Jump to content

Ask The Devs 36 - Answers!


283 replies to this topic

#261 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 02 May 2013 - 11:24 PM

Edit: kindle not agreeing with this site recently...

Seen as I wasn't even trying to bring up DHS, and I knew ELO was going to get mentioned... I was playing this Stalker back when it first came out,before ELO I believe (correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think I am). So, just to show how much I have played this mech since the individual mech stats came out... you tell me if it's worth a week or two of play just to upgrade this mech.

View PostTesunie, on 26 April 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:


Posted Image

I'll just let my states speak for themselves.

Sure, my Stalker 3F may have more kills, but I think that's expected for an Assault. But I feel I've done well enough for my mediums. They are still very viable, in their own way. Now if only assists where counted into these stats. I feel you'd see a much different and important changed between my weight classes of my mechs. Mediums would probably have a ton of assists, where as my assaults and heavies have more kills. That is the true role of the medium mech, assisting other mechs.

EDIT
The break down:
Dragon 1N = LBXAC10, ERPPC, 2 LRM5s= 250 damage average per match
Hunchback 4SP= 5 med lasers, 2 LRM5s = 238 damage average
Centurion AL= PPC 2 SRM4s = 318 damage average (5 matches) <before missile hotfix
Cicada 2A= 6 med lasers = 281 damage average (6 matches)
Cicada "Hollander 2" 3C= 98 KPH Guass, med laser = 115 damage average (6 matches)
Stalker 3F= 6 med lasers, 4 LRm5s = 345 damage average (9 matches)
Jagermech S= 2 AC20s = 239 damage average

I have marked those with too few real matches to give a decent rating, but I have 2 heavies and a medium that has a good pool of data to reference too.
Stalker just goes to show you that damage isn't everything, and/or that I'm probably best with a Stalker.
Centurion shows that a medium can be a viable threat. My Hunchback shows that they can be fairly deadly even with a build most people say is "junk" (I've heard that before on my hunchback build).

Does any of this mark me as a great pilot? I don't think so, but it gives some numbers to crunch on if mediums really are outclassed by other weight classes. I'd have to say... no.


Posted that in another thread, and for some decent information on mech usage and stats on different class mechs. Here, you can see that this Stalker, non optimized or not, is a fairly effective build, but did I argue that it couldn't be improved upon? I don't believe I did. However, sometimes, you just need to play what feels right. I play for fun. That means playing whatever I feel like. I need no other reason besides that.



<p>

View PostPurgatus233, on 02 May 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This confirms my assumptions about your build, which I estimated to be the 300 standard engine with 5 ML, 2 LRM 10, 2 tons of ammo, 29 heat sinks, and nearly maxed armor.</p>
<p>
</p>

So close, but wrong. You want to talk about efficiency, and then add in two LRM10s instead on 4 LRM5s? 2 tons ammo? Guess that's not going to be planned to be a long fight. And no. I'm not going to bother posting my build here. I did that in another thread and people wanted to change it to &quot;make it better&quot;. If you change it, then it is your build, not mine. I also think you underestimate the extra armor of an assault compared to a medium. And, you forgot about a laser... Saved 2 tons with the LRM5s which is what's throwing you off.

I will tell you, I believe it runs stock armor, but I might be wrong. Not going to waste my time again to just be told how low my ELO must be by people who can't understand personal taste. Actually, I'll let my Stalker stats speak for themselves, in its whole total of 9 matches. Make of it as you will, it's effective as is. Effective by the way, means it works well, not works the best out there.

<p>

View PostPurgatus233, on 02 May 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

</p>
<p>I just want to point out the transition in your arguments over time.</p>
<p>You start by basically asserting that certain things work for certain people. On its face, this is undeniably true, but the subtle underlying argument is that there are some items/builds which, when matched with the appropriate skillset/playstyle, provide some kind of synergy that makes them better *for that person.*</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You provide examples of a slow light mech, and single heat sink Stalker.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You then transition to saying that you’ve “done the math” and that the differences are negligible.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You mention that “<em>A Jagermech with dual AC20 can be just as effective as one with dual gauss, or 4 AC5s, or 2 AC2s and 2 UAC5s. It's all in how it's played and what you want it to do.”</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>And finally <em>“A Jagermech with dual AC20 can be just as effective as one with dual gauss, or 4 AC5s, or 2 AC2s and 2 UAC5s. It's all in how it's played and what you want it to do.”</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Now, this is classic.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Making vague statements about “preferences” is fine, if a bit hard to really pin down. Some people might prefer their mechs to perform worse, that’s true.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But it’s where you are basically asserting that “all choices are equally effective in the right hands (paraphrasing but the idea is there) that you start to really go astray.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It’s simply. Not. True.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A slow light might be “effective” i.e. it can “do something,” but it will always be less effective than a heavier mech which can carry more armor and more weapons while achieving the same speed. This is not a matter of preference; this is simply an objective fact.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Likewise, your Stalker might be “effective” in terms of being able to accomplish things, but it will always be more effective with DHS. It’s simply a fact.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You say you have 30 heat sinks.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Well, let’s call it 29 heat sinks, with nearly maxed armor except the legs, 5 medium lasers, 2 LRM 10s and 2 tons of ammo. This sounds pretty close to your build, but I might be off by a bit. It’s irrelevant. Smurfy lists your cooling efficiency at 40%.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Moving to double heat sinks, your engine heat sinks immediately replace 20 of your 29 original heat sinks.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In order to replace the other 9, you must purchase and install 7 more (that gives you a bit more efficiency, actually).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You now have 12 tons of additional weight available.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>12 TONS.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Now, you could do all kinds of things with that weight. You could add weapons or upsize them, using some of the additional tonnage for more heat sinks. You have plenty of room. You could go for a bigger engine (though not that much bigger than the 300 I already have in there). You could go “INFINITE AMMO UNLOCKED” mode on your LRMs and spam them to your heart’s content.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Lots of things. But the point is, for the exact same performance, you get a huge amount of extra tonnage to work with. And crit slots are simply not an issue for this build. And at this precise cooling performance, you are only using TWO more crit slots than with the singles.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The issue is that you just don’t like that it’s simply “better.” You eventually start discussing that this is a “remnant” mech from “back in the day” that you just basically can’t be arsed to change.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Finally, you make the classic fluff appeal in a last, desperate attempt at justification.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The reality is, you don’t need to justify anything.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If you like to see steam rising from your legs when standing in water (that’s been implemented, right…? It’s been a while since I’ve driven a SHS mech…), or if the sight of bulky doubles in your mechlab crit layout visually offends you, of if you simply don’t want to be like everyone else, then that’s “valid.” But it isn’t “just as effective”… it’s not. The danger comes when you try to propagate the idea that they are all “equally effective” choices.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Even your c-bill argument is simply rationally lacking. Having 12 extra tons to play with will simply make your mech better, making your income go up with that mech. We see 15% of our tonnage made available but in reality you will see more than a 15% increase in your effectiveness, because the last 25% of your tons are simply more meaningfully spent than the first 75%.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If you have an aesthetic and emotional attachment to single heat sinks and being unique, just say that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But this thread is fundamentally about balance, and the injection of those kinds of appeals to emotion camouflaged in pseudo-logic and 3<sup>rd</sup> grade “everyone’s entitled to their opinion” stuff is just not going to pass the sniff test.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You are suffering from cognitive dissonance, trying to rationally justify an irrational decision. Just embrace the irrationality, admit that it’s an emotional choice and move on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It should be noted, that if this is a “flaw” it is fundamentally a flaw in design. XL engines, which you also note are prolific, are NOT “simply better” than standard engines and in some cases are much worse. This is because there are genuine trade-offs in survivability and crit-space which make that decision much more situational, much closer to your above explanation of “the right choice for the right situation.”</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So if you are irritated that DHS are not balanced, then just say that, but don’t argue that, in some weird way they actually are.</p>
<p>
</p>

I thought I had 31 SHS, but that could have been my old PPC Stalker before I upgraded it with DHS... Still. 12 tons. Okay. Your point? Larger engine, slightly better cooling and heat cap... maybe replace a set LRM5s for LRM10s... I've been down this road before. I know. The design could possibly be upgraded... wait. Didn't I already say that?

Oh, and you missed the point where I was trying to mention different mechs and load outs for different people... I can use and do what I feel is a good amount of work in the team with a cicada that doesn't even breach 100 kph. Can everyone? Probably not. I've heard of one person in a mocked up Urbanmech doing tons of damage. Could I pull that of? I don't think I could. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned my Stalker and only mentioned slow light mech designs that I've used well myself. Then, the typical &quot;DHS are betta&quot; crowd could have stayed out of it and we could discuss slow moving lights, which was my primary reason for responding. (Actually, I was reading the thread because I had a question I had asked get answered, and then wanted to join in the conversation about the Spider 5k, which can make some decent builds. I even wanted, and did, mention that a standard 5k can do well, in a team with the right pilot.)

This thread actually isn't about balance, it's about questions the devs decided to answer from questions brought up by the community. Balance might be raised in a question, but the thread itself was not created with the soul purpose of discussing balance. A question raised was for someone to call out a single build for the Spider 5k that doesn't involve the &quot;underpowered machine guns&quot;. I did, as well as mentioning a couple Cicada 3c builds, which was another ballistic &quot;light&quot; mech mentioned in the thread. I only pointed out my Stalker build to show that, sometimes, builds someone else thinks can't work ends up working well, in the right hands. Effective also does not mean best.

Now, why don't you just admit you don't like people who mention something that goes counter to your belief of mech construction, and admit you are responding with emotion. Yes, I like my Stalker as is right now. Didn't I say that? I believe I said I also don't wish to spend the c-bills (which are more than just the advertised 1.5 million when finished) on the upgrade at this time. Key words here are &quot;at this time&quot;. Maybe if/when I feel like playing the Stalker more often, I might decide to upgrade...

Last I knew, everyone was entitled to their opinion. I will tell you I once ran as 4 PPC Stalker with SHS. Upon advise and new information (someone's advice/opinion) I upgraded it to DHS. Maxing crit space after weapons on DHS, I got a marginal heat efficiency increase according to the in game mech lab, and all I could do was add in a bigger engine to fill in the extra weight. So, in the end, for all the c-bills I placed into it, I didn't see improvement on heat management, but I did get a boost to speed... on my sniping mech. Didn't need the speed, but it does come in handy sometimes. Shall I post a smurfy on this one? Am I saying it didn't improve that build? Nope. It did. Do I regret the upgrade? No.

Oh, and your understanding of logic is... interesting. It's not logical to save time and c-bills by not upgrading a mech I'm really using right now? So mechs I'm not should be upgraded first over mechs I am using? How does that make sense? Think you logic, then get back to me. I thought it was perfectly logical to not upgrade a mech not being used right now in favor of mechs I'm more interested in mastering as of this moment, like saving up for my next Jagermech to get the basics done, and elites after that.

<p>

View PostPurgatus233, on 02 May 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

</p>
<p>One other thing to keep in mind is that ELO will make people think that things are more effective than they really are, for reasons that should be obvious.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The fact that you say you can &quot;melt an Atlas&quot; with 6 medium lasers before he can melt you back suggests that something else MIGHT be going on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>My atlas, for instance, with my AC20, 3xASRM4 and twin Large Lasers, has the same heat efficiency as your Stalker, and MASSIVELY more effective short/mid range dps. In a &quot;melting match&quot; you are certain to lose against a properly built Atlas unless piloted by someone who is incapable of hitting a 50 kph Stalker at close range.</p>
<p>
</p>

You forget, I have LRMs. I can strike with those at range, hiding when needed. You forget that we work in teams. You forget that some pilots might have pin point accuracy with some weapons. If I can, theoretically, weaken a spot with some LRMs, when I do get closer, 6 med lasers can finish a section off. I might even have some allies help me with this. Or, because I am slow, being an assault and all, by the time I get to you, you might have already gotten beat up by an ally, letting me take advantage of either a spotter, or previous damage to pin point destroy. Or, a common error people make with me, charge into me recklessly because you see LRMs, think I'm a stupid easy to kill LRM boat, find out I've got more bite than you expected, and I'm near other LRM mechs who are using my distraction and defence to get range on you to continue to shoot their LRMs at you add I blunt your attacks, soak up your damage, and together we take you down, as a team.

Many factors come up in battle. I'm just relating what normally happens with me. And I won't say I get way unscathed.


Oh, and if I could, I wouldn't mind a 1 on 1 challenge. But we can't, and it probably would not prove much of anything anyway.


So, once more, just encase you didn't get it, yes. My Stalker could probably use DHS and could be improved by them. However, I do not wish to spend the c-bills on it. You forget to include into your math the cost of the additional DHS needed after the upgrade. I've also already mastered the Stalker, and have moved onto the Jagermech, Hunchback and Centurion as my current projects. And as a side note, if I want to be a wrecking ball and earn more c-bills, I still jump into my Stalker 3f, as it seems to be efficient in my hands, even now with the current state of LRMs or in the older version of LRMs.

So, are you guys done trying to pick apart a stalker build you want to guess at how it's made and plays , or is this discussion going to revolve off an old Stalker that still kicks butt when it needs to? Personally, I've been really tempted to pick up a Spider 5k to try my hands at a real Hollander design (of something closer than my Cicada). Maybe I'll rebuy my Spider when I finish the Jagermech...

Edited by Tesunie, 02 May 2013 - 11:43 PM.


#262 Purgatus233

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 22 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 08:09 AM

Hard to respond to everything, and frankly I don't think that's what you're asking for or wanting.

I will say, I should have used "discussion" rather than "thread." I actually thought about it after I posted it but was too lazy to go back and fix it. This THREAD is about dev questions, but the
DISCUSSION we were having was definitely about balance.

I definitely didn't realize that you had only played nine matches with this mech, but what I want you to realize is that this fact invalidates your arguments just as much as it invalidates my "economic rationality" argument about upgrading. Yes, there is going to be some minimum number of matches required before you break even on such an investment, and if we were really, really bored and had no jobs and no lives we could do some experiments to determine average increases in C-bill income, calculate a simple payback, and voila, we would know the answer as to whether it was worth it, based upon the number of games you intended to play.

I can tell you, if you haven't really played the mech, or plan to play the mech, it's not worth it. It’s kind of like arguing that the gas mileage on your Ford F-450 pickup truck is a non-issue as long as it stays parked in your garage all year. It’s… technically true, but it’s not an argument in favor of the Ford F-450 pickup truck as a daily commuter.

So… if you don’t play the mech, and don’t plan on playing the mech… then no you shouldn’t invest in it. But neither should you be arguing for the effectiveness of a build that you played for NINE MATCHES months ago and never touched since. Maybe you should sell it so you can invest in DHS for the mech you ARE playing.

A lot of the other arguments you are making about your performance against an Atlas boil down to “if someone else on my team does a lot of the work for me, I can probably finish him off with my lasers.” Or “if he lets me pound him for a long time with one half of my weapons first, then I can probably finish him off with my lasers.”

“You forget, I have LRMs. I can strike with those at range, hiding when needed.”

And your opponents don’t have LRMs, or Gauss rifles, or UAC5s? They can’t hide when needed?

“You forget that we work in teams.”

Your opponent has a team also.

“You forget that some pilots might have pin point accuracy with some weapons.”
Your opponent might be one of those “some people,” too.

Etc. Etc. None of what you are saying is incorrect, but what you fail to notice is that basically you are taking your actual mech out of the equation.

There is no question that an inferior mech can beat a superior mech, with assistance, with greater piloting skill, with greater teamwork. But your mech is still inferior, demonstrably.

“Last I knew, everyone was entitled to their opinion.”

Entitlement is an interesting concept. I cannot stop you from forming any opinion on any topic you want, but I can tell you if I think your opinion is wrong, or misguided, and explain why you shouldn’t try and spread your opinion to others when it’s wrong or misguided.

“Now, why don't you just admit you don't like people who mention something that goes counter to your belief of mech construction, and admit you are responding with emotion.”

I’m not sure if you’re talking to me here, or if you’re paraphrasing me talking to you. Both?

I definitely don’t give a flying flip what you put on your mech unless you are in my corp doing organized drops with me. In a PuG, I think you’re entitled to load your autocannons with cream pies and shower your opponent’s with glitter from your LRM tubes if that’s what makes you happy.

The emotional response I have is when someone makes fallacious arguments to try and justify their choices when they are not, in fact rational choices, from the perspective of trying to be effective in the game. I’m not trying to tell you that being as effective in the game as possible SHOULD be your goal. It doesn’t have to be. It should only be your goal if that is HOW YOU HAVE FUN.

But, again, saying: “I have played this mech less than a dozen matches and don’t plan on playing it any more so I’m not going to fix it to make it better cause it’s not worth it to me.”

Is a fundamentally different argument than: “Hey it all comes down to playstyle and preference and really either option is just as valid depending upon the player and what they are trying to do with their mech and the role that they want to play and oh by the way I don’t like DHS cause of fluff and reasons.”

And yes, you might be a far better mech pilot than I am. Noted. Acknowledged. I don’t know. It’s also irrelevant.

Finally, what you don’t seem to understand is that I’m not trying to mock you, or belittle you, or tell you you’re “wrong” for your choices. I’m truly sorry if you’re feeling attacked, because that’s not my intent. Sometimes my writing comes across harshly, and I am trying (but perhaps failing) to note that there is a very large difference between you personally preferring something for emotional/aesthetic reasons (totally reasonable) and your arguing that the two things are essentially equivalents in efficacy and that it comes down to playstyle/preference (this is simply not true).

And allow me to emphasize, once more, that the REAL problem with DHS is that PGI has not made it a “real” choice. It’s simply a straight upgrade. It’s better in every way, in 99% of the situations you will encounter (the 1% being that rare instance where you are short of critical slots for the same cooling capacity, which is actually rather rare given the increased efficacy of your engine heat sinks). And not just “marginally” better. DRAMATICALLY better.

I’m a firm proponent that things SHOULD be more like the way you envision – that player style, mech role, etc. mean that both options are VALID and SITUATIONALLY PREFERABLE ones. But currently that’s just not the case.

Edited by Purgatus233, 03 May 2013 - 08:10 AM.


#263 ICEFANG13

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,718 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 08:20 AM

14-4? That's not stats. 9 games? No wonder those 16 games to get DHS sound like a nightmare.

#264 GrindcoreJoe

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 43 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:09 PM

Question:

I have played enough to bring up my Mechs to Master. I have to convert XP to GXP for real money. Will that change?

#265 GrindcoreJoe

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 43 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:19 PM

And another thing:

The effectissnes of a Mech can not be seen to the other 7 MechWarriors in a Team. Maybe it would work for the Teams, if everyone could chose its Mechs best effectife range, like

Close Combat 0-400 Meters
Medium Range 300-700 Meters
Long Range 500-xxxxxxx Meters

And then show it before the Mech or the Pilot in Tab Menue.

Continue to make a good game.

#266 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:50 PM

People seem to always miss read things. I response to the "melt the face off an atlas" comment response, which implies a one on one situation, where I bring up my LRMs. I respond farther by bringing up that, though we might be talking as one on one comparison, you can't forget the team as a whole still. Yet, I get responses that switch my comments up and mix match them to sound bad. I see my comments paraphrased and taken out of their context...

You conveniently jumped over the part where I say I've mastered the mech, and I don't know about you but when I say mastered a mech, I didn't just convert GEXP into EXP but worked with the mech, playing it over and over again like the Jagermech, Dragon and Hunchback in my stats I posted. I've only played this mech 9 times since they started to keep individual mech stats. Now, picture the damage and kills done in nine matches (which includes a couple matches where my team stranded me as soon as the enemy started to push, or I had a bad run with an ammo explosion) and apply that to enough matches to get masters, before ELO as well. I'd have to say it's earned a reputation. If 9 matches have me at 14 kills to 4 deaths with an average match damage outcome of close to 400 (300 something), I'd say I'm pulling my weight and not hindering the team.

As I shall repeat to you again, could DHS improve my Stalker? Probably. Does it improve it enough to warrant the price tag (1.5 million for conversion, plus cost of additional sinks, plus cost of two steps larger engine, plus possible cost of larger LRM10s, plus cost of removing endo)? I don't feel like it does AT THIS TIME. I can cause large amounts of damage as is, don't require more speed, and have enough cooling as is to not overheat in most situations, even in caustic. (Removes your "massively more weapons", "can shoot twice as long without overheating", "tons more ammo" and several other comments because it doesn't effect it that much. I actually start to run out of crit slots with DHS and still have more weight left over. Did I mention that I rarely run out of ammo too? And yes, I do know that the engine sinks are true 2.0 sinks.)

So, you still want to decree that you have to be right when it's all a preference item? I like my mech as it is. I'm working on my Jagermech right now. I'm saving all c-bills for that. Also, as someone else stated before, whom you conveniently ignored, a mech can be built with SHS and still effective if you know what you are doing. Just like a slow light can be used effectively, by the right pilot.

What you guys seem to be trying to push is a comment like "a Jagermech is only good if it got two AC20s on it" or a comment like "LRMs are only good if boated" or "the only light mech is a fast light mech" or "Cataphrats are only good with jump, gauss and PPCs". All are incorrect statements. There are tons of effective ways to custom a mech. Are all customs equal? No. But any mech can probably do well with the right pilot in it. I've witnessed a 4 machine gun spider working in tandem with his team to strip weapons from enemies with armor breaches, and he did well at it, removing weapons and attack power from mechs that where too engaged to fight a Machine gun spider. He really helped his team and annoyed his opponents even if he didn't do much damage on the end screen.

#267 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:56 PM

View PostICEFANG13, on 03 May 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

14-4? That's not stats. 9 games? No wonder those 16 games to get DHS sound like a nightmare.


16 games just to convert to DHS, excluding removing endo, buying additional sinks, etc. Not to mention, I'm trying to buy my next Jagermech for elites, as well as my next Centurion. Oh, and I actually have a job, bills and a life outside of MWO. Just like how life dropped a ceiling on my computer, making it so I can't play at all right now.

And, for the record, 14-4 in 9 matches are stats, just not necessarily stats with lot of data.

#268 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 08 May 2013 - 01:03 PM

View PostGrindcoreJoe, on 04 May 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Question:

I have played enough to bring up my Mechs to Master. I have to convert XP to GXP for real money. Will that change?


I don't think this well change. Sorry. GXP is used for a lot of things, including speeding up the time of mastering other mechs. Things that increase speed of progression of the game is a paying feature.

#269 ICEFANG13

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,718 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 05:43 PM

View PostTesunie, on 08 May 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:


16 games just to convert to DHS, excluding removing endo, buying additional sinks, etc. Not to mention, I'm trying to buy my next Jagermech for elites, as well as my next Centurion. Oh, and I actually have a job, bills and a life outside of MWO. Just like how life dropped a ceiling on my computer, making it so I can't play at all right now.

And, for the record, 14-4 in 9 matches are stats, just not necessarily stats with lot of data.


Me too, I have a life and job and stuff to do too, but I like to play with good mechs and not fireplaces, so I will play an extra 16 games to make all my mechs cooler.

9 matches is too far small of a sample to say anything. Try 50 first. Why not just put DHS on it? Its literally 100% better.

#270 bashi

    Rookie

  • 1 posts

Posted 16 May 2013 - 05:57 AM

para cuando la version en español y cuando sacaran los mech originales falta el dhaisin y el madcat y algunos mas

#271 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 16 May 2013 - 06:06 AM

View Postbashi, on 16 May 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

para cuando la version en español y cuando sacaran los mech originales falta el dhaisin y el madcat y algunos mas

http://mwomercs.com/...2-foro-espanol/

#272 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 28 May 2013 - 10:04 AM

Just encase anyone still follows this thread and the underlying topic, here is what a normal match for my Stalker looks like. My "piece of garbage" Stalker build.


Posted Image

After a month away from the game due to life, I've even bumped up my stats for the Stalker to:
_______________ M W L W/L K D K/D Damage EXP Time in matches
STALKERSTK-3F 14 9 5 1.80 20 9 2.22 4,693 8,512 01:08:30

It boils down to an average damage of 355 damage per match. Respectable, very respectable.

Once more though, could DHS improve my mech? Sure. Do I need DHS to make an EFFECTIVE mech? Not really. I'd call this mech effective as it is right now.

Edited by Tesunie, 28 May 2013 - 10:19 AM.


#273 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 28 May 2013 - 10:18 AM

View PostICEFANG13, on 08 May 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

9 matches is too far small of a sample to say anything. Try 50 first. Why not just put DHS on it? Its literally 100% better.


100% better? Do you know what 100% would entail? That would mean double damage, double speed, double armor, double... everything. It does not "make" my mech "100%" better. At best, maybe 10-20% better. Is that still better? Sure. With the weight saved from DHS, I could upgrade my LRMs to 2 racks of LRM10s and 2 LRM5s, with a little faster engine and a .05 better heat dissipation. I've been over this before. So, that would be about 10 more points of damage (10 extra tubes of LRMs), about the same heat dissipation, and about 5-10 KPH faster for an assault mech. Worth the (done the math here) extra cost of 4,406,333 c-bills? That's the cost to upgrade my Stalker from SHS to DHS, and taking advantage of the extra tonnage freed up. That is:
- Cost to change to DHS
- Cost for DHS themselves
- Cost for removing Endo Steel
- Cost for largest engine size
- Cost for the 2 LRM10s

That's almost a whole Jagermech, easily a Blackjack, Centurion, Dragon, or many other mechs I might be interested in purchasing. That's a LOT of C-bills, and a lot more C-bills than what you where talking about. Just 1,500,000 c-bills? Really? Try x3 that amount. So? Still worth it for a 10% increase in overall performance?


PS: In the screen shot end of match, in that whole match, I only overheated once, after a very long fire fight with 2 mechs at once. I'd still say that it runs cool enough.

#274 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 28 May 2013 - 11:57 AM

View PostTesunie, on 28 May 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Worth the (done the math here) extra cost of 4,406,333 c-bills?

Yeah, like C-Bills are in short supply and you have no way to earn them.
I earn about 100k CB per match, so to earn 4.4M CB I need to play 44 matches. Looking at my other stats (check below): 44 matches is almost 30k XP, more then enough to unlock all basic skills.
14 matches can hardly be considered a sample, but let us know how your stats look when you have three-digit number of matches played. And 355 damage per match in an assault mech? I have 400 damage per match in my 3F (246 matches played) and I think it's pretty low.
Your XP per match: 608, mine - 667
Your damage per match: 355, mine - 400
Your W/L: 1.80, mine - 1.67
Your K/D: 2.22, mine - 2.40
I consider myself an average Stalker pilot, so that makes you below-average.

You don't have to upgrade your engine or LRMs, you can still use ones you have already, so the cost of upgrading to DHS would only be 1.5M CB + cost of sinks. And even with removing Endo it's like 2M CB (20 matches). Everything else is extra. You can also sell unused engine, SHS, LRMs... You can also borrow an engine from some other mech, or use that bigger engine and other stuff you "have to" buy in other mechs too.

To answer your question: yes. Even if you only want to unlock basic skills and sell that mech after that.

Edited by Krzysztof z Bagien, 28 May 2013 - 12:00 PM.


#275 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 28 May 2013 - 01:16 PM

View PostKrzysztof z Bagien, on 28 May 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Yeah, like C-Bills are in short supply and you have no way to earn them.
I earn about 100k CB per match, so to earn 4.4M CB I need to play 44 matches. Looking at my other stats (check below): 44 matches is almost 30k XP, more then enough to unlock all basic skills.
14 matches can hardly be considered a sample, but let us know how your stats look when you have three-digit number of matches played. And 355 damage per match in an assault mech? I have 400 damage per match in my 3F (246 matches played) and I think it's pretty low.
Your XP per match: 608, mine - 667
Your damage per match: 355, mine - 400
Your W/L: 1.80, mine - 1.67
Your K/D: 2.22, mine - 2.40
I consider myself an average Stalker pilot, so that makes you below-average.

You don't have to upgrade your engine or LRMs, you can still use ones you have already, so the cost of upgrading to DHS would only be 1.5M CB + cost of sinks. And even with removing Endo it's like 2M CB (20 matches). Everything else is extra. You can also sell unused engine, SHS, LRMs... You can also borrow an engine from some other mech, or use that bigger engine and other stuff you "have to" buy in other mechs too.

To answer your question: yes. Even if you only want to unlock basic skills and sell that mech after that.



I earn about 100-80K a match. But, I've only play a total of 1686(788 / 898) matches total since I started the game in December. I've also had times where I couldn't play the game for weeks, or even a month, at a time like recently. So, 4,400K is still a LOT of c-bills. To, what? Improve my damage by 10, my KPH by 5, and my heat by 0.05? I've done the math, and converted my 4PPC stalker from SHS to DHS, and saw very little actual improvement besides a speed boost.

14 matches IS a sample, just not a very LARGE sample. How many times have I had to say these very SIMPLE mathimatical information and terminology. However, I will agree that a larger sample would be better for information. However, though I have already played my Stalker to masters, it did not get recorded as individual stat lines, as they were not tracking those stats like that at the time I played my mech.

You saw almost 400 damage is low? Last I knew, causing 100 damage was considered "participating". I'm doing x3 that "participating" number, which makes me feel that I'm doing a decent job. So, because we have a gap of 50 damage per match, you think I'm so much lower? Don't forget, that's average, which includes some matchs where I did not do so well, was out of position and died fast, or just didn't have any good targets to shoot at or had ECM blocking some of my shots. Not to mention the changes to LRMs (I missed the extra damage from the LRM Apocalypse bug, as I was working on my Jagermech at that time). Oh, and not everyone in every match can cause over 1000 damage. There just isn't that much health to go around to damage.

Even by EXP standards, we still only have a 60 point gap. 600 exp makes me think I'm definitely pulling my own weight in a match. I'd say you are a slightly better pilot than I. To say you are average and I am below average is nothing but ego talking. What's average for a Stalker pilot? What's above average? Honestly, we are probably each in the "average" or "above average" category, as overall our scores are not that much different from each others.

Cost for upgrading to DHS... and I just have a larger engine laying around? Really? I don't. Do you? I'd have to buy an engine for an upgrade. I will admit that I do have the 2 LRM10s already in my inventory to replace the 2 LRM5s, but looking at it from a "if I had to buy everything, how much would it cost", that IS the cost of upgrading and changing my mech for DHS. Only piece of gear I actually already own for the change would be the LRMs. Everything else I would have to buy. So, subtract 400,000 from that price, and that is what it will cost ME personally to upgrade to DHS, just to gain 10 extra damage and 5 KPH more. OR, I can save up, and buy my next Jagermech to get basics and elites on instead. Change a mech I already love and already mastered.... or buy a new mech to work on my current project?

I think saying if it is worth the cost is a preference thing. Personally, I do not feel it is worth the cost on a mech that is already an effective mech. Could it be improved with DHS? Never argued that fact. All I'm saying is, I don't feel it is worth the time to earn the c-bills needed for the change at this moment.

#276 ICEFANG13

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,718 posts

Posted 28 May 2013 - 06:21 PM

100% better means that it is a pure upgrade, it is purely good, you are a fool for not using it. No build, espcially Stalkers benefit enough to use SHS. Every single thing you play can be better with DHS.

Now if I said that your mech would be 100% better, then that would require some numbers, saying DHS is 100% better than SHS, is clearly true, its a true and pure upgrade and every competitive mech other than the Commando-2D sometimes, runs it.

Post your build and I'll make it better, I guarantee it.

#277 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 29 May 2013 - 05:33 AM

MWO is PvP game. In PvP games you play against other people, you COMPETE with them. EVERYTHING that gives you an edge against your opponent is worth obtaining. Especially that you don't have to pay for it with real money. Period.
Stock 3F costs 7,618,480 CB. 3F upgraded to DHS, with max armour and 5 DHS would cost 1,590,048 CB more. Tell me more how that it is not worth having more armour, better heat efficiency and sustained DPS.
Posted Image

#278 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 29 May 2013 - 07:58 AM

100% better for upgrading would be double better cooling if you are talking about it improving just your cooling. I shall now show you what I am talking about. Observe.

First is just my base standard. I have 4 tons of ammo, placed within the arms. I prefer my ammo in the arms on the Stalker because I lose my sides before my arms are threatened with an armor breach. This makes my ammo very secure from an explosion, as it doesn't get crited on.

Posted Image

This is a pure upgrade from SHS to DHS. No other changes (besides removing endo steel for more crit space). Notice the 0.05 better heat efficiency? That is only 0.05 better efficiency. (My PPC stalker benifited by .04.)

Posted Image

Now, fully upgraded with a larger engine, 30 LRMs total, and retaining the 6 med lasers. I end up with 9 more missile damage, same 4 tons of ammo, 1 KPH faster, and the SAME EXACT ENDING COOLING AS MY BASE. All for 3,393,000 C-bills. All those c-bills ends up giving me, really, only 9 more points of LRM damage, which can be negated by ECM or just closing in with me. I did not gain extra heat efficiency. I did not get that much faster. I did not even gain that much more damage overall. All for the cost of a Blackjack, Centurion, almost a whole Jagermech... (I already own the 2 LRM10s needed for this conversion.)

Posted Image


So. Once more. YES. DHS can improve my Stalker (my lone and only mech with SHS besides a Gauss Cicada), but the cost of it is more than it is worth at this moment for me. Actually, every time I do this comparison, I keep finding out that my Stalkers doesn't need it more and more. You keep convincing me that I do not need this upgrade. Wasn't your goal to convince me get this upgrade? That it is so vital that I need it? Well. Tell me now how much I need that 0.05 better heat efficiency, 1 KPH more speed, and 9 points situational LRM damage? Please.

I think I've made my point. Care to continue to say otherwise? Then prove your point. I think I've demonstrated my point very clearly, this time with pictures.

(And just to clarify, I don't disagree with DHS providing more benefits over SHS under most circumstances. Also, all these mechs have 6 med lasers, and 4 LRM5s. The last configuration has 6 med lasers, 2 LRM5s, and 2 LRM10s.)

EDIT: Yes, I know. I placed ammo in my torso. This was only a test, and I personally don't like having ammo rattling around in my legs. It's a personal thing there, but if I was to create this mech loadout, I probably would place it in my legs for safety. Just to stop that argument right there.


EDIT 2: After doing some math, if I am correct, I gained just under 10% overall improvement. Probably closer to 12% if I was to use that 0.5 tons for improving the leg armor to max. That, by the way, is not 100% better. Even in cooling, a 0.05 improvement is not 100%, but more like less than 5% improvement in cooling. So, it doesn't even come close to improving my design by 100%. Not even the "it's improving it in every way" 100% statement. 10% is 10%.

Edited by Tesunie, 29 May 2013 - 08:19 AM.


#279 ICEFANG13

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,718 posts

Posted 29 May 2013 - 10:13 AM

Huh that's a huge Hunchback you got there, with those weapons, and then with that armor, its like a Catapult.

I hope I never have you on my team, that mech is terrible and would get ripped apart by any competent assault, maybe medium pilot.

You've already made my point for me, your mech is completely better when you add DHS. Just because you think you're right, doesn't make it so. Why don't you make a poll about it, and we can see what players think?

Is DHS a pure upgrade for almost any mech?

Based on your mech I know you don't have FF armor, but you do have Endo, this is its load out.

Placement aside: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b18d2220e190a9e

And with DHS: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...6f8f9b80d5f56bc

DHS, because your mech design is so inferior, actually save more tonnage than Endo-Steel does, makes it cooler, gives it another 100 armor, and cooler. Its 100% better. You could even make a good mech and upgrade to large lasers so you could be an assault mech instead of a medium mech with more armor.

I'm not arguing that its not 100% better, is it worse in any way? No, then its a complete improvement, your mech's effectiveness has not increased 100%, but it is completely better (like I dunno, how 100% is complete, or 100/100 is complete, its fully better).

I've improved your design, you're welcome.

Edited by ICEFANG13, 29 May 2013 - 10:14 AM.


#280 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,586 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 29 May 2013 - 07:52 PM

View PostICEFANG13, on 29 May 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

Huh that's a huge Hunchback you got there, with those weapons, and then with that armor, its like a Catapult.


Show me a single hunchback that can field 20 LRMs, 6 med lasers, and have 432 points of armor. I actually have a close proxy of that for a hunchback. 10 LRMs, 5 med lasers, and a whole lot less armor. Wanna know what? This Stalker still out preforms it. So, no. It's not a "heavy medium". I've faced against assault mechs before in this mech. Also, consider the mechs given role in a TEAM. I run support. The LRMs permit me to support as I move my slow mech towards the front lines. Once I get to the front lines, I'm hoping my opening of LRMs from spotted targets (and from other team members engaging) has softened targets enough for my lasers to take advantage of any damaged sections. It's called teamwork. I do still find myself able to handle myself when alone too, provided I don't get swarmed.

Also, med lasers are considered the best ton/heat to damage weapons in the game right now. I don't need the large laser range thanks to having LRMs, and I fire weapons in their given range bands. This keeps me from overheating for the most part. I also tend to sit right at that 200-300m range, the one range that I can max damage as well as threaten to overheat if I maintain that damage zone. Most times, I get a few shots at this sweet band, and then they either close in within LRM range, or run away out of laser range.

Quote

I hope I never have you on my team, that mech is terrible and would get ripped apart by any competent assault, maybe medium pilot.


Funny. I take apart fellow assault mechs in the matches. I've also been ripped apart by assaults as well. Assaults can do that. I've also taken down assaults with my Hunchback mention above, as well as with my Cicada too. Does that make them over powered then? That's luck of combat, tactics and pilot skills, as well as mech construction. By the way, when I play my Stalker, I tend to be at the top of the score charts. Of course, this can be luck dependent as sometimes I might get caught alone or someone gets a quick head shot off. Happens.

Quote

You've already made my point for me, your mech is completely better when you add DHS. Just because you think you're right, doesn't make it so. Why don't you make a poll about it, and we can see what players think?


Question. Did I argue that DHS are worse than SHS? I don't recall saying anything of that sort. Actually, I recall saying that DHS are better, and could improve my Stalker, if I wished to place the c-bills into the conversion. What I've been arguing is the fact that, maybe I don't need the upgrade to be effective? Maybe I don't need to spend those c-bills on this upgrade, and instead can spend them on other items in the game, such as new mechs to try new tactics and enjoy the game farther, compared to playing the same mech over and over and over again into boredom.

I don't think I'm right. I think it's part of my PLAY STYLE. I prefer playing mechs closer to lore. If it was possible, I'd play with stock mechs with an option to play stock mechs against stock mechs. However, that is not an option, so I try to build mechs that retain to lore, while at the same time being effective, functional mechs. Are they always the best? Let me just say, I have a 90 KPH Cicada I refer to as the "Hollander 2", and I find it competent (though not overly deadly), fun, and challenging. I tend to do at least 100 points of damage in a match with it (key word here is least, as in I tend to do more), which I see as competent and participating. Would I say it's the best mech I have? No. But it's a blast to play anyway.

Your the one whom seems to think you are right, when... guess what? I'm not arguing that DHS are better and could improve my Stalker. All I'm saying is, I don't feel nor see it being worth the c-bills to convert my Stalker to DHS AT THIS TIME. I have other projects I'm working on, and I like the FEEL of how my Stalker runs at the moment. I do also consider this Stalker to be my flagship mech. It's my go to mech when I just want things to die around me.

I'm not arguing that DHS are inferior to SHS. DHS are better than SHS in just about every way. There is normally no reason to not take DHS, especially once you understand the fact that in engine sinks count as 2.0 sinks, and external sinks count as 1.4. I am not arguing the benefits of DHS over SHS. I'm just saying that designs can be effective with SHS even if they are not considered optimized.

The question here is, is it worth the c-bills to convert my Stalker at this time? I've argued my point. 5% better heat efficiency. 9 points more damage with LRMs (10 more tubes). Maxed armor on arms and legs. 1-3 KHP faster movement speed. Do I need these things to still be an effective design? I don't really feel I need to. Not when I have other items I can spend my c-bills on, such as mastering my Centurion line, or Jagermechs, or getting a Blackjack to try out. So, how about not treating me like I don't know what I'm doing, not treating me like I'm against DHS and their use, and treating me with a little respect and try seeing things from my point of view. I've already mastered the Stalker line and is looking to expand my play experience with other mechs for variety.

Quote

Is DHS a pure upgrade for almost any mech?


Yes. Almost any mech. Some mechs don't need it. A couple it even hinders. Heard of the Commando that DHS can't fit? There is a Commando set up that can't fit DHS due to small engine size and large weapon systems. I believe it was an SRM 6 version? I don't have it and I don't play with Commandos so I don't overly know. My Cicada also does not need DHS to function. It runs with SHS just fine. Of course, it's only weapons are a single Gauss rifle and a med laser. Only overheats from testing (hasn't happened in combat) on Caustic after about 3 minutes of continuous fire. I could also pull up the Dual Gauss Jagermech and Catapult, as they don't produce enough heat to need the benefits of DHS.

So, it is a pure upgrade to most mechs. Most mechs can benefit from DHS, some don't need it, and very few can't really use it.

Quote

Based on your mech I know you don't have FF armor, but you do have Endo, this is its load out.



Placement aside: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b18d2220e190a9e

With placement under consideration:
If you seriously think this is my mech, you are sadly mistaken. This mech really is terrible. That arm is just asking to be blown off with a tap, your legs have armor it really doesn't need, and ammo on a Stalker is surprisingly safer on the arms than in the legs. Sorry, but try again. And no, I wont post my exact schematics of my Stalker, as I am sick of people (like you) who will tell me how bad it is (without playing beside it), and are "all to willing" to "give me an upgraded mech". Thing is, this is my mech. If you change it, then it's no longer my mech, is it? It's now your mech load out. Personally, I much rather prefer to play mechs I've devised myself, instead of mechs that others have created.

Placement is everything on a mech though. The amounts of armor and where that armor is can be vital. Same with where you place your ammo. So, with that said, the weapons are good, but I can't say anything about armor or ammo without knowing placement. I'll tell you, I've spent a lot of time slowly tweeking the placement of things, sometimes by a few points at a time. My Stalker isn't a throw together mech, but a mech that I've spent a lot of time and thought into. True, with poor information at first, but I still find it's been fine tuned enough to be very effective in my hands. Maybe it just wouldn't match your play style. For me, it's deadly.

Quote


So. My mech has the fire power of a medium mech, yet your "improved" version has the same exact weapons. My "upgrade" with DHS at least had more weapons, and 0.5 tons of free space for extra armor I didn't even add. That was more of an upgrade. This... this is just tossing on DHS and claiming that the 5% (0.05 better heat efficiency) makes the mech so much more superior on its own. Sure, you managed to up it's armor to max, but I find that the arms don't need max armor, and my legs rarely get hit so they also don't need max armor. The extra 2 KPH speed boost is... unneeded with the reach that the LRMs give me. It's better, but in the wrong ways. Not to mention, the ammo is, once more, safer in the arms of a Stalker than in the legs. I've seen a Stalker loose a leg and have no ammo left to fight with. Very messy. Very bad. In the arms, if someone blows off your side torso, you've lost half your weapons, which means you also lose the LRMs that need the ammo you are loosing. Also, when you loose your arm from a side explosion, ammo in your arm can't explode. For a Stalker, they so rarely loose an arm before loosing a side that the arms are actually great places to hide ammo.

Oh, and nice addition of the BAP. Sorry, for an LRM mech, it's useless (or near). I suspect you added it in because it cuts ECM. If I recall the data correctly, it will shut off ECM within 180m, well within the LRM min range. And just encase you thought BAP improved lock on times, that is a vicious rumor that isn't true. About the only good the BAP does for an LRM Stalker is increase your sensor range slightly, and keep locks on shut down mechs when close. Whoops. I guess it only increases range of sensors (and thus lock on abilities at a farther range when running solo).

What my design would look with DHS. The ammo in the head if I recall right would get used up first, so that shouldn't be much risk. Too bad I had to place the ammo in the legs, as I find the arms safer for ammo on a Stalker.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3c7c938a548367b

Quote

DHS, because your mech design is so inferior, actually save more tonnage than Endo-Steel does, makes it cooler, gives it another 100 armor, and cooler. Its 100% better. You could even make a good mech and upgrade to large lasers so you could be an assault mech instead of a medium mech with more armor.


Your concept of my mech design in inferior. My real mech design isn't, if you ever considered pilot skill, play style and tactics. But you wont play with me from the sounds of it to see how well the mech fields. Sometimes, a mech out preforms it's paper stats. I do realize DHS saves more weight than Endo does now. Back when I made that decision, I was going off rumors that DHS gave a flat bonus of 1.4. I did the math with these erroneous numbers and determined that Endo would be more beneficial. I know better now, however, I do not feel it is worth the c-bills to convert the mech right now, so I will not be doing so at the moment. In the future? Maybe. If I have 4,000,000 c-bills and nothing to do with it, sure. I might. But, for now, I like the feel of the mech and the way it currently runs.

Med lasers are the most heat to weight to damage effective weapons in the game. Large lasers aren't bad, but I do not require range, nor the weight of them, not to mention the heat build up. I find 6 med lasers concentrated at the same point to be more than effective. The trick is to have the accuracy to keep the beams on one spot for their whole duration. Something I seem to be fairly good at doing.

Quote

I'm not arguing that its not 100% better, is it worse in any way? No, then its a complete improvement, your mech's effectiveness has not increased 100%, but it is completely better (like I dunno, how 100% is complete, or 100/100 is complete, its fully better).


Really? Beacuse just one pharagraph up, you ARE saying it's 100% better. Can/does it have the potential to improve every aspect of my mech? Sure. But that's not 100% better. It improves my heat by 5%, my damage (alpha) by 20%, my armor by 8% and my speed by 0-5% (upgrade dependant). Overall, it's actually an 8% improvement. (Total score of 538.37 of all stats added together of the original, and 580.37 (give or take). Multiply 538.37 by 0.08 (8%), you get 43 points, added to the original score of 538.37 totals to ~581.37, making it a total of an 8% overall effective upgrade when all is said and considered.)

It CAN be worse. If you are cramped for crit space, then it could be bad. If you are fielding Gauss as your main weapons, then they don't produce enough heat to even need to worry about the efficiency of the DHS. Most mechs, these issues will not be a problem, but for some mechs it might be. Some mechs just don't need them, but can still take them with just no benefits to their current loadout. We are talking about a few mechs where it doesn't work or is just irrelevant to the mech. Most mechs do benefit from DHS. I'd dare say almost all mechs do. That's not the issue. The issue is if it's worth the cost all the time. Most every time, yes. If you are cramped for c-bills... maybe not. Circumstances dependant.

Quote

I've improved your design, you're welcome.


Here. I improved your design. You're welcome.
(Sarcasm)
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...719975c237c8661

There is also this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d5a58d1eff42a75

Or this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2edc656ea0d54ac

Or this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...8df682bee808df2

Or this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...812b2b65f96db3a

Shall I keep making "improved" Stalker designs? I could make a ton of these. I DO in FACT know HOW to MAKE a mech loadout that is effective. Also, as a ending note, and I'll enlarge this fact for you, as I've said it a lot already and you can't seem to read it,

DHS CAN IMPROVE MY MECH. I AM NOT ARGUING THAT FACT.

Edited by Tesunie, 29 May 2013 - 08:04 PM.






16 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 16 guests, 0 anonymous users