97 replies to this topic

[JigglyMoobs]

Another piece of advice I would give (worth approximate ~$0.02) is, if you are going to go light on weapons, then go big on sensors. Stack a TC or a BAP with the target info gathering module, or TC + BAP + sensor range enhancement.

By doing this, you get nearly instant information on damaged enemy components, making your shots much more damaging.

[L Y N X]

Flak Kannon, on 16 September 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

I played my COMM-1B this morning. 171 kph.

Limited weapon loadout...Fast as heck.

Topped 500 damage most matches...


My Speed is my Armor.

My Speed is my Weapon.

HE = 1.45
3x MPL
xl240 = 171KPH

Right on Flak...

Edited by 7ynx, 18 September 2014 - 10:02 AM.

[_____]

7ynx, on 16 September 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

I have used them to dumb fire overhead where I "think" the enemy is, and get their AMS to fire to give away the approximate enemy position.

And you give away your or your entire team's position. LRM5 is also too easy to take down with a single AMS. Not going to argue with you about how often it actually works for you, but I suspect you're exaggerating its usefulness for yourself for the purposes of this thread.

Furthermore you're using a Dragon for a brawler, a chassis in which, no matter how you torso twist, your opponent can hit CT, and then apparently adding a weapon system that doesn't work when you're in your optimal fighting range.

Fine if that works for you, but I'd imagine your 3xMPL 1B has a better chance of punching above its weight.

[Tesunie]

BlackhawkSC, on 18 September 2014 - 05:14 PM, said:

And you give away your or your entire team's position. LRM5 is also too easy to take down with a single AMS. Not going to argue with you about how often it actually works for you, but I suspect you're exaggerating its usefulness for yourself for the purposes of this thread.

Furthermore you're using a Dragon for a brawler, a chassis in which, no matter how you torso twist, your opponent can hit CT, and then apparently adding a weapon system that doesn't work when you're in your optimal fighting range.

Fine if that works for you, but I'd imagine your 3xMPL 1B has a better chance of punching above its weight.

Locust 3S- Only has two LRM5s, yet I seem to do scary well in it! (Considering it's a Locust, and one with a Std 100 engine... It actually typically out preforms my other Locusts.)
Battlemaster 1G(P)- Has only a single LRM10. Before this addition, I saw very poor performance (with an Xl400 engine, even among other designs that preformed poorly). This mech went from "I completely hate this mech, wish I could sell it" to "I love this mech! Let me jump into another match with it!" Mostly because of the enhanced teamwork abilities and "repositioning" aspects that the LRM10 gave me, even if only for two tons of ammo.
Raven 4X- Only a single LRM15 launcher with two tons of reloads, but it's been a great performer. Has one of my higher K/D on my account. The LRMs permit me to engage and support at range, letting me help the team and open up armor for my other weapons to take advantage of later. (I call it Carrion for a reason...)
Raven 3L- An even stranger one yet! My Raven 3L has the typical ECM. It's primary weapon is an LRM10 with two tons of ammo. It's intended purpose is to NARC and then carefully use cover to safely fire my LRMs, and watch as my team's LRMs also land onto he target. Once the NARC is over, or the target is dead, rinse and repeat. Done very well, especially in group play. (Was a main stay mech for the Lance challenge.)
Hunchback 4SP- This is an ancient design. (This was it's original design for a while, before the weapon mesh changes.) It's been working very well from me since I started playing this game, as this was the first mech I ever owned.
Locust 1M- I've been using this mech, and I tend to do fairly well in it, considering it's STOCK! I've been using it in public matches, both team and solo drops. For being a 20 ton mech, I average 100 damage a match. For stock, and 20 tons only, I think that decent. I'm being as effective on the field as an Atlas who does 500 points of damage.

Then, the main flagship of my Mechbay, belongs to my Stalker 3F. Even before I placed the TAG in there (yes, it use to not have TAG equiped, I added that later when I managed to be able to fire a third weapon group. Two button mouse here.), it gained an average damage of around 700, a K/D of 27 (has since been knocked down to 5.00 K/D... I died 8 times recently, but have 40 kills. Deaths mostly from glitches... If you wish to believe me).


My point is, you don't need to boat LRMs for them to be effective. Even a few can still be effective weapons.

[Just wanna play]

i approve his stalker 3f ^^^^ roughly the same as my awesome 8t was, just no streaks and bigger lrms on that (or medium pulses) got my first ever match over 700 in it, (769 to be exact) back in the days of 8v8 when i was still newbish, granted i dont agree with him comparing a locust doing 100 damage and an atlas doing 500 since sure an atlas has more weight to use but it uses more weight to go a certain speed and it has a bit less crit slots

Edited by Just wanna play, 18 September 2014 - 06:37 PM.

[Tesunie]

Just wanna play, on 18 September 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

... granted i dont agree with him comparing a locust doing 100 damage and an atlas doing 500 since sure an atlas has more weight to use but it uses more weight to go a certain speed and it has a bit less crit slots

Damage per ton invested in the match (and considering a Locust can be one shot and killed with relative ease). I'm not saying it's "out preforming", but "for it's tonnage" it's being as "effective". Most people consider 5.0 or higher damage per ton per match to be reasonable numbers. For a Locust, that makes the goal 100 damage per match. An atlas is "expected" to do 500 damage a match to achieve the same "efficiency", per ton invested into the match. (These numbers are more relevant if teams had a 100% exact tonnage match.)

[Just wanna play]

still, tonnage to damage doesn't sound like a good way to judge a mechs performance, if it was lights would always be best because they have more crits for the tonnage (atlas need more crit slots > . <), more hard points for the tonnage, can use endo and ferro more easily for even more tonnage, are faster for the same engine, and all that other good stuff mm, its not like mm actually does compensating like two locust for a cicada or anything, it just tried to match weight classes (which now that i think about it is kind of...sucky and plain) but thats just what i think.....

[Tesunie]

Just wanna play, on 18 September 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

still, tonnage to damage doesn't sound like a good way to judge a mechs performance...

It's just one of many ways one can judge a mech. It is not the only way.

As far as crit slots and tonnage, in a 1v1, the Atlas has more armor and tonnage to place in more heavy equipment. Sure, the light mechs may get more speed for less weight, but they also get less armor and less weapon options, limited by their weight. In an efficiency manner, a light mech can easily be considered "better" efficiency wise. Efficiency and effectiveness (yes, first post I said effectiveness, wrong word there) are two different things. A heavy mech (in particular for MW:O) tends to be the most effective chassis in a match. An Atlas that deals 500 damage in a match was more effective than a Locust that gets 100, or even 200, damage most times.

As for MM, as far as I understand, it will match class for class, and then try to match tonnage for tonnage if possible. Of course, being 3/3/3/3 if possible as well, etc.

Trust me, I do get what you mean, we just are viewing things from slightly different angles (and I did use the incorrect word before). I gauge a mech on it's efficiency, not always it's effectiveness. Damage is only one such factor, but is by far the easiest one to calculate and figure out. Experience gained per match is also another decent factor to look at, and I do from time to time look at how much experience a mech might gain per match.

(I don't know if I'm explaining this as well as I could. It's kinda late where I am...)

[Sam Slade]

It sounds like you what you're really talking about is mixed configurations: multi-role mechs. This is what the majority of stock 'work horse' configurations are designed for(Centurion, Atlas, Thunderbolt, etc...). These are good in PUGs, not so good in teamwork

[Tesunie]

Sam Slade, on 18 September 2014 - 11:55 PM, said:

These are good in PUGs, not so good in teamwork

If I may interject on this one? MWO: Forums - Guide: A Balance Concept To Mech Building
I go more in depth in the link above about the general concept, but a diverse and more balanced build can work for solo (it helps more in solo I will agree) or group play. My above Stalker 3F design is rather good for solo because it can defend itself at any range, and support my allies at longer ranges if I don't/can't have line of sight. In group play, it still retains a role, and that role is defending the other support elements of the team. It's a guard mech, able to join in with the other support mechs, while at the same time having enough of a punch to destroy or chase away threats to itself and the support elements it's protecting.

In group play, you can get away with boating a lot more easily. If you are 100% LRMs (for example) in solo play, someone gets close to you and you are most likely dead. In group play though, you can get away with these configurations a lot more often and easier, as if someone gets on top of you, a teammate will notice and will run to support you if they can.

Many of my builds have proven themselves in Solo Pug play, but have also proven themselves in group play as well. Often times, it's how one plays their mechs, not always how it's set up. (The thread I linked here has a fairly good debate upon this subject actually... If one cared to look. )


Hum... did one know they could change the Emote icons sizes? (I had a hunch I could, just never tried till now.)

Edit: You can change it in your post, but it reverts to standard size when you post. Had to check it out (finally).

Edited by Tesunie, 19 September 2014 - 08:23 AM.

[Void Angel]

BlackhawkSC, on 18 September 2014 - 05:14 PM, said:

And you give away your or your entire team's position. LRM5 is also too easy to take down with a single AMS. Not going to argue with you about how often it actually works for you, but I suspect you're exaggerating its usefulness for yourself for the purposes of this thread.

... really?

"I'm not going to argue about how well it works for you, but you're a liar." A bit of consistency and a dash of courtesy, please.

[Just wanna play]

Tesunie, on 18 September 2014 - 08:55 PM, said:

It's just one of many ways one can judge a mech. It is not the only way.

As far as crit slots and tonnage, in a 1v1, the Atlas has more armor and tonnage to place in more heavy equipment. Sure, the light mechs may get more speed for less weight, but they also get less armor and less weapon options, limited by their weight. In an efficiency manner, a light mech can easily be considered "better" efficiency wise. Efficiency and effectiveness (yes, first post I said effectiveness, wrong word there) are two different things. A heavy mech (in particular for MW:O) tends to be the most effective chassis in a match. An Atlas that deals 500 damage in a match was more effective than a Locust that gets 100, or even 200, damage most times.

As for MM, as far as I understand, it will match class for class, and then try to match tonnage for tonnage if possible. Of course, being 3/3/3/3 if possible as well, etc.

Trust me, I do get what you mean, we just are viewing things from slightly different angles (and I did use the incorrect word before). I gauge a mech on it's efficiency, not always it's effectiveness. Damage is only one such factor, but is by far the easiest one to calculate and figure out. Experience gained per match is also another decent factor to look at, and I do from time to time look at how much experience a mech might gain per match.

(I don't know if I'm explaining this as well as I could. It's kinda late where I am...)

3/3/3/3 as far as i know is a 12 man only thing, its how they balanced big groups vs small groups, smaller groups dont have to have a max of 3 assaults. and yeah you are explaining it perfectly fine, its just that in this game biger is always more wasteful, (a std 100 is 1/25th the weight of a std 300, 2 mediums is way lighter then 1 large and more powerful, crit slots is the same for e verything etc.) so for the tonnage multiple things is easily better then one bigger thing. naturally bigger is bigger in 1 v 1, but iv just always though tonnage shouldn be looked at for performance... lol yes im ranting about my merc group giving a bigger score the lighter the mech you use XD i also HATE the fact EVERYTHING has the same amount of crit slots..............

Edited by Just wanna play, 19 September 2014 - 03:19 PM.

[Tesunie]

Just wanna play, on 19 September 2014 - 03:18 PM, said:

3/3/3/3 as far as i know is a 12 man only thing,...

3/3/3/3 is used for public matches as well, or it tries to. If it can't create a perfect 3/3/3/3 balanced match, it starts to open up it's searching parameters, which then lets the Match Maker add in "an extra assault/heavy/whatever" to fill in additional members so the match can start. MM does it's best to create balanced matches, but there are times when it can't pair up the right weight classes with the right Elos, and then starts to mix and match as best it can to just get a match going. Team groups must follow these restrictions absolutely within their individual teams. Solo players get a lot more relaxation from these rules, as it's completely up to MM to find and gather the correct people for the match, which sometimes it might have to "fudge" something to make a match happen in a reasonable time frame. (Unless we all wanted much longer wait times, and seen as some people couldn't wait 30 seconds for the "ready up" timer... I doubt people could stand to wait any longer than they already do to get into a match.)

As far as crits, lights, assaults, etc.
Light have more crits, but less tonnage to use those crits properly. An assault on the other hand has to balance their crit loads with their weapon loads as part of their balancing within the game. This goes into how BT and MW has always been balanced (part of the universe the game is based on). You have to now decide if the weight savings is worth the crit slots many upgrades can take on you. Also do consider, the larger the mech, the more armor it can place on it, the more damage it can take and till keep going. Consider that the frame also needs to be larger to contain and hold all that weight. Part of the description as to why the two weight classes have the same crit spaces for weapons payload is: Large mech, Larger frame. Larger frame, more armor it can take (thus probably taking some of the "crits" available, leaving the same amount of room to work in). But, larger mechs can either have more weapons (face it, you can't fit more than a few med lasers, and forget an AC20, on most light mechs) and heavier weapons packed within that frame, because they have the room and the tonnage to do so.

There are many balance checks within the game, and some are not so apparent as to why they exist, but I find most everything (in TT at least, and most of what is in MW:O as well, my opinion) has a reason and purpose for being there. If removed or altered, it often drastically changes the game as it is.

As one case and point, my Locust often times gets hit once and crumples, or loses a leg/arm and some/most of a side torso. An Atlas though can weather through that same firestorm, and barely have it's armor turn orange most times. A Locust (for extreme example) compared to an Atlas (complete opposite end of the spectrum) often have largely different speeds, armor and firepower. The Atlas often times has a lot more armor than a Locust, and greatly more firepower than one too, as well as often times longer range (from larger weapons). Hit for hit traded, an Atlas wrecks the Locust. (Take with some generalization and a few grains of salt.)

And as far as a Std 100 engine, you are talking about a 1 ton engine that propels the Locust to an amazing 81-89 KPH! An Atlas can take a, comparative to tonnage difference, std 200 engine for 11.5 tons. Smallest engine each mech can take. This gives the Atlas more internal DHS over the Locust. It's a matter of the std 100 engine taking 0.05 (1/20 or 5%) of the Locusts max tonnage (without considering structure tonnage) compared to the Atlas with it's smallest engine taking up 0.115 (11.5/100 or 11.5%) of the Atlas's max tonnage. I just noticed you compared the Locust with std 100 engine to an Atlas with std 300 engine... Just saying it should be lowest to lowest. But even then, the most I could cram into a Locust frame was 2 LRM5s with 2 tons of ammo, 2 SRM2s with 1 ton of ammo, single heat sinks and not even max armor yet. That's even with FF and Endo... An Atlas carries far more than that on even a build with it's largest engine, with max armor*!
Also consider that a Med laser (1 ton) takes up 5% (1/20) of the Locusts space, where as that same med laser with the same preformance now takes up 1% (1/100) of the total space of an Atlas, comparatively speaking. That Large Laser though, is only 5% (5/100) of that Atlas's tonnage total, same comparative capacity as the med laser on a Locust, but has better range, hits almost as hard as two med lasers, and produces less heat (last I recall) than that same med laser. (Don't forget the same weight ERLL, which produces more heat, but massively out ranges the med laser...) Just to bring a little weight comparison concepts/view point into this discussion. (Which, as much fun as it's been, and I hate to say it, is off topic. But it does make great bumps for this thread!)

*Warning: Not even sure if that build would be viable. I just tossed it together showing the difference between as heavily armed of a Locust as I can manage with an Atlas with larger engine and near max armor would be in comparison.


I have a feeling we each understand what we each are talking about though... We are just looking at it from different angles.

[Just wanna play]

was just using bigger engine vs smaller engine in general weight for the speed wise, not in those specific mechs. also, i lost respect for the er ll when it got .25 seconds added to the fire duration :/ really a better way to look at it from my view point is basically, two 50 ton mech are just better then a 100 ton because they use less tonnage combined to go same speed as 100 ton, get more crits to use, get more hard points to use, etc. but meh what ever all this math is making my head hurt...back to og topic discussion (what ever that was)!

actually two 50 tns vs 1 100 ton reminds me of destroying both sides of a clan mech to kill it vs destroying ct of is mech to kill it.....

Edited by Just wanna play, 19 September 2014 - 07:07 PM.

[L Y N X]

Excellent discussions going here, and just to be clear the Thread title wasn't meant literally, it was meant more as an attention getting than anything else, but the idea is that if the mech is more maneuverable and has a cooler heat envelope, then a skilled pilot can "Always Be Moving" (ABM) and "Always Be Shooting" (ABS)!

When intelligently combining ABS and ABM ideas, staying alive longer enable higher damage and higher kill count matches... Those kinds of matches produce more victories. Sometimes I have a great match but still lose, the other team simply out played us and I always offer up a good sportsmanship "gg" for good game afterwards!

Improve your move, improve your heat, and stay alive, move more, shoot more, and build/train a better scan, your matches will improve. I have noticed mine have.

[JigglyMoobs]

So here' anothe hot tip:

If you are running a laser build, you may have been noticing that your shots do a lot less damage than you think they should be doing. In this case,you can improve hit reg significantly by standing still when you take your shots. This of course comes at the cost of taking greater damage, so you have to be smart about when and where to do this.

Edited by JigglyMoobs, 20 September 2014 - 01:11 PM.

[L Y N X]

JigglyMoobs, on 20 September 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

So here' anothe hot tip:

If you are running a laser build, you may have been noticing that your shots do a lot less damage than you think they should be doing. In this case,you can improve hit reg significantly by standing still when you take your shots. This of course comes at the cost of taking greater damage, so you have to be smart about when and where to do this.

Also adjusting your Mouse sensitivity so that it is easier to hold the reticule on target while moving may help in this same light. Being able to fire accurately while moving will make your mech harder to be hit if moving across the enemies' field of view, not directly at or away from the enemy. Standing still will make your mech an easier target, exceptions sometimes for range and cover and stepping back to cover, called hill humping. When hill humping, try to not go back to the same spot too many times or the enemy will pre-aim for your location. Move 20 meters makes the enemies' pre-aimed shot obsolete. Having few enough weapons to have a range advantage and preferably a heat envelope advantage will help one score more damage.

[Just wanna play]

JigglyMoobs, on 20 September 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

So here' anothe hot tip:

If you are running a laser build, you may have been noticing that your shots do a lot less damage than you think they should be doing. In this case,you can improve hit reg significantly by standing still when you take your shots. This of course comes at the cost of taking greater damage, so you have to be smart about when and where to do this.

nah doesn't work, i watched as a guy named nathan kerensky fired at a stationary cat while statinary, you could see literally 2 shots had NO effect, the cts color didnt change at all, nor did it flash

[JigglyMoobs]

7ynx, on 20 September 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

Also adjusting your Mouse sensitivity so that it is easier to hold the reticule on target while moving may help in this same light. Being able to fire accurately while moving will make your mech harder to be hit if moving across the enemies' field of view, not directly at or away from the enemy. Standing still will make your mech an easier target, exceptions sometimes for range and cover and stepping back to cover, called hill humping. When hill humping, try to not go back to the same spot too many times or the enemy will pre-aim for your location. Move 20 meters makes the enemies' pre-aimed shot obsolete. Having few enough weapons to have a range advantage and preferably a heat envelope advantage will help one score more damage.

Yep pretty much.

Also, lower sensitivity helps the server too. Your mouse input and aiming vectors are not perfectly sampled by the server. If you have high sense,the server could be sensing large variances in your aim even though from your perspective you may have aimed perfectly. This happens in pretty much all games with continuous hitscan weapons even if back ends are coded differently.

Just wanna play, on 20 September 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

nah doesn't work, i watched as a guy named nathan kerensky fired at a stationary cat while statinary, you could see literally 2 shots had NO effect, the cts color didnt change at all, nor did it flash

Its definitely not 100%. Just better on average.

Edited by JigglyMoobs, 20 September 2014 - 01:57 PM.

[Just wanna play]

suddenly im afraid to see what its like normally