304 replies to this topic

[Sedant]

So like.... Took head damage from collision at the start of Frozen City.... Seriously? Come on PGI!

[ArmageddonKnight]

Demon Horde, on 21 March 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

honestly , i think its a bit ho hum... you guys already had a 65 ton mech with the catapult , really before you repeat any more exact weights you need to add mechs in weights for the weights you don't have so the game is more rounded out. that being we need a 20 ton mech , a 45 ton, a 55 ton, a 75 ton , a 90 ton and a 95 ton mech before you guys do any more "same wieght mechs". Aside from that the jager mech is nice , just seems redundant to have it (it being a 65 ton mech) when we already had the catapult but don't have a 75 ton heavy yet.

My suggestions to fill these missing wieghts these are all mechs that preceeded the year 3050 (our current year) or were made in 3050.

20 ton - flee
45 ton - Blackjack
55 ton - hoplite
75 ton - Marauder (or black knight instead)
90 ton - Mauler
95 ton - Cerberus

75ton.. TimberWolf/MadCat - Everyone loves the MadCat

[Ironwolf2029]

I think Jagger Mech DD variant should instead have 3B Hardpoints on the arm should had 2B 1E making it in my opinion more versatile mech. That way you can put some ER Large Lasers or even PPC or ERPPC on the arms.

Edited by Ironwolf2029, 21 March 2013 - 01:15 PM.

[Ronin Cahill]

only thing i dont like is the super exposed cocpit. i think i have died almost every match iv played from head kills..note the rest of my mech is light yellow when that happens. iv also had my head taken out from behind.
looks like a nice mech but ichabod needs a horse.
ronin

[Tesunie]

ArmageddonKnight, on 21 March 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

Jagger DD cannot fit 6 worthwhile ballistic weapons.

Whats the point having 6 ballistic slots when fitting 6 of the smallest AC weapons (AC2) means u have a tiny engine, limit armor, little ammo, and overheat like crazy. And b4 any1 comes back talking about the machin gun,it is a super close range weapon that does next to 0 damage, which means it is usless on a Jagger designed for long range support.

Ether redesign the DD or sort out the Heat of AC2's (less) and the stack sizes of AC2 ammo (more).

other than that, Head shots, to easy to be head shotted atm, whether it be a bug with the ML's or simply the hitbox being to big, it is another issue.

I have stood by on so many of these comments, but enough is enough (not aimed at the particular person whom I am quoting, just the general statement). Just because a mech has x number of hard points does not mean that all of them must be filled for it to be useful. It is there to provide options. It lets you, if you wished, to place say, maybe 2 ac5, 2 ac2, and 2 machine guns on. Or have a really small engine with 6 ac2s.OR, you can just place 4 ac5s, or 2 AC20s, or have one arm with 3 ac2s on it and an ac5 in the other arm. I've even heard of builds that had 6 machine guns on it and two ERPPCs. If that's what they enjoy, then suddenly the x6 ballistic slots works for them.

It's like saying the Cicada 3c is useless because you can't use all the hard points in it. Sure, it isn't the best cicada, but it can fit a lot in it. It's the only cicada that can do 2 ac2s. (Personally I field mine with an LBx10 and an ERPPC.)

Just because something has a lot of hard points doesn't mean it must use them all to be useful. It just provides more options and flavor.

Rant is over now. I'm done.

[Notick]

Tesunie, on 21 March 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

I have stood by on so many of these comments, but enough is enough (not aimed at the particular person whom I am quoting, just the general statement). Just because a mech has x number of hard points does not mean that all of them must be filled for it to be useful. It is there to provide options. It lets you, if you wished, to place say, maybe 2 ac5, 2 ac2, and 2 machine guns on. Or have a really small engine with 6 ac2s.OR, you can just place 4 ac5s, or 2 AC20s, or have one arm with 3 ac2s on it and an ac5 in the other arm. I've even heard of builds that had 6 machine guns on it and two ERPPCs. If that's what they enjoy, then suddenly the x6 ballistic slots works for them.

It's like saying the Cicada 3c is useless because you can't use all the hard points in it. Sure, it isn't the best cicada, but it can fit a lot in it. It's the only cicada that can do 2 ac2s. (Personally I field mine with an LBx10 and an ERPPC.)

Just because something has a lot of hard points doesn't mean it must use them all to be useful. It just provides more options and flavor.

Rant is over now. I'm done.

Very solid points. However, if a 'Mech is added that can't do something as well as another 'Mech then what's the point? Why field a 3UAC/5 Jagermech if you own an Ilya?! Why field a Jumpjet Trebuchet if you own a Cataphract-3D, which has more armor? The Trebuchet has the same issues the Jagermech has in a lot of peoples eyes. It's a cool looking 'Mech, but the current 'Mechs that were already in the game are just flat-out better for damage output.

Most everyone in the game approaches fielding 'Mechs just like someone in an FPS equips their weapons. They equip the weapons that's going to get them the most kills with the highest survivability, not the weapons that are 'neat' and 'cool looking'. This is where the issue of 'Mechs like this come in. What's the point of adding fluff if it isn't going to do anything new for the game?!

That being said... I 100% agree that hard slots don't need to be 100% filled. I argue this with Teammates all the time. Sometimes secondary equipment is better than another weapon.

Edited by Notick, 21 March 2013 - 05:53 PM.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Notick, on 21 March 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Very solid points. However, if a 'Mech is added that can't do something as well as another 'Mech then what's the point? Why field a 3UAC/5 Jagermech if you own an Ilya?! Why field a Jumpjet Trebuchet if you own a Cataphract-3D, which has more armor? The Trebuchet has the same issues the Jagermech has in a lot of peoples eyes. It's a cool looking 'Mech, but the current 'Mechs that were already in the game are just flat-out better for damage output.

Most everyone in the game approaches fielding 'Mechs just like someone in an FPS equips their weapons. They equip the weapons that's going to get them the most kills with the highest survivability, not the weapons that are 'neat' and 'cool looking'. This is where the issue of 'Mechs like this come in. What's the point of adding fluff if it isn't going to do anything new for the game?!

That being said... I 100% agree that hard slots don't need to be 100% filled. I argue this with Teammates all the time. Sometimes secondary equipment is better than another weapon.

That's just it, though, Notick, the CTFs were intended as brawlers, and the JM6 was intended as long range direct fire support. And by intended I mean the BT writers, not PGI and not the players.

Also despite what people think the JM6 has one clear advantage over the CTF, and that is the lack of lower arm actuators. First off, this means AC20s in the arms if one desires, and this also means that a CTF and a JM6 in a duel will favor the JM6 as long as he uses terrain. Why? Because the CTF will turf most of it's weaponry whilst a Jager will not. A CTF will need to fully expose itself just to bring all it's prime weapons to bear while the JM6 will not. Also, the CTF has little to no capacity to use LRM in a proper manner.

So the idea that the CTF is better from a pure numbers standpoint is ludicrous because that is ignoring a dozen other factors, and therefore utterly pointless as a basis for an argument in superiority.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 21 March 2013 - 06:13 PM.

[Zordicron]

Notick, on 21 March 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Very solid points. However, if a 'Mech is added that can't do something as well as another 'Mech then what's the point? Why field a 3UAC/5 Jagermech if you own an Ilya?! Why field a Jumpjet Trebuchet if you own a Cataphract-3D, which has more armor? The Trebuchet has the same issues the Jagermech has in a lot of peoples eyes. It's a cool looking 'Mech, but the current 'Mechs that were already in the game are just flat-out better for damage output.

Most everyone in the game approaches fielding 'Mechs just like someone in an FPS equips their weapons. They equip the weapons that's going to get them the most kills with the highest survivability, not the weapons that are 'neat' and 'cool looking'. This is where the issue of 'Mechs like this come in. What's the point of adding fluff if it isn't going to do anything new for the game?!

That being said... I 100% agree that hard slots don't need to be 100% filled. I argue this with Teammates all the time. Sometimes secondary equipment is better than another weapon.

You put a new mech in the game, because it is a new mech. Its battletech, looks are as valid a reason as any other most of the time to pick one mech over another one. And Jager looks badass. I like looks, otherwise spreadsheet warrior would be the game I play instead of MWO.
That said, I havent bought a jager yet as I am saving C-bills while I master out my last little bit on Illya and my 2x, thus completing my ultimate mastery of all Phracts! lulz.

Really though, i hold hope MG will see some help, and then extra B slots will be super awesome, instead of just pipe dreams awesome.

[Nik Reaper]

Notick, on 21 March 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Very solid points. However, if a 'Mech is added that can't do something as well as another 'Mech then what's the point? Why field a 3UAC/5 Jagermech if you own an Ilya?! Why field a Jumpjet Trebuchet if you own a Cataphract-3D, which has more armor? The Trebuchet has the same issues the Jagermech has in a lot of peoples eyes. It's a cool looking 'Mech, but the current 'Mechs that were already in the game are just flat-out better for damage output.

Most everyone in the game approaches fielding 'Mechs just like someone in an FPS equips their weapons. They equip the weapons that's going to get them the most kills with the highest survivability, not the weapons that are 'neat' and 'cool looking'. This is where the issue of 'Mechs like this come in. What's the point of adding fluff if it isn't going to do anything new for the game?!

That being said... I 100% agree that hard slots don't need to be 100% filled. I argue this with Teammates all the time. Sometimes secondary equipment is better than another weapon.

As noted, a solid point, but there is one thing to consider, being that so far matchmaking is not finished being tuned, if at some point we get weight limits or battle value, having a lighter "version" of the "best" mech for the job seems a good enough reason to have lesser redundant mech in the game + they will have there quirks.

[Nirilus]

megoblocks, on 20 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

Neither of those can do 5 or 6 AC2s either, which completely out dakka dakka the 4x or the K2. I laugh at your silly missile boat and shred them with glee.

hex AC2 was my first build. Not impressed.

[Tyranum]

PsychoTurtle, on 19 March 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

It looks like it smells exactly what angels taste like.

This checks out....science!

[OneEzKill]

Holy Headshot batman! every time this mech has died on me was due to headshot whether head was destroyed with center torso too or all by itself. It's ALWAYS death by headshot. please fix.

[BlueSanta]

I normally pick one variant of a mech to keep and ultimately master. For the Jagermech, I chose the S variant because of the hardpoints; there is really no viable 6 ballistic config at the moment (yes you can do 6 MG, which does nothing, or 6 AC2, which kills your speed) and 4 energy hardpoints are better than 2 when it comes to long-term flexibility. As for the A, well, Catapult. Which I already have 3 of.

Anyway, I just elited my S yesterday and I'm working on mastery. I have enjoyed 4 AC2 and 2 Gauss especially, and just generally having a dedicated ballistic chassis finally.

My only gripe is that without the ballistic state rewinding, ballistic shots are hitting on-screen but not registering against lights. I am also one of the many that believe a dual Gauss shot should knock a light on its ***. And something is seriously wrong with the head hitbox, possibly because of damage transfer or its size. I was headshotted through the back once with my back armor only yellow/orange. This was done with LRMs.

Edited by BlueSanta, 22 March 2013 - 11:01 AM.

[CoyDK]

Jagermech JM6-DD

Why give it 6 Balistic slots when its IMPOSSIBLE to fit anything beside 6x AC's and no ammo or 6x Machine guns. Its just pointless.

Stril ALL armor, upgrade everythign and put a tiny engien in then mabye you can get a dubble heat syncs and ammo in it but there is NO way to make it worke.

Do somthing the JM6-DD is just completly and utterly pointless!!!

[Atheus]

I've played quite a lot of matches in jagermechs now, and both my JM6-S and JM6-A have had a side torso destroyed without destroying the associated arm. It's certainly nice being able to keep using that autocannon or whatever, but it's not exactly fair.

It seems like the attached arm usually takes a lot of damage when the side torso is destroyed, but just not enough to fully destroy it.

[William Knight]

Has no one else noticed that the side torso's are huge!
Since most Jagermechs have an xl engine (and all weapons in the side and arms) this is a far bigger problem than the head being a little bit larger than the Cataphracts.

[VikingN1nja]

xl is only way to mount decent weapons but they die so easy is crap as they are fun to pilot unless we can squeeze more bullets per ton.

[Patchimus]

William Knight, on 22 March 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

Has no one else noticed that the side torso's are huge!
Since most Jagermechs have an xl engine (and all weapons in the side and arms) this is a far bigger problem than the head being a little bit larger than the Cataphracts.

I hadn't noticed.. but then I play mine with the "Fire Support" role in mind & hang back.

Play style makes or breaks these mechs, all the people saying "but this is doesn't do X better than X", really need to include Role Warfare into their min/maxing heads.

Yes a CTF can hold 5T more gear, but can it comfortably fulfil the fire support role in the same war a Jager can?


On another note, now more mechs are coming out, I'm seeing much more variety in the matches. By hanging back I'm seeing more tactics play out.. it's pretty satisfying seeing the cavalry Dragons flank around the side while our assaults brawl, LRMs flying in.. Awesome =)

[Eric darkstar Marr]

I must say I was disappointed that all the Jagers had the lower arms removed compared to the original design and record sheets.

It makes the DD less unique and the A the most desirable overall as you can have many flexible builds with it. by adding the missile hardpoints.

I would hope you fix this grievous and make the DD more unique by following the original designs more and putting lower arm crits back on the A and S.

[5th Fedcom Rat]

Putting lower arm crits on the A and S would eliminate the Ac/20 option, so um, no. As for A being the best, that's debatable: its arms have larger hitboxes (I assume this is modeled right now) so they're easier for snipers to blow off.