390 replies to this topic

[ragingmunkyz]

OK, I just fought an HBK-P that was boating nothing but small lasers. I was laughing through the whole fight...there is literally no acceptable explanation for such a terribad build. You didn't even want like, one or two medium lasers? It could only have been worse if he had equipped 9 flamers.

[EyeOne]

BattleGnome, on 13 March 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

Not sure if this was mentioned already, but I'll say it anyway. Worst case, it'll add emphasis!

Any build with AC5s.

Why would anyone use the AC5 over the UAC5 or the (deceptively) low damage AC2?

I prefer to save a ton and not worry about jamming. So, that is why. I never use UACs

[Buckminster]

I think a lot of it depends on what someone calls "bad". My Cat K2 has twin ERPPCs and twin MGs, so with a mech 25 tons heavier than Olivia Maybach's Cicada, I added a pair of MGs. But for me and my play style it's fantastic, I have enough heat sinks and armor for my K2 to be very durable - it takes a beating, and isn't red hot on the verge of shutdown after three salvos of shooting. Others may look at it as underpowered.

[FrostCollar]

ragingmunkyz, on 14 March 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

OK, I just fought an HBK-P that was boating nothing but small lasers. I was laughing through the whole fight...there is literally no acceptable explanation for such a terribad build. You didn't even want like, one or two medium lasers? It could only have been worse if he had equipped 9 flamers.

Let's be fair - small lasers can be useful. For it to be truely terribad, he'd have to be boating small pulse lasers, which I've seen.

Also, the 9 flamer Hunch is the game's premier mech at making me laugh at it. How can I call that a bad build?

[Tickdoff Tank]

ragingmunkyz, on 14 March 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

OK, I just fought an HBK-P that was boating nothing but small lasers. I was laughing through the whole fight...there is literally no acceptable explanation for such a terribad build. You didn't even want like, one or two medium lasers? It could only have been worse if he had equipped 9 flamers.

The 9 Small Laser Hunchback used to be one of the most popular builds in the game. It can do a lot of damage and is very heat efficient. That said, I prefer the ML version.

[Whompity]

Homeless Bill, on 14 March 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

A few snipers in my clan would ******* destroy have words with anyone that dare post that build on this thread =P

Heehee. It's fantastic for chasing down lights. "How is that still hitting me over here?"

[bloodnor]

back before R&R was taken out a half dead hunchback with one med pulse laser

[Abulafia]

Today, I saw a Catapult-K2 with nothing but an AMS on it. No joke.

My other favorite was a COM-2D with ECM, an ERPPC, and a STD100 engine - top speed, 64.8 kph in a Commando O_o

[Terror Teddy]

BattleGnome, on 13 March 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

Not sure if this was mentioned already, but I'll say it anyway. Worst case, it'll add emphasis!

Any build with AC5s.

Why would anyone use the AC5 over the UAC5 or the (deceptively) low damage AC2?

Personally I think the UAC5 should have the same basic stats and fire rate of the AC5 - the ONLY difference is the firing mechanism that allows the UAC5 to fire faster but risk jamming.

Then BOTH weapons would be viable - there is no point in the UAC5 to fire faster as base fire rate.

[Commander Kobold]

I saw an atlas K with 2 ERPPCs and one LRM 20 with 400-500 ish ammo and an AMS with about 5k ammo wasn't sure what he was planning to do but he popped pretty good.

[Redmond Spiderhammer]

Dr Killinger, on 11 March 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

An Atlas with 2 PPCs. Nothing else.

People are far too obsessed with trying to be heat-neutral. Unless he dropped with the wrong mech, in which case, I sympathize!

I ran into a stalker with just one PPC once.... not even an ER

[BattleGnome]

Mechkilla, on 14 March 2013 - 03:50 AM, said:

Yes and no. The UAC is on paper much better than a double AC5. As said before in my other post, I have a Dragon with this setup and also one with a UAC. Both are doing nice damage. But the UAC is sometimes very annoying because of its jam rate. To often it jams after the first shot, then again after it is ready to go. I think I had a few times were it jams before the first round left the barrel after a longer cooldown period. And then I can dish out up to ten shells even with a few double taps.
So the Dual-AC5 is heavier but more reliable in the heat of the fight (during that waiting for the UAC ****** me really off). Both sides have their advantages and disadvanteges.

I also have a Dragon with Triple-AC2. I'm using those not in chainfire mode (cause the DPS in this mode is lower than it should be). Lot of tonnage and heat just for three "low-damage-weapons" but the DPS is quite high. Had to sacrifice speed (89.1 kph) and heat sinks but it's a good sniper on Alpine .

These are good points, but I'm talking more about the build rather than individual weapons. To clarify, one UAC5 in this game is somewhat of a liability because of the jamming. But two of them set up for chain firing is surprisingly devastating and is well worth the extra two tons versus 2 AC5s. Considering the nice fact that one can have multiple weapon groups, it's also not too shabby group fired when popping shots out of cover. Because by the time jamming occurs, you're (or your target) are behind cover anyway yet the burst damage has already been done. And then there's Ilya Muromets.

It's because of this trade off I consider builds with AC5s to be sub optimal.

Personally, I run a minimum of 2 UAC5s or none at all because of this. If I don't have the tonnage to make it work, I go to AC2s, Gauss (less so as of late), and lately the AC20.

[One Medic Army]

ragingmunkyz, on 14 March 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

OK, I just fought an HBK-P that was boating nothing but small lasers. I was laughing through the whole fight...there is literally no acceptable explanation for such a terribad build. You didn't even want like, one or two medium lasers? It could only have been worse if he had equipped 9 flamers.

What the heck was he doing with the extra weight?
Seriously, I ran 6smalls, 1medium, and 2 larges on my P, with a 245std engine and plenty of heatsinks.
The only think I can imagine is if he had a large standard engine, and a large number of STD heatsinks, but even then he should have had mediums on the arms...

[MustrumRidcully]

ragingmunkyz, on 14 March 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

OK, I just fought an HBK-P that was boating nothing but small lasers. I was laughing through the whole fight...there is literally no acceptable explanation for such a terribad build. You didn't even want like, one or two medium lasers? It could only have been worse if he had equipped 9 flamers.

Back in the old Closed Beta Days, when we had to move up the Caldera both ways and had only single heat sinks, the 9 Small Laser Hunchback 4P was one of the most effective builds. So effective that we got additional engine rating limtations so that people would no longer run with 110 KPH Hunchbacks boating 9 Small lasers. With that nerf, the HBK could no longer reach the speeds necessary to make that build really work.

Now we have Double Heat Sinks, so it's probably an irrelevant build. But it could very well be that the user was still using SHS and trying to find a way to fill those energy slots without overheating every 6 seconds.

[Protection]

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...62255e5a337c5bd

[One Medic Army]

Protection, on 14 March 2013 - 11:41 PM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...62255e5a337c5bd

Ow.
My brain.

[Escef]

Protection, on 14 March 2013 - 11:41 PM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...62255e5a337c5bd

Not an entirely bad concept, just a horrible execution.

THIS is how I'd fix it without screwing around with the questionable engine choice.

[Royalewithcheese]

Yen Lo Wang with 1xAC20, 2xFlamer and a top speed of 43 KPH.

why

if this is your robot please explain

[Vilheim]

Rainbow Awesome.
1 LL
1 LPL
1 ML
1 MPL
1 SL
1 SPL

By the way, that build was mine
in closed beta

[Mr 144]

Terror Teddy, on 14 March 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Personally I think the UAC5 should have the same basic stats and fire rate of the AC5 - the ONLY difference is the firing mechanism that allows the UAC5 to fire faster but risk jamming.

Then BOTH weapons would be viable - there is no point in the UAC5 to fire faster as base fire rate.

Actually, the UAC/5 still has a delay if double-tapped. You can't actually get 2 rounds off in the 1.1 seconds. The true double-tap recycle is approximately .85x2, or 1.7 seconds, perfectly matching the overall rate of the AC/5. So matching recycles at full spam, but the UAC/5 has Jams. There's math floating around here with pretty thorough testing, that shows under full spam long engagement, the average DPS between the two are surprisingly quite similar.

Actual tests performed in house shows the 2xUAC+2xAC5 CTF-4X is actually superior to the Ilya 3xUAC+3xML....even though napkin math says different. Every single testing attempt showed this rather conclusively too. The AC/5s aren't a bad weapon, they just lack both burst and alpha potential. Sustained DPS (heat included vs. the AC/2) they are actually quite good.

All that being said...I still don't like 'em either

Mr 144

Edited by Mr 144, 15 March 2013 - 11:11 PM.