

Dear Pgi - Please Revise The Yen-Lo-Wang Design.
#1
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:01 AM
http://mwomercs.com/...-on-hero-mechs/
Above is the breakdown for average values.
The closest equivalent to the Wang is the CN9-A at 3,7 mil.
Average value per MC is 2360 CB's
The wang cost aproximately 9,1 Mil compared to the CN9-A's 3,7.
That's a 41% price difference and the average cost difference between an equivalent standard and hero is usually around 20-25%
You could at least have given it DHS or Endo-Steel - Or Ferro Fibrous because 5,1 million difference for the cash bonus is a WEE bit steep.
#2
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:05 AM
have purchased the deaths knell and ylw (when it was on discount)...i tend to regret the TDK...but the wang? the wang!
it's a very nice mech - a good centurion variant, as the ac20 really punshes hard
the 30% cbill boost + ac20 make it a good buy in my opinion
it could have come with already dhs or at least endo pre-installed...but the design itself is okay
#3
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:06 AM

#4
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:15 AM
#5
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:19 AM
Iacov, on 06 March 2013 - 03:05 AM, said:
Check the link above.
The CN9-A can have the same gear and the difference in cost between AC10 and 20 is a mere 200K.
You pay 5,1 MILLION extra for
-3 missile slots
+1 Module
200 000C bill AC10 upgrade to AC20
That's it. The C-bill bonus cost you 5,1 MILLION.
Compare this to the Death Knell which is damn good at +25% with double heatsinks compared to their closest commando equivalent - It's pricing is reasonable and the YLW is unfortunately not.
The YLW would benefit from perhaps double heatsinks or at LEAST move the energy mounts to the left torso for some flexibility.
Tincan Nightmare, on 06 March 2013 - 03:06 AM, said:
Initial equipment is not my concern - it's what you get for the money. The Pretty Baby is better at it's +20% cost and that one loose 3 energy mounts but that one does not cost 41% more than it's counterpart.
They could have moved energy mounts to a better position for flexibility.
Mycrus, on 06 March 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:
15 points engine boost
-3 missile mounts
+1 ballistic
For 5,1 mil
#6
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:23 AM
yeah...the difference are merely 200k...and the possibility to equip it!
personally i would prefer having missile hardpoints and what so ever in the YLW - but i still bought it because i'm a fan of battletech, of mwo and am a collector...and reviewing my wang's performance so far, i'm very satisfied with it
#7
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:26 AM
#8
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:30 AM
Iacov, on 06 March 2013 - 03:23 AM, said:
And the CN9-A does not have the same R-Arm design to fit the AC/20?
#9
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:40 AM
Terror Teddy, on 06 March 2013 - 03:19 AM, said:
Initial equipment is not my concern - it's what you get for the money. The Pretty Baby is better at it's +20% cost and that one loose 3 energy mounts but that one does not cost 41% more than it's counterpart.
They could have moved energy mounts to a better position for flexibility.
Well what I was trying to say is that lore wise there were 2 versions of YLW. The pre-Clan invasion version with an AC/20 and 2 med. lasers in the ct (one may have been rear mounted can't remember), and the post-Clan model that had a Gauss in place of the AC/20 and 2 med pulse lasers that were moved to the left arm. So lore wise eventually the YLW did end up with a different hardpoint layout. Now wether PGI would ever change the YLW's hardpoints, or offer an 'upgrade' to the later version, don't know on that one. I know that the mech would be far easier to strip of weapons if both arms carried all the hardpoints, but it would allow for an increase in firepower as you could go for more than 2 med or 1 lg laser (either pulse or standard) in the CT with the arms higher crit space.
#10
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:47 AM
Terror Teddy, on 06 March 2013 - 03:30 AM, said:
And the CN9-A does not have the same R-Arm design to fit the AC/20?
no, the ylw does not a lower arm actuator (so it cant move the arm horizontally, only up and down) to fit in the ac20
other centurions do have a lower arm actuator and therefor can't mount an ac20
#11
Posted 06 March 2013 - 03:52 AM
Tincan Nightmare, on 06 March 2013 - 03:40 AM, said:
Well what I was trying to say is that lore wise there were 2 versions of YLW. The pre-Clan invasion version with an AC/20 and 2 med. lasers in the ct (one may have been rear mounted can't remember), and the post-Clan model that had a Gauss in place of the AC/20 and 2 med pulse lasers that were moved to the left arm.
I have no problem with that, but it's certainly underperforming. A use for mechs with shields or melee weapons would certainly make it more OOMPH for the money.
Price should have been about 4K to be reasonable or give it some extra hardpoint but no actual equipment in them.
Edited by Terror Teddy, 06 March 2013 - 03:54 AM.
#12
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:01 AM
But my main drive was the paintjob
#13
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:06 AM
or another laser or 2
#14
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:35 AM
#15
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:36 AM
#16
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:40 AM
Edited by jay35, 06 March 2013 - 04:44 AM.
#17
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:41 AM
#18
Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:46 AM
PGI took it out of the game in the first round of Pay-to-Win to try and make more people buy the Pay-To-Wang even though it's a stock mech of the era that had been in CB since the Centurion was first introduced.
#19
Posted 06 March 2013 - 07:13 AM
jay35, on 06 March 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:
Yea, but a cheaper standard CN9-A could have a AC/20 as well right? It's arm design is the same isnt it? No cash bonus but +3 missile slots and 5,1 million cheaper.
#20
Posted 06 March 2013 - 07:15 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users