

The Hunchback Needs Help
#121
Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:45 PM
Mediums in general are underpowered currently; no reason to ever take a medium over a light, heavy, or assault. Especially since Lights are both better, and cheaper.
#123
Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:39 PM
Lokust Davion, on 06 April 2013 - 06:05 PM, said:
this buff is especially needed for the 4G.
According to the wiki, even the 4G has 144 degrees of twist after efficiencies are maxed; this is equal to the info on the Catapults (but I'm not sure if that's pre- or post-nerf info on the Cat.) I've managed to shoot and kill several enemies that were directly behind me, or close enough to it.
The torso twist and arm flex that the Hunchbacks already have is a great asset that gets overlooked on paper, and is one of the reasons that I pilot HBK's almost exclusively. Personally, and I admit this is beyond the scope of "quirks", I'd like to see some of the hardpoints moved from RT to CT or LT, such as one of the ballistics in the G, and one or two of the lasers in the J and H. Not sure what to do with the P, and the SP is about as perfect as they come. Or maybe a built-in CASE-like something that keeps the RT from taking the RA with it. That'd give me just a little more zombie power when the hunch goes out.
In terms of a quirk that could go across the entire chassis...I don't know. Better stopping and starting would be appropriate because of the chassis' origins as an urban fighter, but the Cent already took that.
#125
Posted 07 April 2013 - 02:43 PM
What bothers me much, is that they are the slowest mediums of the bunch. I think they should need some love, at least an increase in engine cap to 270 or 275 like the cents can do now.
So yes, please, raise the engine cap of the hunchies, that's it.
#126
Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:20 PM
Since Hunchbacks have rather vulnerable hunches, they are more fit for peek a booing behind large mechs or cover.
However, since I never tried other Hunchback variants, I have the HBK-4SP which I do rather well in.

Edited by ZeProme, 07 April 2013 - 03:21 PM.
#127
Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:22 PM
#128
Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:24 PM
#129
Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:35 PM
I think ill have a stroke if one more person sez mediums suck..
"lets say it all together."
Its you that sucks, not the mech.
#130
Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:55 PM
Look at the spine on the phranken paint job to sort of see what I am getting at.
#131
Posted 07 April 2013 - 04:45 PM
Koniving, on 07 April 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:
In its element of urban environments, it performs superbly. Take it out of its designed location and you are going to have issues.
"The Hunchback is a respected and feared Reunification War-era street fighter that has been in production since its introduction in 2572. Built for urban combat and close range brawling, this BattleMech has the heavy armor and weaponry to stand up against any foe in the dense cover of a city environment."
It is a city defense unit. It is also useful as a command lance escort. It is not intended to be an open field brawler. Every mech has its designed roles.
In comparison, Centurions are designed specifically to escort Trebuchets.
It's great to quote the battletech lore, but anyone who plays a cent to escort a treb has something weird going on; especially because the cent came out months before the treb.
The 4G/H are best in a close, urban environment, but that doesn't make them good there. What made the 4G good in TT was the fact that the AC20 would punch through armor much more easily with the halved armor values compared to MWO, and the relatively low cost, which is not really a factor in MWO. The slow cooldown on the AC20 means that any time you run into a smart opponent, even with the surprise of urban cover, you get one shot off that hurts the armor, they return fire to your hunch, and you get a second shot off that maybe opens them up if you hit the same place again. But by the time your second shot is launched, you'll be down a RT, and now have relatively few options left to you; at maximum, two medium lasers.
#132
Posted 08 April 2013 - 08:00 AM
Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 08 April 2013 - 08:01 AM.
#133
Posted 08 April 2013 - 08:50 AM
(1) Cicada's and Trebuchets can fill in the speed gap between Lights and Heavies, but Centurions and Hunchbacks can't (excluding Cent-D). so cents and hunchies are weaker, they just don't have the option of choosing large engines. even the recent boost for centurions, going from 260 engine limit to 275, isn't enough.
why did they restrict engines? because the hunchback has a lot of hard points for his size, and carrying 9 small lasers on the small maps in early beta made him deadly. now the maps are larger, and carrying 9 small lasers will make you useless 50% of the time, but the engine restrictions remain
why is speed important? because we all play FPS games and are good at aiming, which negates the random hit locations BT used. so we use heavy mechs and assault mechs loaded with PPCs and Gauss and core cents and hunchies in a few shots. wihout speed, the medium mechs can't get away from the direct fire weapons
solution to this problem? Allow all medium mechs to equip up to the 300 engine. this will also make all centurion variants usefull
(2) ELO is currently taking other things into account much greater than mech weight. i bring a medium, the enemy team gets an Atlas. i'm not joking, i played a match where the enemy team had 7 assault (3 atlas, 3 highlander HM, 1 stalker) and 1 other. we had 2 of each weight class and got stomped. i know some people play above their level, and ELO is supposed to account for this, but unbalanced matches this bad are ridiculous. so everyone is playing heavy to asault mechs because your team is "guarenteed" those big mechs, and the enemy team is random. the best they can do it equal you in tonnage. so more big mechs with big guns shooting slow hunchies
solution to this problem? either tonnage matchmaking system, or they go back to weight-class matchmaking... then skill level (ELO) secondary
Hunchback pilot Hadros
#134
Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:48 AM
Hadros, on 08 April 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:
(2) ELO is currently taking other things into account much greater than mech weight. i bring a medium, the enemy team gets an Atlas. i'm not joking, i played a match where the enemy team had 7 assault (3 atlas, 3 highlander HM, 1 stalker) and 1 other. we had 2 of each weight class and got stomped. i know some people play above their level, and ELO is supposed to account for this, but unbalanced matches this bad are ridiculous. so everyone is playing heavy to asault mechs because your team is "guarenteed" those big mechs, and the enemy team is random. the best they can do it equal you in tonnage. so more big mechs with big guns shooting slow hunchies
solution to this problem? either tonnage matchmaking system, or they go back to weight-class matchmaking... then skill level (ELO) secondary
A bigger engine is less tonnage for weapons, ammo, and heat sinks, so you wind up nerfing yourself for the sake of a few KPH.
As for the second bit about matchmaking, the devs announced last week that they found a bug in the Elo calculation that caused some pilots to have higher Elo than they should, and also that they're going to introduce weight class matching again. Both tweaks should go in next week.
http://mwomercs.com/...46#entry2228746
#135
Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:52 AM
Cicadas are lights, they don't count. (even though cicadas are meh as well)
Edited by LordBraxton, 15 April 2013 - 10:52 AM.
#136
Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:53 AM
Edited by IG 88, 15 April 2013 - 10:55 AM.
#137
Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:56 AM
Fenris Krinkovich, on 15 April 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:
A bigger engine is less tonnage for weapons, ammo, and heat sinks, so you wind up nerfing yourself for the sake of a few KPH.
Exactly this. "Bigger Engines" sounds good at first, but all that weight is really going to put a damper on combat effectiveness.
Besides, out of all the HBK threads I've seen, there are virtually no load-outs being shared that are using the current max engine size.
#138
Posted 15 April 2013 - 12:27 PM
Mechwarrior, Battletech.. whatever you wanna call it, has 4 Classes as we know.
main difference with this game is that in the Battletech universe and in other Competitive Modes when we were playing MW4, ECONOMY was playing an important role.
Actually Economy and Jump Ships weight restirctions together.
When you have those restriction, Medium class and any "sub-par" configuration assumes its own role. When you have no money or you have weight restriction, you gotta use what you can.
MWO players are just spoiled players with no understanding of economy. If there are no restrictions there are no reason (other than cosmetc) to not use the best and most expensive mech.
Assaults are better than Heavies, although some Heavies can still be usefull.
Heavies are better than Mediums, period. What makes the difference is in the economy. Mediums are quite good, cost less and their maintanence is cheap... but if you don t have to worry about your money, why even bother?
Lights are very useful in general, therefore will always be there on the battlefield.
Why do we have to repeat all of these for the 4th billion time?
#139
Posted 15 April 2013 - 01:17 PM
BatWing, on 15 April 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:
Mechwarrior, Battletech.. whatever you wanna call it, has 4 Classes as we know.
main difference with this game is that in the Battletech universe and in other Competitive Modes when we were playing MW4, ECONOMY was playing an important role.
Actually Economy and Jump Ships weight restirctions together.
When you have those restriction, Medium class and any "sub-par" configuration assumes its own role. When you have no money or you have weight restriction, you gotta use what you can.
MWO players are just spoiled players with no understanding of economy. If there are no restrictions there are no reason (other than cosmetc) to not use the best and most expensive mech.
Assaults are better than Heavies, although some Heavies can still be usefull.
Heavies are better than Mediums, period. What makes the difference is in the economy. Mediums are quite good, cost less and their maintanence is cheap... but if you don t have to worry about your money, why even bother?
Lights are very useful in general, therefore will always be there on the battlefield.
Why do we have to repeat all of these for the 4th billion time?
As you said elsewhere:
Quote
#140
Posted 15 April 2013 - 01:21 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users