464 replies to this topic

[MnDragon]

I don't know why this got bumped, but to save new pilots from horrible mistakes I will say this: "Mech Tier Lists" are useless. There are two inherent things wrong with them:

1. The meta in this game changes so often that to spend money, cbills or time developing a mech to meet the "top Tier" is a horrible idea. By the time you actually achieve it where you want it and it is a "viable" mech for competition, the meta has changed to something else and now you need to reconfigure. The information on the list is only good during the time period it was written.

2. If the OP cares about his post and his opinion and actually updates his post as the meta changes, that then becomes the second problem: it's his opinion. Its information based on his experiences on what he perceives as top tier play. He doesn't know what ELO he is in, no one does. And even if he is in top tier play, you have no idea what kind of pilot he is. For all you know, you the reader, the OP sucks and falls over dead after 2 mins of game time. (I'm not saying the OP does suck, merely pointing out that there is no system for checks and balances to determine who indeed is "top tier" short of posting your stats page)

I'm not saying his ideas aren't sound or would be good in a fight, I am only suggesting that any and all mech tier lists should be taken with a grain of salt. There are several mechs that he would consider below par that because of the pilot's preference and time spent in the mech learning how to fly it, would be awesome in tournament play. I leave you with this: its a game. Everyone likes to win and everyone wants an edge to win, but if you're not having fun discovering what your OWN capabilities are, then why bother playing?

[travelbug]

MnDragon, on 02 November 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

I don't know why this got bumped, but to save new pilots from horrible mistakes I will say this: "Mech Tier Lists" are useless. There are two inherent things wrong with them:

1. The meta in this game changes so often that to spend money, cbills or time developing a mech to meet the "top Tier" is a horrible idea. By the time you actually achieve it where you want it and it is a "viable" mech for competition, the meta has changed to something else and now you need to reconfigure. The information on the list is only good during the time period it was written.

2. If the OP cares about his post and his opinion and actually updates his post as the meta changes, that then becomes the second problem: it's his opinion. Its information based on his experiences on what he perceives as top tier play. He doesn't know what ELO he is in, no one does. And even if he is in top tier play, you have no idea what kind of pilot he is. For all you know, you the reader, the OP sucks and falls over dead after 2 mins of game time. (I'm not saying the OP does suck, merely pointing out that there is no system for checks and balances to determine who indeed is "top tier" short of posting your stats page)

I'm not saying his ideas aren't sound or would be good in a fight, I am only suggesting that any and all mech tier lists should be taken with a grain of salt. There are several mechs that he would consider below par that because of the pilot's preference and time spent in the mech learning how to fly it, would be awesome in tournament play. I leave you with this: its a game. Everyone likes to win and everyone wants an edge to win, but if you're not having fun discovering what your OWN capabilities are, then why bother playing?

this would be valid if it werent for the fact that almost all top tier guys use the same build. the meta in this game is quite strong.

[Cerberias]

MnDragon got no clue, cute. Mav is one of the top tier players, in a good clan.. he regularly talks to other top tier players, and this list is an amalgamation of the opinions of many top tier players. The meta in this game has pretty much been jumpjet sniping and high alphas for the last fair while, so unless it's different at low elo...

[MnDragon]

Cerberias, on 02 November 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

MnDragon got no clue, cute. Mav is one of the top tier players, in a good clan.. he regularly talks to other top tier players, and this list is an amalgamation of the opinions of many top tier players. The meta in this game has pretty much been jumpjet sniping and high alphas for the last fair while, so unless it's different at low elo...

I was not disparaging the OP, I am well aware of Mav's abilities and have fought against him several times. My point is that NEW people that look for these should take the information with a grain of salt. Again, meta changes, and just because Everyone jumps off a bridge, doesn't mean you should too. Highlanders are top tier mechs but I don't do well in them. I do better in catapults, so to ME a catapult is a top tier mech. I will always advocate that people should learn to pilot what they like first, then branch out and not look for cookie cutter builds that everyone uses. Otherwise we will have LRMapocolypse or Poptart snipers over every ridge again.

[Roosterfish]

I think Mav has done the MWO community a real service here with this.

It gives folks like me that pug a window into the competitive side of MWO. It gives new players an idea of how different mechs perform in general.

I don't see Mav proposing builds here but how well chassis and their varients perform at a competitive level.

[luxebo]

With the Project Phoenix mechs in, why did the TDR-5SS get lowered under the other Thunderbolts? Also, are the Locusts that terribly bad under all the mechs? I know that Shadow Hawk is good and Battlemaster is alright at support, but I'm a little confused on why the OP placed TDR-5SS is lowered and Locusts are that bad (I think with their speed boost and different variants they aren't worst than SDR-5V or RVN-2X/4X).

[Asyres]

luxebo, on 02 November 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

With the Project Phoenix mechs in, why did the TDR-5SS get lowered under the other Thunderbolts? Also, are the Locusts that terribly bad under all the mechs? I know that Shadow Hawk is good and Battlemaster is alright at support, but I'm a little confused on why the OP placed TDR-5SS is lowered and Locusts are that bad (I think with their speed boost and different variants they aren't worst than SDR-5V or RVN-2X/4X).

The 5SS is a totally unexceptional energy boat, and the locusts are incredibly fragile.

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 02 November 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

With the Project Phoenix mechs in, why did the TDR-5SS get lowered under the other Thunderbolts? Also, are the Locusts that terribly bad under all the mechs? I know that Shadow Hawk is good and Battlemaster is alright at support, but I'm a little confused on why the OP placed TDR-5SS is lowered and Locusts are that bad (I think with their speed boost and different variants they aren't worst than SDR-5V or RVN-2X/4X).

Watch the videos for answers.

Also watch War Room Epi 6 for more discussion.

[MavRCK]

MnDragon, on 02 November 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

I was not disparaging the OP, I am well aware of Mav's abilities and have fought against him several times. My point is that NEW people that look for these should take the information with a grain of salt. Again, meta changes, and just because Everyone jumps off a bridge, doesn't mean you should too. Highlanders are top tier mechs but I don't do well in them. I do better in catapults, so to ME a catapult is a top tier mech. I will always advocate that people should learn to pilot what they like first, then branch out and not look for cookie cutter builds that everyone uses. Otherwise we will have LRMapocolypse or Poptart snipers over every ridge again.

Every top player agrees these are the mechs to master if you want to join a competitive group or tournament. Anything less won't even be considered.

Sorry, but competitive players need the slight advantages the top mechs bring. Top players are just that good in a competitive team environment. 4 mans and pugs won't cut it.. You'll see the huge skill difference in 12 mans when top teams just roll over over teams.

Watch the videos and the War Room as we discuss why these mechs are top for a reason.


If you're just having fun, no problem. If you just want to be good enough, no problem. But don't suggest the age-old thing that average mechs are good enough if you are... It's misleading... it's not valid.. It's been discussed and debunked for a reason.

Frankly Dragon, you haven't read the 20 pages of comments like yours... you haven't watched the videos.. You're not in a top unit... and you don't have my experience at the highest levels of play to make the comments you do..

I love your passion.... keep it and use to better yourself.. but also... please watch my videos and explanations for the details! Remember we don't want to mislead new players.

Edited by MavRCK, 02 November 2013 - 06:15 PM.

[MavRCK]

Ken Oath, on 02 November 2013 - 04:06 AM, said:

Special thanks to MavRCK

Only been playing a few weeks and wish I'd found this from day one.

This should be stickied!

Cheers Bro'

Sorry Bro, this used to be in the new player forum so new players would see it immediately.. but you're AMAZING moderators placed it in this forum.

If you want to complain to them.. maybe they'll listen to YOU. Report. Email. Cross fingers...

A lot of people have tried to censor this information, delete this thread and bury it... Fight the power!!

[Wintersdark]

luxebo, on 02 November 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

With the Project Phoenix mechs in, why did the TDR-5SS get lowered under the other Thunderbolts? Also, are the Locusts that terribly bad under all the mechs? I know that Shadow Hawk is good and Battlemaster is alright at support, but I'm a little confused on why the OP placed TDR-5SS is lowered and Locusts are that bad (I think with their speed boost and different variants they aren't worst than SDR-5V or RVN-2X/4X).

Already answered, but:

Locust: The speed is relevant, but the spider goes the same speed, with more survivability and jump jets. It's *vastly* better. The Locust, on the other hand - as awesome and fun a mech it can be - is far less competitive because of it's fragility, and it's limited tonnage really restricts what it can do with it's loadouts. The spider can take hits that would cripple or outright destroy a locust. And ECM.

The TDR-5SS is just inferior to the SE and S. The S offers dual ballistic hardpoints providing low-heat ranged firepower, the SE offers jump jets. The SS, however, is an energy boat in a game where multiple potent energy weapons are severely crippled by Ghost Heat.

[Shaftronics]

Just realized; No judgement for the Boar's Head?

[MavRCK]

Shaftronics, on 02 November 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Just realized; No judgement for the Boar's Head?

Ah thanks.. I'll put it in for next week.

It's ok.. nothing great..

6 medium lasers is really fun.. but HOT....

Would I take a Boar's Head over a DDC? No... I like ECM.. .the 3 SRm 6 can out dmg in close range over 6 ML...

But it's decent.. better than the other Atlas.. So tier 2... 2nd best Atlas.

[Alaskan Nobody]

MavRCK, on 02 November 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

But it's decent.. better than the other Atlas.. So tier 2... 2nd best Atlas.

Well that is good to know
I still need a second to help me on my way to mastering my DDC

[luxebo]

Ah, ok thanks MavRCK and Wintersdark. Locusts I know are under most lights but they shouldn't be under the slower Ravens (though they are fun and I saw the AC20 horse riding Raven vid Koniving posted ), or the Spider with only 12 JJs. Thunderbolt 5SS I can see why after looking at the hardpoints on Smurfy, I should've just looked there first.

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 02 November 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

Ah, ok thanks MavRCK and Wintersdark. Locusts I know are under most lights but they shouldn't be under the slower Ravens (though they are fun and I saw the AC20 horse riding Raven vid Koniving posted ), or the Spider with only 12 JJs. Thunderbolt 5SS I can see why after looking at the hardpoints on Smurfy, I should've just looked there first.

Any of the ravens or the spiders can eat the locusts for lunch - it's a function of tonnage and JJ.

[luxebo]

Even the Locust 3M? I know the 1V is terrible because it has the same slots as the Spider but worser in survivability. The 3S is also pretty bad because it is overdependent on missiles, which aren't really good. 3M has double AMS and only one less laser than the Jenners, which still has major flaws, but Spider 5V has 2 lasers and 12 JJs, which I have doubts can beat 3M, even since it's a locust. Raven 2X and 4X are 30 kph slower at max speed, which I might be wrong if a 3M can beat one on one, but I think 3M is more worth as a support mech over 2X and 4X. I definitely think that 5V is under at least 3M but Ravens could be a little different.

[MavRCK]

It's really because the 10-15 tons difference is huge in terms of armor, heatsinks, weapons...

For some reason the Locust has less leg armor than expected...

[Shaftronics]

6 Medium Lasers?

The usual cookie cutter for skilled BH users are x4 ML, x2 'LL and an AC/20 with a big engine and maxed at 17 DHS

[luxebo]

Ah, I see. I think PGI might be buffing them however so they wouldn't be the worst of the lights (at least potentially beating non ECM Ravens or Spiders or Commandoes).

Edit: Speaking of Boar's Heads, hows a 6 LL on chain fire gonna do?

Edited by luxebo, 03 November 2013 - 10:08 AM.