38 replies to this topic

[Autobot9000]

Not many relevant points here regarding the chassis.

Fixed ferro, hard point system, fixed structure/heat sinks etc are the trade off in the clan vs IS system. IMO the warhawk is excellent, but runs a little too hot with 4 ER PPCs. For me it's too early to demand a change here. First find out where the meta settles, then it might be interesting to see actual imbalance arguments.

[Malcolm Decker]

Everyone is still missing the point of this thread. The argument is not that the Warhawk is a terrible mech, I've never said that, it's that the Warhawk is the second heaviest clan mech yet it ranks near the bottom for custimization. If a Dire Wolf can run 2xAC20/2xAC10 and still have room to spread 9 tons of ammo across 5 locations, Warhawk should at least be able to run 2 20's without being one lucky torso crit away from ammo depletion.

While these mechs are built according to canon values, the old construction rules never specified where the locked armor and heatsink criticals had to go. We should at least be able to shift heatsinks to other free locations to spread ammo, but given fixed criticals, this is impossible.

Modo44, on 07 July 2014 - 09:43 PM, said:

You are already in pay to win territory with that "underpowered" thing.

Clans have already been "balanced" down to IS level and arguably lower if you utilize the pinpoint meta. As good as clans look on paper, this doesn't necessarily translate to in-game performance. With a few exceptions, the best IS meta builds are still generally better.

DLFReporter, on 07 July 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

The locked hardpoints are a great compensation for the stronger clan weapons.

Excluding LRM's, clan weapons are not stronger. Some of them have higher paper dps but it is harder to actually apply that damage. Also you have to face the enemy longer, opening yourself to return fire. Clan PPC's technically deal splash damage but if you know how to aim, they aren't really any better than an IS PPC. IS AC's are better at applying damage as well.

Autobot9000, on 08 July 2014 - 02:54 AM, said:

IMO the warhawk is excellent, but runs a little too hot with 4 ER PPCs. For me it's too early to demand a change here. First find out where the meta settles, then it might be interesting to see actual imbalance arguments.

I don't disagree. I think the 4 ERPPC Warhawk is probably about as good as 4 ERPPC mechs get, but it is definitely too hot. The sustainable DPS is pretty abysmal compared to alternatives. If we could get locked torso's that provided quirks to heat dissipation or removed ghost heat penalties on PPC's then I think it might be worthwhile compared to more efficient builds.

Edited by Malcolm Decker, 08 July 2014 - 11:05 AM.

[Modo44]

You sound like the people who complained about Victor nerfs while the Victor remained one of the strongest mechs in MWO. This is how literally all "my Clan mech so weak" threads read. So, yet again, quit whining.

[Malcolm Decker]

Modo44, on 08 July 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

You sound like the people who complained about Victor nerfs while the Victor remained one of the strongest mechs in MWO. This is how literally all "my Clan mech so weak" threads read. So, yet again, quit whining.

You just don't seem to get it. This thread has nothing to do with weak, underpowered, etc. It has to do with the fact that the Warhawk is limited more by the fixed critical system than any of the other clan mechs. Altering this would not strengthen the chassis. It would only offer more variety for people who occasionally get tired of running PPC/Gauss yet don't want to get roflstomped because they brought a build that belongs on a heavy mech. As it is, the most powerful, meta-friendly builds for the Warhawk are already possible with the current hardpoints and criticals.

Also as far as implying that clan tech is overpowered and/or pay to win, I think this is one case where you should take your own advice. Quit whining, learn to play.

Edited by Malcolm Decker, 08 July 2014 - 12:09 PM.

[Modo44]

You mean like jumping Clan mechs have to have 5 JJs? Or how the TW has a silly huge engine? Or how the Dire Wolf is basically a turret? Yeah, quit whining. This just hits your personal pet peeve, nothing more.

[Martis Gradivus]

No, he's simply stating that the Warhawk has an ENTIRE SIDE TORSO with ALL CRITICALS that are fixed across ALL variants.

He is simply asking to maybe move a couple of the DHS to the other torso, or maybe put 1 DHS in the other torso, and another in the arm or something.

Currently, you are very limited as to where you can put your ammo. No other mech forces you to stuff your ammo in so few places as to make the mech lose 75%+ of it's firepower if it loses the torso.

[Chimerahawk]

I notice lots of people came in here and argued that the warhawk is better, but didn't argue any points.

I don't have much to contribute because I agree, and don't own one. I can that when 2 warhawks charged my DW I lol'd so hard.

Also, I know the Direwolf got a CT fix because its CT was outrageous, but did they ever do anything for the CT on warhawk? Was it ever as bad?

Edited by Chimerahawk, 08 July 2014 - 12:46 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Well, at the very least, it is interesting to consider having a floating Clan DHS (or even two maybe) for the Warhawk and Kit Fox.
And having a DHS or two only move to the opposite torso might be enough to address that too.

[HashBee]

I agree floating criticals would help. They would be better at brawling if they could take a torso loss and keep half their weapons. Whenever I see a brawler build its usually an easy kill because they lose their weapons so fast. The speed isn't enough to make up for being shaped like a hitbox on legs. I think right now warhawk is in a no mans land between clan heavies and assaults. It can't go as fast as victors, it can't jump, and it doesn't have the armor or hardpoints to be a ground-bound weapons platform like direwolf. You might as well take a stalker for the standard engine and high mounted weapons.

Edited by HashBee, 10 July 2014 - 07:56 AM.

[Tesunie]

HashBee, on 10 July 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

I agree floating criticals would help. They would be better at brawling if they could take a torso loss and keep half their weapons. Whenever I see a brawler build its usually an easy kill because they lose their weapons so fast. The speed isn't enough to make up for being shaped like a hitbox on legs. I think right now warhawk is in a no mans land between clan heavies and assaults. It can't go as fast as victors, it can't jump, and it doesn't have the armor or hardpoints to be a ground-bound weapons platform like direwolf. You might as well take a stalker for the standard engine and high mounted weapons.

Wait... am I reading this post right? Someone suggesting taking an IS mech over the Clans? But... The forums told me that Clan mechs (all of them) are OP and P2W!

(Yes, I'm poking fun at your statement a little, and couldn't help myself. )

[Sandslice]

Just to clear up a misconception about tabletop rules:

-When deciding on things that are part of an OmniMech's base chassis, that is, the raw chassis that has "N tons of pod space available," you MUST set all fixed-equipment allocations during design; that is, somewhat unfortunately for the Masakari and Thor, something that PGI is doing properly.

This is shown in TechManual, where we are walked through the design of three 'Mechs... including the Executioner. It has fixed jump jets in the legs (which explicitly can't be moved in variants,) MASC, one out-of-engine heat sink, and ferrofib.

(Oddly enough, it doesn't have endo - and the face-palming reason given for this is to maximise critical slots for equipment. This is despite the fact that endo and ferro take up the same space...)

I still enjoy using the Warhawk, all the same.

[Tesunie]

Sandslice, on 13 July 2014 - 08:05 PM, said:

(Oddly enough, it doesn't have endo - and the face-palming reason given for this is to maximise critical slots for equipment. This is despite the fact that endo and ferro take up the same space...)

FF was probably taken instead if (or as well as) endo because FF is cheaper than Endo. In BT, a lot of mechs were made to be good at a good price. Make it too expensive, and just like in real life, no one can buy it or will buy the cheaper "almost/just as good" model.

In the case of the Thor (and other mechs), they probably did that to make an already expensive mech less expensive, where as other mechs (such as the Timberwolf) was made to be effective, no costs held back.

Locked criticals was to help the Gyro tuning on Omnimechs, which the pod space would adjust the gyro by predetermined "settings" depending upon what was placed within the pod space. Adjust one of the locks crits, and you've throw the whole omni out of whack, making it into a standard battlemech instead. (Which standard mechs didn't get upgraded or customized very often due to cost, one of which was recalibrating the Gyro, as well as the weapons among other things. However, time taken and with high costs, a standard mech could be customized a lot, the Yen-Lo-Wang being one such example.)

[Koniving]

Malcolm Decker, on 02 July 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

While the Warhawk is exactly what it's supposed to be... Some things to remember.
Ferro is cheaper than Endo to repair. Want a reason to validate it? Ask for repair and rearm.

The lore has an existing economy.
The game sorely needs it to provide rhyme to reason.

Edited by Koniving, 13 July 2014 - 08:23 PM.

[Sandslice]

Tesunie, on 13 July 2014 - 08:13 PM, said:

FF was probably taken instead if (or as well as) endo because FF is cheaper than Endo. In BT, a lot of mechs were made to be good at a good price. Make it too expensive, and just like in real life, no one can buy it or will buy the cheaper "almost/just as good" model.

In-universe, I definitely agree (and I consider that when designing 'Mechs.) I was more getting a laugh out of the "designer's" justification as explicitly described in TechManual: no endo because we need more slots, but then ferro.

[Thunder Child]

From what I've seen, the Hawk is built to be an Energy Platform. It has 4 (6?) DHS in the Engines. My poor DW has 2. Many, MANY times, I have struggled to find a way to keep the heat efficiency above one on that thing (without resorting to the Cheese Builds), and still use up all my tonnage.

Edit: And I get what you're saying about the locked crits. They can be annoying. But that's the whole point. It's one of the "balancing" things that PGI have had to do so that Clan mechs aren't TOO ludicrously OP (timberwolf excluded).

Edited by Thunder Child, 13 July 2014 - 08:57 PM.

[krolmir]

My thought on Warhawk left torso, hate it. However, its not a bad mech, and if I do under 600 damage a match its a rarity. PGI has said that additional omnipods will be made available. All they need to do is make a Warhawk LT like the did with the Kit fox variants extra right arm. Preferably one that ditches he heat sinks there lol. The thing that really kicks clan mechs in the arse is the PPC/Ballistic in the arm doesn't allow lower/hand actuators. Meaning I always have to give my enemy my weak spot in order to fire at them.

[Reno Blade]

Chimerahawk, on 08 July 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

I notice lots of people came in here and argued that the warhawk is better, but didn't argue any points.

I don't have much to contribute because I agree, and don't own one. I can that when 2 warhawks charged my DW I lol'd so hard.

Also, I know the Direwolf got a CT fix because its CT was outrageous, but did they ever do anything for the CT on warhawk? Was it ever as bad?

The Direwolfs CT was fixed to make "like the Warhawks CT" (patchnotes).



I think the Warhawk is a great example of a role specific chassis.
It is build for relatively fast moving into position and deliver a good punch with mostly energy based builds.

Gauss, 3ERLL and some backup SRMs is my favorite build.
You can nearly ignore the ghost heat on 3 LL on most maps

Dual Gauss/20s is a waste of tonnage because of the heatsinks, so you take one balistic, or none, but very rarely 2.

Want 2 AC10 and some ML (or more)? Take a Timber Wolf or Direwolf.
Want multiple PPC and ERLL and maybe LRM/Gauss? Take Warhawk or Direwolf.

The Direwolf has only 300xl egine, no Endo and no FF with lot of space and tonnage, but that makes it very slow.
If you add too many energy weapons, you need more DHS and run out of space quickly, if you want to have more/bigger weapons also (to use the tonnage).

Mobility and speed is essential also for heavy and assault mechs.
The usual Atlas/Victor takes a higher engine to get into battle fast enough.
Using a Warhawk will give you the ability to keep in formation and move to the place where you can bring your firepower and assist your team.
Teamplay is OP, so it's less about the mech itself

[Tesunie]

Reno Blade, on 14 July 2014 - 02:28 AM, said:

Mobility and speed is essential also for heavy and assault mechs.

I think this phrase will be dependent upon the build and how one plays.

To be honest, I was having problems with my Battlemaster because I was trying to build it in the way you've described. In the end, I hated the mech, or so I thought. Then I started to treat my battlemaster like the Assault it was and slowed down the engine massively (from xl400 to std320, still faster than a Direwolf I know). This let me add in more weapons and I placed an LRM10 launcher to assist the mech to counter the slower speeds. (Read second to last post in this thread to understand what and why I did things...) Now I no longer hate and despise the mech, now I love it and can't stop playing the mech!

Mobility and speed on an assault/heavy (any) mech will depend upon play style and mech loadout. As with everything else, one must find the right balance between speed/mobility and close range and long range firepower for themselves. What will work for one person, might not another. (Basically, you are probably on average correct, but there can be times were being slow might not be as much of a problem.)

Edited by Tesunie, 14 July 2014 - 06:29 AM.

[Summon3r]

there really are no good arguements here, someone said sure if a decent pilot takes it and pilots it well its a good mech.. wtf? is that not the whole point? we dont want just a n00b game where all the bad pilots complain like crazy on the forums and get all the changes and nerfs they want? the warhawk is a devastating mech specially when u get it going 74kph

this is like all the complaining about the Summoner and its lack of tonnage/custimizability the Summoner is a great mech (tho with incoming JJ nerf it may suffer hugely). as said somewhere above tho the main issue is probably that the timberwolf is SOOOO good

btw i can has Executioner pls?