3
But as I've looked at and played around with the Centurion, I've really started to lose my interest in the Hunchback (with some exceptions; more on that later). Generally, it seems that the Centurion does what the Hunchback does, but with small benefits. For example, the 4SP is great, yes. But let's compare it to the CN9-AL.
Pros:
One extra energy slot
Better energy articulation (on 2 of them, at least)
Missiles are spread between right and left torso, so both have to be removed to render you missile-less
That's literally all I can come up with.
Cons:
Much larger torsos, so the third Pro above actually doesn't really help that much if at all
Lower engine threshold
Half the zombie firepower
Much larger center torso means really only a fraction of the zombie power
Missiles are spread out between torsos instead of localized in one location (basically the CN9s have a built-in, weightless Artemis in comparison, that can also be given Artemis if you want)
Doesn't have the flexible "shield arm" that you can use to soak damage or save tonnage
No way in hell you can use an XL engine with it, which can work on the Centurion even if it's generally seen as sub-optimal
And the thing is, that's generally considered the best Hunchback out there. But it gets annihilated in a side-by-side comparison, unless I'm missing something(s).
Other variants don't have quite the same glaring problems when stacked up, but I still tend to find that a Centurion will usually do a Hunchback's job better. The one exception is if you don't want to spend money on the Yen-lo-Wang, and really want to mount an AC/20 on a medium. Then you have no choice. But, if you do, here's how the HBK-4H would stack up against it.
Pros:
Three extra energy hardpoints
Better articulation on 2 of the energy hardpoints
Autocannon is better protected
Cons:
Much smaller engine threshold
Worse articulation on the autocannon, which is the only reason you're running the 'Mech
Making use of the extra energy hardpoints means you don't have space for a decent engine or heatsinks along with enough ammo to feed the autocannon, so the first Pro doesn't even help much
The Autocannon is absolutey enormous, so the third Pro doesn't help much either
Same profile size and zombie ability problems as the earlier comparison
Unlike the above comparison, not only can you not realistically run an XL engine, you can't even fit an XL engine even if you wanted to, and if you did, you'd die instantly anyways
So... there's your side-by-side. I should note that if you want to run a smaller autocannon, the 4H is probably very good, because you can cram in the extra lasers and enough DHS to keep them running cool without sacrificing ammo or running such a small engine you turn yourself into a third of a Cataphract with a huge target painted on your shoulder.
Then there's also the CN9-A, which does missile-boating better than any Hunchback, and the CN9-D which has ridiculous speed. Also, The 9-A can mount the zombie lasers, the triple missiles, and still mount a small ballistics weapon. Or you can do it with one less missile slot on the 9-D and give it a huge (probably XL) engine. You can't do that on a Hunchback. That flexibility, coupled with the ways the Centurions outperform their most direct counterparts, just seems to doom most Hunchbacks. The HBK-4G just seems silly, since triple AC/2 (and all in one vulnerable torso tumor) doesn't seem like a smart way to play, and the HBK-4J is... well I guess it has a place if you want to run LRM 15-20. And it has 2 more energy hardpoints than the CN9-AL (which you can't use at the same time as 2 LRM 15 or LRM 20 anyways, so in that case, you'd do just as well in the AL or in a 4P).
Oh, and if you want to try a Gauss Rifle medium, you'd be crazy to try it on a Hunchback because one solid hit to the hunch would likely take out your engine.
Can anyone pick apart my critique here? I'm at 10 'Mechs now, and looking to sell some off to make room. Unless someone can point out some glaring oversight I'm making, I have pretty much no inclination to keep my 4-SP or 4-H. Still, general consensus seems to be that HBKs are great and CN9s are just a worse version. I just cannot for the life of me see it. All I can think of is maybe the Centurion is larger overall, but I don't think it's by much. Like, larger by the size of the head and shoulder fins. I suppose the right arm sticks out farther too, but it seems way easier to protect that than the Hunchback's hunch, and often goes unused anyways.
I should add that the one redemptive variant, in my opinion, is the HBK-4P, because nothing else in its class does laserboating quite like it does. And that's cool. I happen to like it, so I'll hang onto it. Then again, once the Blackjack BJ-3 or possibly BJ-1DB comes out, this'll probably start collecting dust. The Blackjack happens to be my favorite 'Mech. And also it has a better hardpoint configuration, with jumpjets, and while it's 5 tons lighter, it moves with its biggest engine (235) at the same speed as a Hunchback with its largest engine (260), which means it saves 2.5 tons on engine size if you run them at max speed after you add the extra heatsink. There's also the very real chance based on the concept art that it will have minuscule side torsos, so an XL would be a low-risk investment. So yeah. Eggs-in-a-basket laserboat with an extra 2.5 tons of space (oh, and 3 criticals because of the extra DHS in the engine)? Or superior articulation, superior spread, superior zombie ability, jump jets, and possibly the most viable medium XL build? Hmm, that's a tough one.
