443 replies to this topic

[Skyscream Sapphire]

Probably bad pilots misusing them?

If you're trying to run a Dragon with a 300 or lower engine, of course it's trash. It's just a poorly armed and armored Catapult at that point. They have to go fast to do something better than another mech could. Try 350XL or 360XL builds.

As for honorary medium...possibly. But if so, then it's the heaviest hitting of them. So light Heavy or heavy Medium....what's the difference with the current MM not matching weight classes?

[Megurine Luka]

Artgathan, on 18 March 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

A few threads have popped up here recently discussing competitive play balancing and overall chassis balancing (such as 'Is every chassis viable for competitive play?'). The general consensus appears to be 'no'. I've seen a lot of players claim that the Dragon is a "trash chassis". I'd like to know why (I've never piloted a Dragon, aside from a few trial mechs a long time ago, so I don't have much insight).

Is it the hardpoints? Is it the way the hardpoints are distributed? Is it the size of the CT? Is it the Torso Twist?

Please be specific about what you think the problem is. I'd like to get discussion going about:

1. What the Dragon's problems are, and
2. What we can do to fix them.

I'd like to see all mechs have a place in competitive play. Variety is good. The point of this thread is to analyze the problems underlying balance issues, and see if we - the players - can find solutions to help level the playing field.

Missile hardpoints in the Center Torso would've been okay if SSRM2s aren't totally crapped on by ECM. It also removes any decent LRM option for them (LRM10 isn't going to cut it when the other guy is throwing 45-60 missiles at you).

What I do like are the arm weapons though I really wish they fix the ballistic aiming for arm weapons. It's too wonky and in a brawl I cannot reliably aim it over half the time.

I would like to see the Dragon's turning rate increased as well as the torso twist. Maybe tweaks to acceleration and deceleration as well to improve their maneuverability (considering there is only a slim chance that we get a model change or a hardpoint change).

Ballistics and fast mechs don't go together because the Engine and the Ballistic weapon weigh too much. If you are going for a really fast Dragon, you are stuck with Flame and the C1 (though the C1 is inferior due to not having the energy weapons in the arm, but at least it is mounted high).

Giving the Dragon a side torso Missile Hardpoint might make it on par or close with the Treb as a mobile LRM platform with LRM10+LRM20. I was actually hoping that either Fang or Flame would move the missiles to the sides. 1 ballistic RA, 2 energy LA, 1 missile each side torso and you'd have something very flexible indeed!

[Frisk]

The Dragon is fine... just wait until collision is added back in and people will start to cry about how OP the DRG is.

[KinLuu]

The only usefull one is the Flame. It has a role as a dedicated light hunter-killer.

But you could also bring a AS7-RS, that is as good for the job, and brings additional firepower.

They are fun though.

[Phalanx100bc]

Dragons require the most skill to play insofar as manuverability, aiming, heat etc. There have been other threads on Dragons but the most important thing a Dragon player can learn aside from piloting skills is TIMING.

This is not the first mech to pop over the ridgdge or dropship...but it is the mech to flank and come up thier rears when heavies are fully engaed with the main force. It excels at chasing off scouts for your assaults/boats also.

The main problem is with the speed...you may end up at the point of contact before your teamates (besides lights) will and thus find yourself int he middle of the s***. This again is a timing issue (lessened by proper communicaion).

I'll await the 3L and DDC only guys to chime in.

[Sedant]

Q: Why is the Dragon bad?
A: It was designed by Kurita's.

PS: Flame is good, designed by PGI,

Edited by Sedant, 18 March 2013 - 09:52 AM.

[Gaan Cathal]

All the mechs at the low end of their weight bracket have problems. The Dragon's are compounded by combining bad hardpoint layouts with the main selling point being that they are marginally faster than the mech with arguably the best hardpoint layouts in the game, and definitely the best field of fire. A lot of the Dragon's issues stem from being so close in speed, weight, weapons, etc to the Catapult but worse in every single way bar a minor speed advantage.

Essentially, it's a sub-par mech set up to compete with arguably the best mech in the game.

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 18 March 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

That's true as long as SRMs are king of the meta. In my magical-fantasy-imagination land, that won't always be the case, and this game will have some semblance of balance someday (over the rainbow perhaps).

April 2^nd. A huge part of the current dominance of SRMs for brawling is down to the inflated damage caused by splash mechanics. Removing that will mean that the spread-out nature of SRM fire will actually be the disadvantage it's supposed to be, and point-fire weaponry will be less overshadowed.

Phalanx100bc, on 18 March 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

Dragons require the most skill to play insofar as manuverability, aiming, heat etc. There have been other threads on Dragons but the most important thing a Dragon player can learn aside from piloting skills is TIMING.

This is not the first mech to pop over the ridgdge or dropship...but it is the mech to flank and come up thier rears when heavies are fully engaed with the main force. It excels at chasing off scouts for your assaults/boats also.

The main problem is with the speed...you may end up at the point of contact before your teamates (besides lights) will and thus find yourself int he middle of the s***. This again is a timing issue (lessened by proper communicaion).

I'll await the 3L and DDC only guys to chime in.

The fact that good Dragon pilots can squeeze decent (not competitive) performance out of it doesn't mean the chassis isn't sub-par. It's a very good training mech in a lot of ways because of the points you've outlined, but a lot of die-hard Dragon fans will PUG all day in it, then they bring a Cata-something or Stalker/Atlas to the 8 mans.

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 18 March 2013 - 09:57 AM.

[Moonsavage]

They fit a niche, same as an Awesome, in that they are fast.

Compare an AWE with an Stalker or Atlas and they are poor, but they fit a tactical role - it's just a case of exploiting it.

[LordBraxton]

Vassago Rain, on 18 March 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

We already have a much faster flanker in the catapult, that flies, and has firepower. The speed bonus might seem big, but the difference is basically that it takes you 4 less seconds to get out of enemy catapult 270 range.

Well I was going to say the Centurion does that better if you want a fast flanker, but the catapult is pretty much the end all be all mech right now, its really the ultimate balance between offense\defense\speed

[MayGay]

Dragon is Drac trash ;p

[Cyclonite]

Butane9000, on 18 March 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

It isn't terrible. Like Spiders they take a special kind of pilot to succeed.

No it's terrible. I pilot the spider and it isn't even close to how bad the dragon is. The spider fills the role of scout/harrasser/capper that has speed/jump jets/ecm. The dragon has no role, its an oversized medium with terrible hardpoints.

Edited by Cyclonite, 18 March 2013 - 10:03 AM.

[Artgathan]

So what I've seen so far are that the Dragon suffers from:

• A large CT
  
• Poorly Placed Hardpoints
  
• It's too heavy for what it offers (IE: It's a Heavy mech that acts like a Medium Mech)

I've seen a few comments about how the Dragon is meant to be a fast flanker. Given with how engines work in MW:O I highly doubt the chassis can be made to work effectively. For example, a Centurion that runs at 98.0 kph (with speed tweak, a standard engine, 322 points of FF armor and Endo-Steel) has 17 tons left for weaponry. A Dragon with the same load-out (98kph, 322 FF, ES) has 16.5 tons left for weaponry. To run the largest Standard Engine (which runs at 106.9 kph with speed tweak, a whopping 9% faster than the Centurion) leaves the Dragon with 8 tons for weaponry.

The obvious fixes for the Dragon then are:

• Shrink the size of the CT
  
• Redo the placement of some hardpoints (for example, shifting the missile slots out of the CT or moving one of the ballistic hardpoints to the torso)

However the last issue, of the weight problem with the Dragon requires a more creative solution. I think that perhaps the chassis could benefit most from a special tweak that Vassago Rain mentioned (essentially, mechs that were designed for certain things get bonuses for doing that thing - an Awesome with PPCs gets +10% PPC Damage for example). Giving the Dragon a reduction in the weight of heavy engines may help the chassis. For example, if the Dragon carries an engine larger than a 300, it gets a 10% reduction in the weight of the engine. This would allow the Dragon to act as a flanker since it would actually be able to carry decent firepower while moving fast.

[armyof1]

Moonsavage, on 18 March 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

They fit a niche, same as an Awesome, in that they are fast.

Compare an AWE with an Stalker or Atlas and they are poor, but they fit a tactical role - it's just a case of exploiting it.

I can agree with the PB and 9M having a niche, but as for the other AWS I find they're just bad, due to the silly 300 engine limit and at the same time be a huge target. The Dragon can at least have a bit of speed due to higher engine limit compared to other heavies, but most models of AWS are just bad, no ifs or buts.

[StalaggtIKE]

Artgathan, on 18 March 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

So what I've seen so far are that the Dragon suffers from:

• A large CT
  
• Poorly Placed Hardpoints
  
• It's too heavy for what it offers (IE: It's a Heavy mech that acts like a Medium Mech)

I've seen a few comments about how the Dragon is meant to be a fast flanker. Given with how engines work in MW:O I highly doubt the chassis can be made to work effectively. For example, a Centurion that runs at 98.0 kph (with speed tweak, a standard engine, 322 points of FF armor and Endo-Steel) has 17 tons left for weaponry. A Dragon with the same load-out (98kph, 322 FF, ES) has 16.5 tons left for weaponry. To run the largest Standard Engine (which runs at 106.9 kph with speed tweak, a whopping 9% faster than the Centurion) leaves the Dragon with 8 tons for weaponry.

The obvious fixes for the Dragon then are:

• Shrink the size of the CT
  
• Redo the placement of some hardpoints (for example, shifting the missile slots out of the CT or moving one of the ballistic hardpoints to the torso)

However the last issue, of the weight problem with the Dragon requires a more creative solution. I think that perhaps the chassis could benefit most from a special tweak that Vassago Rain mentioned (essentially, mechs that were designed for certain things get bonuses for doing that thing - an Awesome with PPCs gets +10% PPC Damage for example). Giving the Dragon a reduction in the weight of heavy engines may help the chassis. For example, if the Dragon carries an engine larger than a 300, it gets a 10% reduction in the weight of the engine. This would allow the Dragon to act as a flanker since it would actually be able to carry decent firepower while moving fast.

Agreed. I think another one of its issues is actually one of its strength, versatility. The mech is so versatile, with the ability to fulfill any role. However this means it lacks focus. In this game a successful mech is one that can focus its attack, also referred to as boating. It's virtually impossible to effectively boat in a dragon.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 18 March 2013 - 10:08 AM.

[Skyscream Sapphire]

Gaan Cathal, on 18 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

A lot of the Dragon's issues stem from being so close in speed, weight, weapons, etc to the Catapult but worse in every single way bar a minor speed advantage.

I don't agree with this. Max engine (360 vs 315) speed tweak values of 107kph to 86 kph is a BIG difference at 21kph. If you want to round to the nearest heatsink values for your engine min/maxing (250 vs 300), the difference becomes 104kph vs 82 kph, increasing to 22kph.

Gaan Cathal, on 18 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

The fact that good Dragon pilots can squeeze decent (not competitive) performance out of it doesn't mean the chassis isn't sub-par. It's a very good training mech in a lot of ways because of the points you've outlined, but a lot of die-hard Dragon fans will PUG all day in it, then they bring a Cata-something or Stalker/Atlas to the 8 mans.

I do agree with this, though. It's still missing something to be top tier. Maybe not even anything to do with the Dragon itself. For example, maybe a convergence fix would help those using arm mounted ballistics. Maybe an ECM nerf to make the center mounted missile slots more SSRM2 viable. Maybe the SRM splash damage fix to make it compare more favorably to the missile boating mechs surrounding it (Catapult, 4SP, Centbomb). I'm not sure...but it's close. Closer than most people would think.

[Roughneck45]

StalaggtIKE, on 18 March 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Agreed. I think another one of its issues is actually one of its strength, versatility. The mech is so versatile, with the ability to fulfill any role. However this means it lacks focus. In this game a successful mech is one that can focus its attack, also referred to as boating. It's virtually impossible to effectively boat in a dragon.

+1 exactly this.

Thats why it is awful for competitive play but a lot of fun for pugging. If you are going to use a Dragon well you have to utilize all 3 weapon types and use the speed for quick re positioning.

If you are going to be energy or missile boated, you are always better off in a catapult. If you are going to boat ballistics, you are always better in a cataphract.

Jack of all trades master of none as they say.

As far as the huge CT being a problem, I think that is the mechs defining feature, and the main reason why it is a perfect mech for an XL engine and collisions. It doesn't need Dragon bowling like it was in closed beta, but it should certainly have the upper hand in collisions.

From sarna, "while the squat design gives it a smaller profile and makes it harder to knock over"

Edited by Roughneck45, 18 March 2013 - 10:17 AM.

[Globalchaos101]

Personally the Dragon is my favorite mech by far, I find they work amazingly in pairs or groups. Me and my buddy run around in a pair, must be difficult for people to kill two heavies moving so much faster then them with almost the same amount of firepower. Not to mention the arm mounted ballistics are glorious if you know how to aim.

[armyof1]

StalaggtIKE, on 18 March 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Agreed. I think another one of its issues is actually one of its strength, versatility. The mech is so versatile, with the ability to fulfill any role. However this means it lacks focus. In this game a successful mech is one that can focus its attack, also referred to as boating. It's virtually impossible to effectively boat in a dragon.

Sad but true, versatility and variety in weaponry is generally punished in MWO. The closest to boating you can get is the 4LL 1C/Flame. Actually I think I'm going to build it now and run a few matches.

Edited by armyof1, 18 March 2013 - 10:18 AM.

[Vermaxx]

Because it is a 60 ton mech focused on a 300 engine, and generally has terrible hardpoints.

The unknown issue is why it has so few hardpoints, particularly as compared to the Catapult. The Flame (the energy one?) isn't bad, but I'm not investing MC in a mech that needs two unpleasant brothers to be elited.

[Vassago Rain]

Skyscream Sapphire, on 18 March 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

I don't agree with this. Max engine (360 vs 315) speed tweak values of 107kph to 86 kph is a BIG difference at 21kph. If you want to round to the nearest heatsink values for your engine min/maxing (250 vs 300), the difference becomes 104kph vs 82 kph, increasing to 22kph.


I do agree with this, though. It's still missing something to be top tier. Maybe not even anything to do with the Dragon itself. For example, maybe a convergence fix would help those using arm mounted ballistics. Maybe an ECM nerf to make the center mounted missile slots more SSRM2 viable. Maybe the SRM splash damage fix to make it compare more favorably to the missile boating mechs surrounding it (Catapult, 4SP, Centbomb). I'm not sure...but it's close. Closer than most people would think.

It's not a big difference. Do the math. You essentially buy yourself a couple less seconds for the catapults to put 100 SRMs into your nose.

Look at how speed actually works.