despite the major flaw that I've explained, the arms of the Firestarter are large, as I had expected. When you compare it to the Jenner's smallish arm or the Raven's tiny arm, the Firestarter's arms in some ways are a liability when you expect offensive output from them. Since torso mounted weaponry is a lot safer, despite the limitations, it makes sense to use one side as the shield arm, and the other as the offensive. Fortunately most Firestarter variants tend to not be biased to one side, allowing you to pick your side of choice.

The A was my first choice, as that allowed me a reasonable 4 med torso section where most of my firepower would come from. Although nothing ever good comes from staring down a mech with the torso, remember that the Jenner and Raven can still fire from their arms up or down... so in a sense, they are still superior. Still, it's difficult to disable the A's weaponry, and that's rather important. The arms still have utility as carrying a smaller portion of the payload is optimal... as well as using it when you do need to reach your target when your torso weapons cannot.

The S was my second choice... since there was one more energy torso hardpoint than the rest. This variant is specifically referred to as the dual AMS variant. All I can say is... I tried running it with dual AMS, but ultimately did not feel any significant benefit to it. Although some would claim it's of the "OP variety", I have never found any mech with dual AMS a problem... despite the fact that I am not much of an LRM user. I'm a Streak/SRM user, and AMS has never been a serious factor since brawling tends to get into ranges that AMS will not respond fast enough to. If you needed the 3rd torso energy hardpoint... this is your mech to grind with. However, this is the only variant that will mostly bias your mech build to the right side...

I would like to note that the Firestarters tend to cause you to not want FF installed... the 295 engine limit (same as Raven) coupled with the arm actuators tend to reduce the number of crits available, so... in a mechlab optimized environment, the Jenner is ironically still king.

For the 3rd variant, I had picked the K. It reminds me most of the Jenner-F, as this is the most direct comparison to it. I can say with full confidence... it won't replace the Jenner-F. Yes, it does have the extra coveted module slot, but you are literally trading with your large arms and limited range torso weaponry for that. If you can handle those caveats, the trade is alright. For me, it's not that compatible. I did kinda make the mistake of building it like I would a Jenner-F, but ultimately I would have perhaps done better building it more like the Firestarter-S. It is a lot more sensible that way. I'm sure people will go about this differently.. but I've been disabled a lot while using the K with Jenner-F type loadouts... so it is what it is.

I have not taken a serious look at the H, since that is the ballistic variant. However, I know that 2 MGs tend to barely make a dent to exposed armor (see previous attempts with the Dragon-5N)... for the most part, I could see this being more effective than the terrible Raven-4X due to its energy hardpoints (the extra missile hardpoint in the 4X, like the 2X is mostly pointless). So, I'm not sure if I am properly rating it, but I guess you can do a little something with the H, but not a lot from a ballistic POV.

The Ember is mostly a superior version of the Spider-5K, as mentioned before. HOWEVER, I've said a lot about the torso ability to move up and down and understanding that the MG is still the "facehugging weapon variety", it does not have the same kind of troll flexibility that the 5K has. However, the 5K's arms are pretty weak, so it's a tradeoff that doesn't allow the Ember to be always the superior mech. Still, it is a more potent trolling mech than the 5K, since 4 medium lasers will cut through stuff... which makes removing its arms more vital, since it will allow the MGs to stay ineffective. I think there may or may not be more experimenting to do, but considering what you could build with the Raven-4X (which was very limited), it wouldn't translate that much better for the Ember.

So, I'll leave it at this. There aren't that many more mechs to be looking forward to, but we will see. I need to recover from my C-bill capers (Dragon eating up a portion, Firestarters too... the engines I had to get were killer for my C-bill count). Firestarters are simply the "right now meta" and will die down, but not be forgotten like the Lolcust at least. Maybe there will be a mech that would show up to contend with the Jenner... but the Firestarter is not that mech. Maybe I'll look into some of the other variants I'd like to get around to grinding someday... /sigh.

[TercieI]

Great analysis on the FS9.

[Bront]

I disagree with your FS9 assessment.

The torso mounted weapons in the FS9 aren't that great because the YAW on the FS is the worst in the game. It's the side to side arm movement that makes the mech.

I agree the S doesn't appear to be anything special (It's my 3rd, still basicing it up). The AMS doesn't seem to scare anyone, though it does help with LRM rain. Still, I think I'd rather have the S over the A, but it depends on if you want to use all the torso mounted weapons or not (I've got the S right now with 4 ML and 2 SL, with dual AMS. If I wasn't running dual AMS, I'd run probably 4 SPL in the torso)

The K however, I found superior to the Jenner F, as the side to side aiming allows for dueling and torso twisting much better. 6 SPL with side to side arm aiming can be deadly, and if you can manage the heat, SPL 7 and 8 ad even more punch.

With the H, I've found the 2 MGs combined with 2 SPLs can strip and core components quickly to go along with 4 MLs on the arms, and runs nice and cool. It's not an ember, but of the 3 FS9s I own (S, K, and H), it's the one I've had the most success with.

Now, the Ember is probably the best, combining the firepower of 4 SPLs or MLs, and 4 MGs. It's less heat than most light mechs with significant firepower run with, AND more firepower. I don't own one yet though (I will eventually)

The trick with the firestarter is to use an XL280 and don't use FF. It lest you cram some extra HS in there that you otherwise can't (no XL300 to store a second engine HS, and you're short 4 crit slots due to the arms). Between the running around, torso twisting, and jump jets, I find I rarely lose an arm, it's even rarer to lose both arms, and if I do, I'm probably almost dead (Ie, under 30%) anyway. Beyond that, I find I can often survive under 50% in the FS9 easily, and often haven't lost a single component when I'm running that low.

I can't wait to Elite them.

Edited by Bront, 02 March 2014 - 09:31 AM.

[Deathlike]

Bront, on 02 March 2014 - 09:23 AM, said:

I disagree with your FS9 assessment.

That's fine. It's an opinion after all.

Quote

The torso mounted weapons in the FS9 aren't that great because the YAW on the FS is the worst in the game. It's the side to side arm movement that makes the mech.

I explicitly mention this about the Firestarter. It is better for a Firestarter with torso mounted weapons to be UNDER its target, allowing for the JJs to be a factor. A Firestarter that is "above" its target is a less effective mech.

Quote

The K however, I found superior to the Jenner F, as the side to side aiming allows for dueling and torso twisting much better. 6 SPL with side to side arm aiming can be deadly, and if you can manage the heat, SPL 7 and 8 ad even more punch.

In my experience, losing the arms in the Firestarter, particularly the K is a more frequent occurrence. I ran 6 meds (3 on each arm) and most of them time my arms got blown off, despite having a lot of damage (the arms are its strength and weakness at the same time - with the torso, you simply have to manipulate your approach towards your opponent).

Quote

The trick with the firestarter is to use an XL280 and don't use FF. It lest you cram some extra HS in there that you otherwise can't (no XL300 to store a second engine HS, and you're short 4 crit slots due to the arms). Between the running around, torso twisting, and jump jets, I find I rarely lose an arm, it's even rarer to lose both arms, and if I do, I'm probably almost dead (Ie, under 30%) anyway. Beyond that, I find I can often survive under 50% in the FS9 easily, and often haven't lost a single component when I'm running that low.

280XL seems to be where its at. FF doesn't add much (it's like a 1 ton difference at most for 14 crits, and yes that 295XL max hurts). It may or may not have to do with the fact that I prefer to have a shield arm (think Centurions and Griffins), so I like having one shield arm (dedicate firepower to one side) to reduce my damage intake.

It's not clear cut obvious, but I think we're still saying the same thing, even if our preferences/experiences are different.

[Bront]

Deathlike, on 03 March 2014 - 08:31 AM, said:

280XL seems to be where its at. FF doesn't add much (it's like a 1 ton difference at most for 14 crits, and yes that 295XL max hurts). It may or may not have to do with the fact that I prefer to have a shield arm (think Centurions and Griffins), so I like having one shield arm (dedicate firepower to one side) to reduce my damage intake.

It's not clear cut obvious, but I think we're still saying the same thing, even if our preferences/experiences are different.

I think it has more to do with our particular strengths as a player. The FS doesn't need to use the arms as a shield to tank damage, as it has other ways to avoid damage, so for me the arms don't drop off for me. YOu use your arms as a shield, making the arms more vulnerable, so they drop off faster.

Just wanted to throw out my opinion

[Deathlike]

Bront, on 03 March 2014 - 08:38 AM, said:

I think it has more to do with our particular strengths as a player. The FS doesn't need to use the arms as a shield to tank damage, as it has other ways to avoid damage, so for me the arms don't drop off for me. YOu use your arms as a shield, making the arms more vulnerable, so they drop off faster.

Just wanted to throw out my opinion

It's not that they are a shield (although they are good for that), but they are much larger than you think. The only other light mech that has "large arms" is the Commando and they get shot off pretty easily. It doesn't mean that it can't be managed, but having increased weapon uptime helps whenever possible.

[Deathlike]

This is a brief "tourney edition" update to what I've already written.

I had originally wanted to try the Hunchback bracket... mostly to see if that was worth it. It's literally a hard bracket to break into given its notable weaknesses and although I thought I'd see more 4SP on the field, I think the most successful ones are still the 4P for the most part. I tried with a 4J (it was my most successful mech, although, I think I ignored my 4P numbers, which were far better)... it was painful. You remember that success in the tourney almost always requires you to be able to keep firing and prodding and occasionally steal a kill or two there when you didn't have to before. The Hunchback demands that you make your approach as subtle as possible before giving out the payload. That's when the Hunchback succeeds. Some people have mastered that (I have not, since I have the itch trigger finger most of the time). However, it is demanded of you to be a lot more cautious and calculated in 12-mans, and such a requirement isn't needed in regular matches, so it makes the Hunchback a different beast.

I blame JHunch (Jman5) for that. I actually named the mech JMAN SMASH for the tourney. I stopped playing the hunch after the first day.... sad but true.

On day 2, I decided to go with the Trebuchet. There are no great "Trollbuchet" builds really, and I still call it the Failbucket because of its decidedly poor meta ability. With that said, I had originally planned to go with the 7K. I had to relook at the stats and out of my possibly better original judgement, I went with the 5J. I still hate it, but it produced well during the tourney.

The arm weaknesses in the 5J highlights its fragility... it's like a poor Davion's Victor and the Victor is essentially Steiner-funded (well, not really, but I don't mind making fun of the Steiner-Davior marriage). You can build a meta-compliant Trebuchet, but man, you literally have little recourse when you're being confronted. Lights, Streakboats (of all kinds), and "the meta" is essentially your weakness (yes, it is weak vs everything), so failure is hard to fight back against. It is said in the lore that the Trebuchet requires a Centurion guard, but the Centurion ironically seems to be a better missile boat (well, if the tourney build is an indication, although, it kinda is and isn't at the same time). The Trebuchet ultimately is still the worst medium in its bracket... despite it having JJs over its 50 ton breathren.

What I notice since my post is that its arm articulation is worse than most arm articulated mechs. The only mechs that have the "worst" arm articulation are the AC20 capable Victors (9B and 9S) and the Highlander (733C). The AC20 is simply icing on the cake for them (no other mechs with arm articulation can claim this, and the mechs that can use the AC20, such as the Jager and the BJ-1 Champion). Mechs that have arm articulation tend to get their basic 20 degrees (assaults and heavies), with some having lot more (the lighter mechs get the most out of it). I would hazard a guess and say that there was "some fear" for having low arm articulation was because of the missile focused aspect of the mech, but that is unfounded since many missile capable mechs have surpassed the Trebuchet (Griffin, Kintaro, Shadowhawk-streakboats) and the 7M is virtually inferior at that (NARC tube being a psuedo-reason).

So, my suggested buff is to increase the arm articulation of the Trebuchet from 15 degrees to 20, to keep in line with the rest of the mechs. Whatever "intended" nerf was foolhardy, considering what mechs were added since that period of time. I believe there should be more buffs (particularly with overall mobility, since that was kind of troublesome - maybe it's my piloting, but the mech is still "clunky" when it comes to movement). I know arm articulation is important for missile boating, but that's ridiculous. It won't help the hands being shot off often (it happened all thorough the tourney), but I don't really understand how the Trebuchet has effectively the worst arm articulation in this game. The freaking mech needs help.

I still hate the TBT-5J, but maybe it wasn't as bad as I thought (stats with W-L and K-D ratio seemed to hold well actually). Still, it requires a lot more to make it to work than so many other comparable mechs that do what it does... I guess I could upgrade its hate-love, but at this point, making it truly meta-compliant is the only way to make it usable. I don't even want to touch the LRM aspect (because, most Trebuchets on the opposing team were just bad with them).

Also, a small update to the Ravens since I should have covered this before in detail:
The Raven engine upgrades were needed for them to not being complete garbage, but ultimately they still suffer now mostly from comparable mechs. The Raven-2X is still worse than the Jenner-K as JJs are the #1 reason, but also having the extra module slot to add insult. The Raven-4X is closer to a poor man's version of the Firestarter-H, and that's sad. You "could" do something with the missile slot of the 4X, but ultimately that won't bring it more utility than the Firestarter which has more speed (still important for lights) and versatility (more energy points means more options).

It's literally sad that every new mech that is released tends to invalidate a lot of the older mechs and variants being fielded... if only someone could balance better.

Edited by Deathlike, 03 March 2014 - 09:58 AM.

[Bront]

The 4X with an SRM6, 2 MLs, and 2 MGs isn't bad. Then again, I ran that with Standard HS with success. With doubles, I could probably fit something larger than the MLs.

[NRP]

You know, I too feel the Jenner is still ultimately superior to the Firestarter, but Wispsy and Co seem to disagree. Those guys are the top of heap Light pilots, so I'll concede the issue.

The Ember is my favorite of the bunch. It's so rare when a hero version is my favorite variant. I think it's only happened with the Misery and Heavy Metal.

[Deathlike]

NRP, on 03 March 2014 - 12:12 PM, said:

You know, I too feel the Jenner is still ultimately superior to the Firestarter, but Wispsy and Co seem to disagree. Those guys are the top of heap Light pilots, so I'll concede the issue.

I'd personally like to hear the arguments, but it is somewhat like convincing me that the Jenner-F is superior to the Jenner-D. I know exactly that Streaks don't last forever, but if it gets me a slightly better TTK in light vs light fights, it's good for me. It's certainly less effective once Streaks are out of play, but in a game where you have an expectation to be less effective at a certain point, you're making tradeoffs for sustainability in the end. I like that trade. It doesn't mean the F is bad for me... it doesn't function as effectively with my basic philosophies.

Besides, have you seen the PPC Firestarters? The 2 PPC ones look enticing.

Quote

The Ember is my favorite of the bunch. It's so rare when a hero version is my favorite variant. I think it's only happened with the Misery and Heavy Metal.

I think there's some irony and sadness when you realize that there are some hero mechs that although not OP, but they in the "it's too good to pass up" when you are comparing against the rest. To some degree... it feels wrong.

I would like to mention separately that the tournies that used to be run after a new mech release tends to give you a lot better options for grinding... whether for the sake of the tourney or just learning the chassis. It can make the experience enjoyable and should/can be used as such to pass the time... you might like something that you didn't expect to in the first place.

Edited by Deathlike, 03 March 2014 - 12:51 PM.

[Mondos]

Agree with you on the Trebuchet, I ran the 7K to limited sucess in the recent tourney.
The few people I saw running other Trebuchet's look like just copies of other medium mechs with their load outs.
The 7M with it's narc slot can't streak boat as well as other mediums and a laser build felt very clunky.

Sometimes I dream of axing off the left arm of a 7K and puting a 15 slot missile arm off any of the other verisons.
An AC5/LRM15 combo would be ok in a fire support role and safer around lights then just 2 LRM15's.

[Deathlike]

I apologize for not having updated this after grinding out the Griffin. There's just too much pressing stuff to deal with and like the equivalent of a blog, it's requires some effort to want to post an update.

Some "dramatic stuff" has happened and/or is in the pipeline, so rather than ponder why might occur (the future AC nerf/change), I will express my opinion on other related stuff that has come to pass... towards the end of the post.

For now, the Griffin is the topic de jour (the primary topic for today).

Griffin (GRF):
Best variant: 3M
Worst variant: 1N or IS
Interesting variant: All
Best feature: Superior torso twist rivals the venerable Hunchback, also bearing some of the Shadowhawks hitboxes, and being the a more mobile missile platform than the Kintaro.
Worst feature: Weapon hardpoints are not spread out, which requires more caution to using the side of the mech (like the Highlander).
Major Changes: Was released in Feb 2014 for "everyone else" (although, PGI originally forgot until reminded of their own promise in the PP notes), JJ "fuel adjustments", LRM buff (latter two to be explained later)

I took some note of this mech when it was originally released in December for those that invested in the Saber Pack, a Phoenix Pack extension/expansion. While the hardpoints listings suggest that it could be easy to disable weapon-wise for some variants, its superior agility, similar to the Hunchback allows it to mitigate some of the negative impact of that design. I forgot to mention a while ago about the Firestarter that the cockpit was pretty wide, like the Cicada, and the Griffin does have quite a bit of visibility that something that the ShadowHawk does not have. As a pure missile boat option, the Griffin is simply better than the Shadowhawk for that purpose... but the Shadowhawk is the dominant "ideal" build for being what medium mechs should ideally be. The Griffin fortunately has a role... which is good, despite the energy+missile dependency. It's not a bad thing if you can handle the heat.

The 3M reminded me a lot about the Shadowhawk-2D2. The difference is that the 3M is a much better missile boat than the 2D2, but as a Streakboat, I believe the 2D2 is "better" (because, you can still do more on the offensive side, than the 3M). Nevertheless, if and when SRMs are properly operational, it could surpass the classic Centurion-A for that side torso punch... (although that would be affected by Ghost heat). The torso energy hardpoint is actually pretty important... as that allows you to put in a PPC with greater protection as needed over the arm, but the solo arm energy hardpoint is welcomed. Using it as a 4 ALRM5 boat was pretty nice for a period of time.

One thing to note that the Griffin in general is rather XL friendly, given that it has something similar to the Shadowhawk's hitboxes but with larger Centurion-like arm. If you aren't using the left arm to shield yourself on this mech, you're probably using it wrong.

The 1N is the Phoenix version, and it is arguably the most "balanced" in terms of hardpoints, but it makes it like a Highlander (and at least the Highlander has a side where weapons can be put in). Similar to the Yen Lo Wang, you simply have to be very cognizant of how you approach the enemy, similar to being a Hunchback. I couldn't really do much in terms of variety though, so meh. I sadly did end up with PPCs with the variants with the greater energy hardpoints... since it requires less face time. Although the right arm does have very good articulation, it is the arm people will try to take off in order to disable you... the worst of the YLW (it has zero articulation) and the Hunchback (right side dependency) is essentially waved off, so you can get away with whatever energy weapons you put on it.

The 1S reminds me greatly of the Centurion-AL, but with "more favorable restrictions". However, you won't find that arm to be better, as trying to fit 4 energy weapons in an arm is asking for trouble. On the other hand, arm articulation helps a lot here. The "curious" aspect is that the missile torso is on the opposite end... which is why I related this for the AL... and the Griffin has JJs to boot. It puts the onus on you a lot more to protect that arm, and your success and failure hinges on that. What tends to work is putting to large energy weapons (PPCs or Large Lasers) with medium lasers to fill them out. Variation is limited, so it makes more sense "make the most" out of it.

With respect to some of the recent changes, there are 3 things worth pointing out.

1) JJ changes were made across the board, making "particular" changes to the Highlander level of JJs (level 1). In trading for "less lift", more fuel is provided. Overall, the overall "charge" in JJs were reduced, but unless you are some sort of "bunny hopper" like in Counterstrike post the "stamina patch" in CS, this wouldn't affect you that greatly... unless you were a Highlander.

Initially, I wasn't annoyed by this, but the latter note will compound my fustration.

2) Torso twist changes to the Victor and Highlander were applied. What makes LESS sense is that the nerf to the torso twist hit HARDEST to the Highlanders that had the slower torso twist... whereas what is referred to the "meta Highlander", the 733C, got the smallest nerf. The torso twist increase that was given to the 733C was provided as a "balance" to the "loss" of some arm articulation... but it and the Victor (2 variants) can carry an AC20 WITH ARM ARTICULATION... no other mechs have claimed this to date! So, it feels rather odd and backwards (essentially, illogical nerfs).

With this in mind, my next mech is the Victor, and it may replace the Highlander ultimately. The 732 that I run feels severely sluggish and I did do some work revamping it but I need more time to figure out if it's worth it. Switching to the Victor would not be out of the question at this point.

3) During this period, LRMs got a major speed bump. Although it was my own personal Lurmaggeddon (not everyone will agree with that), it was annoying that LRMs did get to chase me down for a bit and equipping AMS on everything that was bigger became mandatory. Now since the post-LRM patch nerf, I've not had the same need to use it, despite LRMs overall are faster... it makes me wonder if we're close to that # where it could be faster, but not stupidly ridiculous like it was before vs lights. I think that's asking too much... I digress.

I will get around to grinding the Kintaro (KTO) and Wolverine (WVR), but the Banshee might be interesting as it is the dakka-Assault of choice. We'll see. Hopefully there's something worth talking about in the future.

[aniviron]

Will be very interested to see what you have to say about the Wolverines next. I used my free mech bay on a WVR-6R, and I HATE it. I don't much care for the peekaboo long-range game that has been so popular for the last 10 months, and the 6R seemed like it would be a perfect brawler to disrupt things in close- fast, relatively heavy armor in all the places that matter, and tons of close range damage with good staying potential.

While I admit that a fair amount of my problems are caused by SRMs being worthless right now, I just find the mech to be incredibly fragile- like an Awesome, but with less armor. My 50-tonners have a lot better staying power than the WVR, which is odd. I can't tell if the mech is big and has bad hitboxes or I'm terrible with it. At least it has great mobility and twisting, even without eliting it.

And yes, I know I cut the armor on my build I've died to legging and headshots, the two places where the armor deficit is, a grand total of two times. The torso and ballistic arm armor is maxed, and that all melts almost immediately. I wonder if you'll have better luck with it than I did.

[Deathlike]

aniviron, on 04 April 2014 - 05:27 PM, said:

Will be very interested to see what you have to say about the Wolverines next. I used my free mech bay on a WVR-6R, and I HATE it. I don't much care for the peekaboo long-range game that has been so popular for the last 10 months, and the 6R seemed like it would be a perfect brawler to disrupt things in close- fast, relatively heavy armor in all the places that matter, and tons of close range damage with good staying potential.

Well, I did say the Victor was next, and the Wolverine is on "the back burner" (like, at the very bottom of my list). So, I don't want to disappoint you in advance. I am more curious about the Kintaro (particularly the Vindicator if that's the next medium released) than the Wolverine. That might just be that I'm an energy+missile guy even though I'm a bit pro-meta (PPCs+ACs).

I'll get to it eventually. I'm not asking for donations or anything (I'm just waiting for the next mechbay giveaway and am a mech poor )

Quote

While I admit that a fair amount of my problems are caused by SRMs being worthless right now, I just find the mech to be incredibly fragile- like an Awesome, but with less armor. My 50-tonners have a lot better staying power than the WVR, which is odd. I can't tell if the mech is big and has bad hitboxes or I'm terrible with it. At least it has great mobility and twisting, even without eliting it.

SRMs cause certain kinds of problems on some builds (Griffin like any missile boat is affected). My first thought about Wolverine is "thunder thighs". That and "poor Shadowhawk" facsimile (the 6R is a poor Shadowhawk-2H).

The 6K is "uninspired" for a lack of a better term. If it was some "mech on crack" like the HBK-4J or even the 4SP, that would be something... but it's not.

The 7K would be OK for a TAG-missile boat (TAG head laser)... but it seems kinda inferior to even the Griffin-1N for that matter...

Quote

And yes, I know I cut the armor on my build I've died to legging and headshots, the two places where the armor deficit is, a grand total of two times. The torso and ballistic arm armor is maxed, and that all melts almost immediately. I wonder if you'll have better luck with it than I did.

I struggled a lot with the Shadowhawk-2H, because I couldn't find "something that would work for me".

I'd literally have to build something that would resemble the "forgotten" Cent-AH... so...maybe I'll have an epiphany.

[aniviron]

Deathlike, on 05 April 2014 - 10:17 PM, said:

Well, I did say the Victor was next, and the Wolverine is on "the back burner" (like, at the very bottom of my list). So, I don't want to disappoint you in advance. I am more curious about the Kintaro (particularly the Vindicator if that's the next medium released) than the Wolverine. That might just be that I'm an energy+missile guy even though I'm a bit pro-meta (PPCs+ACs).

I'll get to it eventually. I'm not asking for donations or anything (I'm just waiting for the next mechbay giveaway and am a mech poor )

SRMs cause certain kinds of problems on some builds (Griffin like any missile boat is affected). My first thought about Wolverine is "thunder thighs". That and "poor Shadowhawk" facsimile (the 6R is a poor Shadowhawk-2H).

The 6K is "uninspired" for a lack of a better term. If it was some "mech on crack" like the HBK-4J or even the 4SP, that would be something... but it's not.

The 7K would be OK for a TAG-missile boat (TAG head laser)... but it seems kinda inferior to even the Griffin-1N for that matter...

I struggled a lot with the Shadowhawk-2H, because I couldn't find "something that would work for me".

I'd literally have to build something that would resemble the "forgotten" Cent-AH... so...maybe I'll have an epiphany.

I'm very much an energy + missile guy! (Preferred chassis: Ravens, Jenners, HBK-4P/SP, Awesomes). That said, I do own a number of ballistic-capable mechs, and my preference on them is go big or go home- AC20s are preferable, but AC10s will do if I don't have the tonnage or slots.

The reason I bought the WVR-6R in the first place was a deep longing for a CN9-AH, actually. I know the WVR can't mount an AC20 in that arm, but I figured that the 6R would make up for it with better maneuverability and an extra launcher. It seems I was wrong, I'm afraid. However, this is the first mech I've ever run on an all-ammo loadout, and I actually don't find it as punishing as I figured I might.

I thought you might not get to the WVR right away (and after my experiences with the 6R, I would suggest putting it off for as long as possible) but would be fascinated to know what you think. I see almost none of them in-game, and not many people are posting about it on the forums either, so I can't really tell what anyone else thinks, and I just wonder if I'm losing my touch or it really is bad.

It's too bad you aren't getting to the Victors until now. I bought mine about three months ago, and they really were the best assault mechs I'd ever run in. I ran a brawler 9S with AC20 + 3SRM6 + 2mlas, a sniper 9K with a gauss, 2 ER llas, and 2 LRM5, and a 9B with 2AC5 and 2 llas, and an XL 380 in all of them. All three builds did fairly well, but the only one I really loved was the brawler. Unfortunately, with the agility nerfs, the 380 engine Victor handles more like a 300 engine Atlas. While I do think that this is just about the right amount of agility for an assault with this engine rating, the fact that no other assault mechs were nerfed except the Victor just makes it feel sluggish and unsatisfying now, while all the others continue to turn far too fast. Pre-nerf, the Victor was actually a pretty viable brawling platform thanks to its combination of firepower, agility, and armor; now you don't really have the ability to get behind other assaults, and lights will take potshots at you without any ability to return fire.

[Deathlike]

aniviron, on 06 April 2014 - 02:32 AM, said:

I'm very much an energy + missile guy! (Preferred chassis: Ravens, Jenners, HBK-4P/SP, Awesomes). That said, I do own a number of ballistic-capable mechs, and my preference on them is go big or go home- AC20s are preferable, but AC10s will do if I don't have the tonnage or slots.

My ballistic preference is the UAC5, but tends to get me killed when I try to keep firing. I have not ruled out AC2s or AC5s for my usage. AC20 obviously gets special consideration where available though. I have kinda "found my own lostech" by rediscovering AC10s in place of 2 AC5s though.

Quote

The reason I bought the WVR-6R in the first place was a deep longing for a CN9-AH, actually. I know the WVR can't mount an AC20 in that arm, but I figured that the 6R would make up for it with better maneuverability and an extra launcher. It seems I was wrong, I'm afraid. However, this is the first mech I've ever run on an all-ammo loadout, and I actually don't find it as punishing as I figured I might.

That is the best I can do as a suggestion:
WVR-6R

If you really need to fill that energy hardpoint with the "backup laser" or TAG:
WVR-6R

Removing FF and downgrading the engine is there. I can't say this will get any better. The Shadowhawk-2H is far more flexible, and can actually be remade into a sub-version of the Shadowhawk-5M (the classic 1 PPC+2AC5 build).

With the 6R, I'm not even sure attempting anything resembling the 2H would even be a considerable improvement. It kinda does need a 3rd ballistic hardpoint or 4th missile hardpoint or something.

Quote

I thought you might not get to the WVR right away (and after my experiences with the 6R, I would suggest putting it off for as long as possible) but would be fascinated to know what you think. I see almost none of them in-game, and not many people are posting about it on the forums either, so I can't really tell what anyone else thinks, and I just wonder if I'm losing my touch or it really is bad.

The latter is likely the case.

Quote

It's too bad you aren't getting to the Victors until now. I bought mine about three months ago, and they really were the best assault mechs I'd ever run in. I ran a brawler 9S with AC20 + 3SRM6 + 2mlas, a sniper 9K with a gauss, 2 ER llas, and 2 LRM5, and a 9B with 2AC5 and 2 llas, and an XL 380 in all of them. All three builds did fairly well, but the only one I really loved was the brawler. Unfortunately, with the agility nerfs, the 380 engine Victor handles more like a 300 engine Atlas. While I do think that this is just about the right amount of agility for an assault with this engine rating, the fact that no other assault mechs were nerfed except the Victor just makes it feel sluggish and unsatisfying now, while all the others continue to turn far too fast. Pre-nerf, the Victor was actually a pretty viable brawling platform thanks to its combination of firepower, agility, and armor; now you don't really have the ability to get behind other assaults, and lights will take potshots at you without any ability to return fire.

Doing analysis post-nerf makes more sense, but I would get a "false sense" of how awesome/epic it was (it easily rose to the top of my list). Right now, I'm trying to get "readjusted" since I'm not used to arm articulation and the low arms (coming from a Highlander, arm lock while shooting in the air is mandatory). Before getting the basics, it drives very similarly to my Highlander-732 (which after that nerf, it's almost Atlas-like) so I'm thinking eliting it would help out. I usually build most mechs with 2 JJs, but considering the JJ nerf AND that the arms are low (meaning, I would consume more fuel to reach the firing height), I'm working on getting the 3rd JJ (making more sacrifices as is). I'll need more lab time with the rest. I am starting with the 9S.

I think it's kinda ironic that the Victor nerf is actually hampering the Victor trial mech (why buy it if it twists as a Highlander/Atlas?) For PGI's own sake, they need to take back some of that nerf, because it isn't gonna get their trial mech sold.

This is still a work in progress. :-/