78 replies to this topic

[Johnny Reb]

I tend to run my std engines in all assaults, most meds and on heavies the catapracht and jager. All my scouts (cicada included) run xl also my fast Cent-D and Treb-3C run big xl engines. Also, Dragons and Cats run xl for me cause im usually cored before the sides get taken out.

[MuonNeutrino]

Alistair Winter, on 06 May 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

What's steptarting? I can't keep up with the MW:O lingo, new terms are added every day

I'm guessing he's referring to the good old 'walk up the ridge, poke your guns over, shoot, walk back down' thing. Would explain the comments about extra speed and optimally positioned weapons being helpful.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alistair Winter, on 06 May 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

Well, your other two builds have weapons on both sides, that's what I mean by balanced. If I'm fighting you and don't know what engine you have, I'm not going to focus on your right torso, because you might have a STD engine. By the time I destroy your right torso, I'll probably be heavily damaged myself. And that's when I don't want 3 x SRM6 launched directly at my face. So against balanced builds with weapons on both sides, I'll go for the CT.

Against your 733P, there's no point in aiming at your CT, because your RT has less armor and it doesn't really matter if you have an STD or XL engine. If you lose your ER PPCs on that thing, you have nothing. I don't have to worry about what engine you have.


Well, I'm going to let you in on a little secret: I am aware that some builds are better with the XL. However, starting a thread called "Choosing the engine depends on several factors" is hardly a controversial statement that stimulates further discussion.

I started the thread because I've personally been having a lot of success with [near] max size STD engines, which I figure is kind of unusual. For a long time, I only used STD engines for slow brawlers. I figure my present preference is rather unusual, but valid, so I made a thread to share my opinion.


Absolutely. And what I've discovered, which I perhaps should have explained more clearly in the OP, is that it isn't a given that the "tank" build needs to use a smaller STD engine, while a "jet" build is a huge XL engine.

For example, consider my Catapult K2 with STD300 and 4 Large Lasers, or my Cataphract 1X with STD335 and 5 medium lasers + 1 gauss rifle. Neither of these are "tanks". They don't have the high burst damage or the high DPS to go toe to toe with other heavies or assaults. I have to play them with a lot of finesse, because they have less firepower than most other heavy mechs, and certainly less than assault mechs. They are very different than, say, my Cataphract 2X (which I've now sold) with STD240, AC20, SRMs... you know, the standard brawler kit.

You might even say that there are three "classes" of mechs.
Tank: Good durability, good firepower, less speed.
Killer: Good firepower, good speed, less durability.
Hunter: Good speed, good durability, less firepower.

The Hunter role is the one I've only recently discovered. Of course, it's not really a choice of three strict classes, there are too many different variables for that.


As I see it, this is the wrong attitude for a Centurion pilot. The value of the STD engine on a Centurion is not zombie mode, running around with no arms and squeezing out an extra 50 damage before you're chopped to bits. The value is in the ability to use half your body as a shield. Whether you're sacrificing your left side to protect an AC10 or sacrificing your right side to protect 3 x SRM6s, you'll get more out of torso twisting anyway.


Well, if you're amazing at the torso-twist game, you should have your most or all of important weapons left after they blow your side torso off! In the case of my Yen Lo Wang, destroying my LA and LT means a 0% reduction of firepower. Or in the case of Bishop Steiner's Highlander with STD engine and 3 ER PPCs, if he loses his LA and LT, he's only lost some heat sinks.

Another factor is that the so-called "meta" trend right now is that most people are relying on high burst damage, whether by AC20s, PPCs, Gauss rifles or whatever else. High burst damage means that it only takes two or three alphas to destroy a healthy component. The trouble with XL engines, for me, is that I have to worry so much about PPC stalkers and AC40 Jagers. If they take a side torso, which takes them about 3 seconds if I'm not slick enough, it's all over.


What's steptarting? I can't keep up with the MW:O lingo, new terms are added every day

On all of them, they only have missiles on the left side. The 733P has 3 SRM6 on the left side, to the 2 ER PPC and UAC5 on the right. True, I love all my long range love, but then, I lose my torso, I pop my XL anyhow. I get my CT cored WAY more often than my sides, so, I guess I consider it worth the trade off. I actually have a much higher KDr with the 733P than my other Highlanders (not that it's terribly impressive in ANY of my mechs, too much PUging, and too little caution/reflexes, lol)

But ALL my builds are split on armament, cause, well, that's the layout.

I do prefer my Jagermechs to anything, though.

[Alistair Winter]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 May 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

On all of them, they only have missiles on the left side. The 733P has 3 SRM6 on the left side, to the 2 ER PPC and UAC5 on the right. True, I love all my long range love, but then, I lose my torso, I pop my XL anyhow. I get my CT cored WAY more often than my sides, so, I guess I consider it worth the trade off. I actually have a much higher KDr with the 733P than my other Highlanders (not that it's terribly impressive in ANY of my mechs, too much PUging, and too little caution/reflexes, lol)
But ALL my builds are split on armament, cause, well, that's the layout.
I do prefer my Jagermechs to anything, though.

Ah, my bad. I was looking at JohanssenJr's builds, not yours. He has a 733P with 3 ER PPCs on right side, and nothing else.

And yeah, the Highlanders should definitely be split, as you say. Though many people do carry all their guns on one side.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 06 May 2013 - 10:37 PM.

[Escef]

Homeless Bill, on 06 May 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

Whenever I think mounting an STD is worth it, I get a torso blown off, fruitlessly try to put out some damage with my one or two remaining weapons, and then get picked apart by the vultures.

By the time one torso is gone, I might as well be dead anyways. It's useful for tanking, but that's something I never do; I'm all about quick, devastating strikes into enemy lines. The speed, heat efficiency, and firepower of an XL are almost always worth it.

It also probably helps that I'm pretty amazing at the torso-twist game.

The day I learned to poptart was when I lost the left side of my HGN-733. 16 SRM tubes gone, in remarkably short order. But I was still able to contribute to the fight with my Gauss and twin large lasers, even managed to take out a Stalker. There have been times I lost the right side of one of my HGNs and was still able to fight on with SRMs.

Of course losing a side gimps you hard. But if you have all your guns on one side, if you are incapable of contributing after losing a side, I'd say that either you need to rethink your set-up or that you need to learn a little tenacity.

[Khobai]

Quote

And assaults should not get xl-engines because they are most easy to hit and xl does not make them fast enough plus steals space, which is most important to them.

Except Assaults should be able to use XL.

The problem is MWO allows precise aiming which completely destroys the prospect of using XL on an assault.

Precise aiming completely ruins the balance of XL engines and makes them only worth using on lights really.

[Escef]

Khobai, on 07 May 2013 - 02:03 AM, said:

Except Assaults should be able to use XL.

The problem is MWO allows precise aiming which completely destroys the prospect of using XL on an assault.

Precise aiming completely ruins the balance of XL engines and makes them only worth using on lights really.

Last I saw, there was a strong movement in the Table Top community away from XL engines in big mechs. This movement became stronger when Improved Jump Jets and Light Engines got added to Level II/Tournament Level rules.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Homeless Bill, on 06 May 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

Whenever I think mounting an STD is worth it, I get a torso blown off, fruitlessly try to put out some damage with my one or two remaining weapons, and then get picked apart by the vultures.

By the time one torso is gone, I might as well be dead anyways. It's useful for tanking, but that's something I never do; I'm all about quick, devastating strikes into enemy lines. The speed, heat efficiency, and firepower of an XL are almost always worth it.

It also probably helps that I'm pretty amazing at the torso-twist game.

I think that too sometimes, however If I had an XL in my Hunchback, we would have lost one match instead of winning it.

Had my swayback, and it was down to me and one enemy Stalker. The Stalker CT armor was gone and internals were orange. He blew off my side torso with my MLaser array taking me from 9MLasers down to 2 MLasers (one head and the other arm). I was still able to beat him with 2 MLasers and win the match.

Had I been running an XL, it would have been over with a victory for them, but instead we took the win.

I know it doesn't happen that often, but running a standard engine can make the difference. I still run XL engines in some mechs, but I tend to default to standard if I can for the build I want.

[Roughneck45]

Khobai, on 07 May 2013 - 02:03 AM, said:

Except Assaults should be able to use XL.

The problem is MWO allows precise aiming which completely destroys the prospect of using XL on an assault.

Precise aiming completely ruins the balance of XL engines and makes them only worth using on lights really.

No, it makes it a no-brainer on lights and a question on assaults.

XL assaults are usually packing a ton of ranged firepower, and are very effective for it.

Its more about picking the right engine for your playstyle and role on the battlefield.

Precise aim does not ruin the balance, because that guy with the XL has precise aim as well, and probably more firepower than you.

[Bishop Steiner]

MeiSooHaityu, on 07 May 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

I think that too sometimes, however If I had an XL in my Hunchback, we would have lost one match instead of winning it.

Had my swayback, and it was down to me and one enemy Stalker. The Stalker CT armor was gone and internals were orange. He blew off my side torso with my MLaser array taking me from 9MLasers down to 2 MLasers (one head and the other arm). I was still able to beat him with 2 MLasers and win the match.

Had I been running an XL, it would have been over with a victory for them, but instead we took the win.

I know it doesn't happen that often, but running a standard engine can make the difference. I still run XL engines in some mechs, but I tend to default to standard if I can for the build I want.

the question though, is how many other instances where you were taken down, might the advantages of the XL kept you alive (higher speed, better firepower, etc)? I bet even if you don't insta-recall any there are several where just a few extra KPH would have got you around that corner before the Atlas cored your torso, got you onto the cap in time to stop an enemy cap attempt, etc. (And it's pretty impossible to count the number of times we could have impacted the game just by as little seeming a thing as 5-10 extra damage per volley)

I think the one guy said it best... the XL engine is pretty much pure bonus... except the matches you die AND lose in (as sometimes, even when we die, we did enough to help secure the win first). The tricky part is determining in each pilot and mech, where the tipping point is where the inherent fragility DOES actually cause us to lose more.

[Roughneck45]

MeiSooHaityu, on 07 May 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

I think that too sometimes, however If I had an XL in my Hunchback, we would have lost one match instead of winning it.

Same here.

When im deciding on an XL engine or standard engine mech build, I consider 2 things depending on what the goal is. I either have a set weapon configuration I want, and then build around that, or a set speed i want, and build around that.

A big factor is the mech hitbox too. Hunchbacks never get XL's, ever. Everyone is aiming for your shoulder already, so it just makes the job easier for your enemey. Cents are great zombies, so I try to avoid XL when possible for them. Same with stalkers, they can soak a ton of damage on those side torsos.

On the flipside, every light mech gets an XL always. The side torsos are small for all of them, and everyone aims for your legs anyway.

Mechs with symmetrical hardpoints usually have to the strongest standard engine builds too.

Edited by Roughneck45, 07 May 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Roughneck45, on 07 May 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

Same here.

When im deciding on an XL engine or standard engine mech build, I consider 2 things depending on what the goal is. I either have a set weapon configuration I want, and then build around that, or a set speed i want, and build around that.

A big factor is the mech hitbox too. Hunchbacks never get XL's, ever. Everyone is aiming for your shoulder already, so it just makes the job easier for your enemey. Cents are great zombies, so I try to avoid XL when possible for them. Same with stalkers, they can soak a ton of damage on those side torsos.

On the flipside, every light mech gets an XL always. The side torsos are small for all of them, and everyone aims for your legs anyway.

Mechs with symmetrical hardpoints usually have to the strongest standard engine builds too.

As a former dedicated Centy pilot, I never have bought into the whole "Zombie-Cent" thing. I see a Centurion with 3 SRM6 and 2 Medium Lasers, I know it has a standard, so 1) speed is not it's strong suit and 2) the side torso may soak decent damage, but I'm still going to pop the LT off first, and then largely ignore the mech, as a 2 Medium laser, 70 kph Cent is a distraction, more than an actual danger (unless you are already severely cored). And popping it's LT off is no tougher than popping the RT on an Hunch.

Conversely, I could be running faster, OR adding an LB-10X or Gauss to the damage load, and laying down some REAL hurt before I go down on my Cent with an XL. Given a chance, I have never lost to a Zombie, 1v1 with my XL Wang (100 kph plus Ac/20 and 2 Mediums) as I still can soak a lot of damage with the left arm, (and a bit with the LT before it gets too squishy to risk the XL) and yet I can pinpoint lay out a nasty barrage over 500 meters away, when the bulk of the Zombie Cents firepower is useless much beyond 150 m. And a near stock CN9-D, I feel pretty well owns all the other Cents (I tend to add DHS, and a standard ac/10 for scrapping, plus extra ammo. Sometimes I keep the LB and toss in SRMs or streaks where the LRM was for pugging as it is a much better scout hunter that way)

Kinda feel the same with the Hunch. Once that shoulder is blown, 9 out of 10 fights, your remaining 2 lasers aren't anything but a last gasp of defiance before you go down. Conversely, my SP and P's both have XL 250s or 260s, allowing me to stay on the flanks of mechs a lot more effectively, and hence avoiding most direct fire.

When one takes a Medium Mech and tries to go toe to toe brawling, IMO they are doing it all wrong anyhow, as they are much better suited to Scout Hunt and Skirmish, bringing the ability to bring relatively high speed AND heavier firepower than lights to the fight. I don't care how they brawl (except my HBK-4G... AC/20 kinda negates it speed anyhow, but my Wang is better for using an AC/20 than the Hunch anyhow), as I want my mediums to dictate the battle by exploiting the fringes, and causing the bulk of the force to waste time trying to deal with the mechs hitting them from the sides, and by wolf packing any mech that over extends.

And in all those scenarios, I find the XL much more useful. The biggest waste is when people try to use the XL on a Medium just to pack heavier guns, when there is nothing brawling wise a Heavy can't do better than a Medium. (just wish the economy/drop weight limit factors were in game to encourage more medium use, since the current meta is not particularly medium friendly)

[John MatriX82]

STD > XL Engines. Not as a general rule imho.

There are builds (or mechs) that can't benefit from a XL engine and others that do well with it and nothing without.

Roughly:

-Lights: xls are usually the only choice, especially for jenners and Ravens.

-Meds: xls: cicadas, uber fast Cent Ds, LRM trebuchets (use LRMs from mid range, not from 1km away). Anything else: STD engines is the only way, hunchies first, non-D Cents then (or cents that don't want to rely on the ballistic slot).

-XL Heavies: Catapults and Dragons, often Cataphracts. STDs on brawler Cataphracts, should be used also on the Jagers, but many builds won't be possible with standards, so XL engine is required but it's a really bad call for the chassis so.. Well I don't use Jagers at all.

-Assaults: STDs are the only living way on Atlases, Stalkers, Awesomes and brawling Highlanders. Fast AWS PB/9Ms can live with high rated Xl engines above 350 (9M can do well also without), the same for support or jumpy Landers.

In the end, it all comes down on how you want to play a given chassis/build.

[Padic]

Even though you just beautifully phrased basically everything I think, I still have one little comment to add...

Bishop Steiner, on 07 May 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Given a chance, I have never lost to a Zombie, 1v1 with my XL Wang

This doesn't necessarily mean your build is better than theirs, it merely means that the sum of your build and your talents exceeded their build and talents. People running competitive builds often don't have a lot of practice with them, or an understanding of the theory behind them - they just pulled up a list of good builds and picked one. You, on the other hand, have built your own mech and know what it is good at and why and how to make use of those things.

Depth beats breadth, and lots of pilots in cookie-cutter builds sacrifice depth for breadth - chasing the newest hot thing or trying to find that elusive "I Win"-Button.

[Sadistic Savior]

Homeless Bill, on 06 May 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

By the time one torso is gone, I might as well be dead anyways.

My Highlander is able to function with an entire side missing. I can still move, and I can still do damage...a torso loss is not insta-death for me. I could even still cap with only a head, CT and one leg.

That has been useful in lots of games, and I play the same way you do. XL engines are only useful for lemming builds. Or builds where you do not get hit a lot (like scouting or capping).

[MeiSooHaityu]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 May 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

the question though, is how many other instances where you were taken down, might the advantages of the XL kept you alive (higher speed, better firepower, etc)? I bet even if you don't insta-recall any there are several where just a few extra KPH would have got you around that corner before the Atlas cored your torso, got you onto the cap in time to stop an enemy cap attempt, etc. (And it's pretty impossible to count the number of times we could have impacted the game just by as little seeming a thing as 5-10 extra damage per volley)

I think the one guy said it best... the XL engine is pretty much pure bonus... except the matches you die AND lose in (as sometimes, even when we die, we did enough to help secure the win first). The tricky part is determining in each pilot and mech, where the tipping point is where the inherent fragility DOES actually cause us to lose more.

Like you said Bishop, it depends. I can say though that my Swayback with the Standard engine is good for 92 KPH with speed tweaks. So, although I would be faster with an XL, I think it would be negligable for that mech. Plus, XL engines take up valuable space for DHS (critical for a Swayback). That is another reason I like Standard Engines when possible.

XL is definently a choice a pilot needs to make depending on how effective he believes he is going to be. My story earlier wasn't meant to positively validate standard engines, just to say that the survivability can work in your favor (especially on the larger mechs).

[TruePoindexter]

It really depends on the mech. XL works great in some cases and is a terrible idea in others. You can't really generalize it one way or another and for every "rule" we create there are exceptions.

Evaluate what you're trying to achieve with your mech and that will tell you if an XL is appropriate.

[Bishop Steiner]

Padic, on 07 May 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even though you just beautifully phrased basically everything I think, I still have one little comment to add...



This doesn't necessarily mean your build is better than theirs, it merely means that the sum of your build and your talents exceeded their build and talents. People running competitive builds often don't have a lot of practice with them, or an understanding of the theory behind them - they just pulled up a list of good builds and picked one. You, on the other hand, have built your own mech and know what it is good at and why and how to make use of those things.

Depth beats breadth, and lots of pilots in cookie-cutter builds sacrifice depth for breadth - chasing the newest hot thing or trying to find that elusive "I Win"-Button.

true

though often that is because they have been mislead by the "Pro-Gamers" on the forums into their limited lemming thinking, instead of trying stuff out to see what fits THEM best, instead of the other way around. It's why I generally have little use or patience for the pros..... they don't see that their outlook is as narrow and limited as the way of the Samurai was... as long as everyone plays by your rules, they work. Or are just inferior opponents. But much like the Samurai facing the Mongols, when someone is competent AND able to think outside the box, it is usually more than they seem capable of dealing with, or admitting. (when we get treated to the "Swell, sure YOU got 8 kills with your YLW, but just imagine what you could have done for your team if you ran an Uber-Optimized Pro-Gamer approved Mech, like a Cataphract 3D "POPTART^tm"...... ignoring the part where you just laid waste to a "Pro" Clan.... etc) Not that I consider myself elite.... I am pretty middle of the pack, and know it. Just funny that most who consider themselves elite on here have no frikking clue.....

Sadistic Savior, on 07 May 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

My Highlander is able to function with an entire side missing. I can still move, and I can still do damage...a torso loss is not insta-death for me. I could even still cap with only a head, CT and one leg.

That has been useful in lots of games, and I play the same way you do. XL engines are only useful for lemming builds. Or builds where you do not get hit a lot (like scouting or capping).

Funny.. most Lemmings are running standard engine Poptarts in their Highlanders..... I run balanced Mechs using XLs and usually get 2-3 kills per match, and rarely have died to side torso coring. (Center torso, on the other hand....)

[Darwins Dog]

@OP: Try fitting a 340 STD (34 tons) in a 40 ton Cicada, then come back and tell me that STD is always better.

[Java Junkie]

I'm still learning the game but I ran into this issue today. I have CASE and several rounds of UAC-5 ammo in my R/LT. With the XL engine, I'm dead as soon as thats been lighting off. I was just looking on here for info. looks like I'll be switching to STD (sigh). What a waste. Thanks for the post.