304 replies to this topic

[Side Step]

I keep getting headshot. Even from the sides and back.

Any other pro/con is overshadowed this major flaw.

[Hammer Hands]

Isamu The Mad, on 20 March 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

Lastly, I'm running 394 points of Ferro armor on this thing and this thing still feels like it's wearing Standard armor.

This statement makes no sense. Ferro doesn't change the way damage is absorbed, just makes the armor lighter.

Edited by Hammer Hands, 20 March 2013 - 10:10 AM.

[Cervantes88]

My 2cents about the Jagermech :

The only thing it can do that a Cat or Phract can't already do better is a fast-moving dual AC20 platform with an XL. Granted it's a fragile and easy target, but at least it's quite mobile and hits hard.

Also 5 AC2s is viable (more viable than 6 AC2s), but still a troll build with terrible heat management. It's still really fun to play.

And that's it. Sad story, but hey, at least it's better than the Spider.

[Taron]

Well, i like my K2 more.

[RolloI]

beautiful and nice, but the resistance of a medium.... not 'as I was expecting: (

[Jackie Butters]

You release a completely OP mech, and nerf the cat...how do you expect to ever balance the game when you do things like that?? many dislikes of this mech for the sake of balance.

[ho1mes]

Picked up the DD and am having a blast. The default config looked pretty fun initially, but after some time in testing grounds realized it would be a deathtrap. No ammo and no armor? Wow. Been playing around with a few different builds, have a few favorites. Right now settled on your basic bread and butter AC2 x4 with lots of ammo and beefed up armor. Had some decent success with it. Far more than with a similar build in my cataphract 4x. I wanted to bring the dakka in that mech, but always ended up dying way too easily. Too slow and arms too low. The jager on the other hand, rocks with the optimal arm placement and decent speed. Only gripes really would be the head hitbox vulnerability and the twist rate is pretty slow. Aside from that, I love this mech.

[LackofCertainty]

Did not read through the thread, but I immediately have 1 massive "What were you thinking" comment about the JM6-DD.


It mounts 2xCASE on a mech with an XL ENGINE!


I understand that the JM6-DD in cannon mounts Case with an XL engine, but that is because in TT that allowed you to salvage and repair the mech rather than having the entire thing destroyed in an ammo explosion. MWO doesn't have repair costs, so the cases literally do nothing other than waste space and tonnage. Remove the cases and put in an extra ton of ammo. It will remain mostly faithful to TT without being completely pants on head ******** whenever someone uses it during a trial week.


TL;DR
Remove the 2x case from the JM6-DD and put in a heatsink or an extra ton of ammo. Also, whoever greenlit that design to go in game should be smacked on their nose with a rolled up newspaper.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 20 March 2013 - 11:23 AM.

[Gallowglas]

Jackie Butters, on 20 March 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

You release a completely OP mech, and nerf the cat...how do you expect to ever balance the game when you do things like that?? many dislikes of this mech for the sake of balance.

OP mech? What mech are you referring to? Because once I realized how vulnerable the Jagermech was, I switched to my Atlas, Cataphract, or Stalker and was mowing them down like wheat. If that's the trademark of an OP mech, then I suppose I can sit back and enjoy the free kills.

[Krubarax]

Here are my thoughts on the JagerMech.
I played around with the two Ballistic variants (I did not try the one with missiles in the arms yet)
I did my best to build something useful.
Removed XL-engine to increase survivability. Downgraded UAC5's to AC2's to increase ammo and armour. Installed Endo-S to get more heatsinks etc.

I can sum my experience so far in this way:

It has the speed and maneuverability of an Atlas.
The Armor of a Jenner
The firepower of a Spider
And the heat efficiency of an Awesome.
As well as the final cost of a Stalker.

In addition to this it gets headshotted in 9 out of 10 games.
In other words: very impressive

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Cervantes88, on 20 March 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

The only thing it can do that a Cat or Phract can't already do better is a fast-moving dual AC20 platform with an XL.

Incorrect. Want to see why, take a CTF 4X with two or more cannons, peek over terrain, and then hit your target without turfing your shells. Think this isn't a big deal? Then perhaps long range warfare is not a concept you fully grasp. RL tanks attempt to use this to their advantage every chance they get, hell, almost any ground based military vehicle or infantryman does this, and most would likely recognize the advantage the JagerMechs' arms have over the CTF's drooping crab claws.

[Catalinasgrace]

I actually like the mech, I have all three and they seem pretty nice. My only real complaint is the fact of out of 20 matches I have been killed by a headshot 18 of those matches. The LRM's will hit for the headshot every time unless you turn to the side well in advance.

[VXJaeger]

Add 5 tons of weight even against "canon" to 70t, and Jager becomes a useable mech. Right now Jager ain't heavy nor medium, but something in between those.
Only really useable is JM6-DD equipped with dual-AC20+2ML & XL250, rest are more or less crap.

And heads hitbox is bigger than Alaska, might be good idea to adjust it smaller.

Edited by VXJaeger, 20 March 2013 - 12:46 PM.

[Laserhupe]

VXJaeger, on 20 March 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

Add 5 tons of weight even against "canon" to 70t, and Jager becomes a useable mech. Right now Jager ain't heavy nor medium, but something in between those.
Only really useable is JM6-DD equipped with dual-AC20+2ML & XL250, rest are more or less crap.

canon has variants of 70t jagers, JM7-C3BS, JM7-D, JM7-F[with ecm!] and the JM7-G. look here: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/JagerMech

Quote

And heads hitbox is bigger than Alaska, might be good idea to adjust it smaller.

true true....might ^^
every f***in hit with STILL BUGGED lrms pulverizes the head. do you test your work before you bring it life? i say no you dont.
lrm facerolling ftw. the curious thing is, every option you implemented with MCs based on is working pretty well. and get rid of consumables and bring DHS back to normal => "The difference is that a double heat sink offers twice the heat dissipation capacity of a standard heat sink, for the same mass (one ton). Their drawback is that they are much bulkier than a standard heat sink (unless integrated into a fusion engine).The advanced Clan version twice the size of a standard heat sink; Star League era double heat sinks and those later (re-)developed by the Inner Sphere are three times as bulky as a standard heat sink.".
your customers wont accept that much long, if you try to cheat them.

[VXJaeger]

Laserhupe, on 20 March 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

canon has variants of 70t jagers, JM7-C3BS, JM7-D, JM7-F[with ecm!] and the JM7-G. look here: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/JagerMech

Ok, so there's no "real" reason why PGI couldn't add 5t to now existing variants to give more versatility to them. Against their original specs true, but it would highly rise effectiveness of Jagers as ballistic platforms.
Exception of DD, all other variants can be made out of other mechs, mainly by CTFs, and they do it better.

[Atheus]

Just restating things that have already been said, but here's the rundown of things I agree with:

• Head is far too easy to hit, and far too easy to hit by accident because it's so close to center of mass. Move it up, and shrink it, imo.
  
• Cockpit looks great, but if I'm going to try to shoot down or up anywhere near the extent of the arms swivel, I can't see the targeting reticles. Pilot view needs to either move forward permanently, or lean forward when aiming low or high. What serious weapon designer would make the weapons aim places the pilot can't see? It's just silly. There are other mechs with this same problem. They should be fixed too.
  
• 3 ballistics on arms is just not viable with current ballistic choices. Maybe down the road we'll have ballistic weapons more to the tune of 3-5 tons per weapon, but nobody can fit 6 AC/2's and have a reasonable amount of ammo to feed them.
  
• Ballistic ammo - which jagermechs depend on heavily - need more shots per ton in general. Double armor means you need to do a lot more shooting - and I know the values were bumped up a bit, but they need to come up a bit more. My suggestion is to standardize on about 200 damage per ton.

• ac20 - 10/ton
  
• ac10 - 20/ton
  
• ac5/uac5 - 40/ton
  
• ac2 - 100/ton
  
• gauss 13/ton

• The last point is the sensors - what's the point of having a mech with a giant antenna on it when it doesn't do anything different than your average catapult? Give it ECM, a unique cockpit vantage, more module slots or something to justify that massive wing up there, otherwise I'd just cut the useless thing off and enjoy having a smaller silhouette and getting hit less.

[William Knight]

VXJaeger, on 20 March 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

Ok, so there's no "real" reason why PGI couldn't add 5t to now existing variants to give more versatility to them. Against their original specs true, but it would highly rise effectiveness of Jagers as ballistic platforms.
Exception of DD, all other variants can be made out of other mechs, mainly by CTFs, and they do it better.

The JM7 series is a Jihad era line of mechs (the Jihad started around 3067AD), the current game time is 3050AD.

[LackofCertainty]

Thontor, on 20 March 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

PGI does not design stock mech loadouts (except for most hero mechs)

They are pulled directly from the Battletech Technical Readouts... They are canon, designed for the Tabletop game.

CASE+XL does serve a purpose in the Battletech universe... Keeps the pilot from getting killed by ammo explosion, and prevents the mech and its engine from being completely obliterated and thus still is salvageable.

Bottom line, remove them yourself after purchasing the mech.

If you actually read my post, you'd see that:
1. I admitted it was cannon.
2. I stated that Case + XL does have uses in TT.
3. specified that while 1 and 2 are true, the fact is that there is no value from doing so in MWO.

Because Pilot death and salvage/repairs aren't used in MWO, mounting case with an XL engine is a waste of tonnage and space. Having a default mech built that way does nothing productive for that mech, and also could confuse new players into non-functional builds. I am okay with trial mechs being subpar, but if they are designed around a functionality that does not exist in MWO, then PGI needs to tweak them to fit.

It's like if they released a Hatchetman mech and give it a hatchet that takes up space and tonnage, but can't be used for anything because MWO doesn't support physical attacks. If it doesn't work, then don't put it into the game.

Hell, if they want to leave it the way it is, fine, but then they need to buff CASE so that there's a viable reason to mount it with XL engines. (maybe have case provide a damage reduction % to all ammo mounted in a location, the way missile pod doors currently prodive DR% on their location when closed)

Edited by LackofCertainty, 20 March 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Atheus, on 20 March 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

The last point is the sensors - what's the point of having a mech with a giant antenna on it when it doesn't do anything different than your average catapult? Give it ECM, a unique cockpit vantage, more module slots or something to justify that massive wing up there, otherwise I'd just cut the useless thing off and enjoy having a smaller silhouette and getting hit less.

Atheus this is patnetly absurd, and I am getting a good chuckle at your expense from this paragraph. Let's think about this, shall we? Because I can see that you have yet to do so on this subject. I can name several things in this game that, if your logic was to be followed, we would have to change JUST to satisfy your draconian need to have function trump form. Examples:

• Remove Machine guns from the game. They are primarily intended for anti-infantry and their usefulness on 'mechs could be seen as a drain on PGI development effort.
  
• Remove all air scoops from the game. There is no air in MW:O for 'mechs to use fro air cooling.
  
• Remove all hand and foot ladders from all 'mechs. We do not climb into or out of our 'mechs so these are not needed.
  
• Remove all tow hooks from all 'mechs. We do not have anything to tow in MW:O.
  
• Remove all aerials and antenna from all 'mechs. We do not use them, we use chat inside MW:O and VOIP out of it and therefore these emitter / recievers are never used.
  
• Remove the JagerMech from the game. It's primary purpose as anti-air is void as there are no aircraft to shoot down yet, and even after there ARE aircraft to shoot PGI will likely not allow the JM6 to perform it's primary duty.
  
• Remove buttons and screens from the cockpits of all 'mechs as most of them are never used.
  
• Remove all hand actuators from all mechs that have them. PGI has serious issues producing viable code on a regular basis, so it should come as no surprise the hand actuators in MW:O do absolutely nothing, and likely never will. This is programming that is drastically far out of their reach, pardon the pun. Therefore remove them as they serve no purpose, both from the 'mechlab and the 'mech itself.
  
• And so on, and so forth.

Short version - next time please do not ask for frivolous modifications to the game in one instance, unless you wish to keep amusing people with your whimsy in which case, carry on with a job well done.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 20 March 2013 - 02:17 PM.

[William Knight]

Just to reiterate, I feel the only problem with the Jagermech is that the side torsos are a little too large.
I also feel that the head is just about perfect in size as the main cause of the head capping at the moment is all the splash damage from all the missiles.

P.S
I love all the modelling work you guys have done on the thing.

Edited by William Knight, 20 March 2013 - 02:35 PM.