464 replies to this topic

[Bront]

Mav, I do want to say that while I don't always agree with you, I do appreciate that you keep this updated and are contributing. There are problems with lists like this, ranging from personal opinion, to playstyle, to unit tactics, but it's not a bad place to start.

That said, the other thing to keep in mind beyond a list like this is how you want to play and what you're looking for. There's nothing wrong with running a mech that isn't a "top tier" mech. If you're good in it, then you'll have fun, and simply playing the game will help you hone your skills regardless of the mech in question.

This list is going to get messier once tonnage limits get introduced though. Mechs like the Victor might get a boost for being 10 tons lighter than a Highlander for example, and your mech choices will be even more dependent on your teammates.

Also, to be fair, I'm usually approaching the game from helping a new player learn to play over competing at the top tier.

MavRCK, on 02 November 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

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...

In the case of a Locust, the Jenner and Raven weigh almost twice as much, so that's almost an order of magnitude of more space and tonnage to play with, and since both mechs can go nearly as fast as the locust, they're simply better.

In the Spider's case, they can either mount ECM and go almost as fast (better), or go faster while mounting better weapons, better armor, and are harder to hit.

The Locust can be fun in PUGs, but any light is tough to play in 12 man compertitive matches, and the Locust simply doesn't have the firepower or durability to be useful when there are other mechs that can do both better with no real sacrifice.

[Wintersdark]

luxebo, on 03 November 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

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?

The non-ECM Spiders, and Commandos all match the Locust for speed, but have more tonnage available for HS and weapons, and sport substantially more armor. The other Ravens had their engine caps increased, too, to make them more competitive with the 3L. They're still inferior, of course, but this is still bad news for the poor Locusts.

Locusts are cool and fun to play, but they are not and will likely never be competitive mechs.

Edited by Wintersdark, 03 November 2013 - 11:59 AM.

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 03 November 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

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?

Er... I wouldn't chain fire 6 LL.. Also that's 30 tons of weaponry... 6ML ac20 std 375

Shaftronics, on 03 November 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

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

Meh to cookie cutter. Makes no sense when you compare vs a ddc ac20 2 ml 3 srm6.. think of the heat capacity

Bront, on 03 November 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Mav, I do want to say that while I don't always agree with you, I do appreciate that you keep this updated and are contributing. There are problems with lists like this, ranging from personal opinion, to playstyle, to unit tactics, but it's not a bad place to start.

That said, the other thing to keep in mind beyond a list like this is how you want to play and what you're looking for. There's nothing wrong with running a mech that isn't a "top tier" mech. If you're good in it, then you'll have fun, and simply playing the game will help you hone your skills regardless of the mech in question.

This list is going to get messier once tonnage limits get introduced though. Mechs like the Victor might get a boost for being 10 tons lighter than a Highlander for example, and your mech choices will be even more dependent on your teammates.

Also, to be fair, I'm usually approaching the game from helping a new player learn to play over competing at the top tier.

In the case of a Locust, the Jenner and Raven weigh almost twice as much, so that's almost an order of magnitude of more space and tonnage to play with, and since both mechs can go nearly as fast as the locust, they're simply better.

In the Spider's case, they can either mount ECM and go almost as fast (better), or go faster while mounting better weapons, better armor, and are harder to hit.

The Locust can be fun in PUGs, but any light is tough to play in 12 man compertitive matches, and the Locust simply doesn't have the firepower or durability to be useful when there are other mechs that can do both better with no real sacrifice.

Yup you're right - the tier list is a framework to learn and understand the different mechs.

Edited by MavRCK, 03 November 2013 - 12:21 PM.

[Wintersdark]

luxebo, on 03 November 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

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

Chainfire is, generally speaking, rarely a good way to go.

If you're equipping multiple large energy weapons, such as 4 LL's (6 has very little benefit, so much heat that you're better off putting the tonnage elsewhere), you're FAR better off putting two into each of two weapon groups and firing them .5 seconds apart for general use - so you're firing the second set before the beam duration of the first set expires. This avoids the chainfire problem of requiring high time-on-target, and avoids ghost heat.

[Bront]

Wintersdark, on 03 November 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

Chainfire is, generally speaking, rarely a good way to go.

I've found Chainfire works well enough with MLs to mitigate heat and keep pressure on mechs. For LLs, I think running more than 4 is a waste of tonnage. Chain fire 2 in 2 groups, and you still heat up pretty fast. Chain fire all 4, and you can keep firing for a pretty long time, but you eventually still heat up pretty fast. Generally, I'd rather run with 2 LLs and 4 MLs on a Boars Head and simply not use the LLs at close range if heat becomes an issue (as MLs are more heat efficient). Use the tonnage saved for a larger engine and/or more heat sinks.

Then again, I don't have a Boars Head, but I've run plenty of Stalkers.

[Blue Splint]

Bront, on 03 November 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

I've found Chainfire works well enough with MLs to mitigate heat and keep pressure on mechs. For LLs, I think running more than 4 is a waste of tonnage. Chain fire 2 in 2 groups, and you still heat up pretty fast. Chain fire all 4, and you can keep firing for a pretty long time, but you eventually still heat up pretty fast. Generally, I'd rather run with 2 LLs and 4 MLs on a Boars Head and simply not use the LLs at close range if heat becomes an issue (as MLs are more heat efficient). Use the tonnage saved for a larger engine and/or more heat sinks.

Then again, I don't have a Boars Head, but I've run plenty of Stalkers.

Not many people seem to realize that the dmg/heat output of Large Lasers is actually better than that of medium lasers. In other words, if heat becomes an issue you're better off keeping on firing the 2 LL rather than 4 mediums (unless you really need 2 extra points on your laser alpha, which is almost never). I think the range fools people into thinking mediums are more heat efficient, but they aren't.

(LLas have a dmg/heat of 9/7 = 1.29 while MLas are at 5/4 = 1.25)

[Bront]

Blue Splint, on 03 November 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

Not many people seem to realize that the dmg/heat output of Large Lasers is actually better than that of medium lasers. In other words, if heat becomes an issue you're better off keeping on firing the 2 LL rather than 4 mediums (unless you really need 2 extra points on your laser alpha, which is almost never). I think the range fools people into thinking mediums are more heat efficient, but they aren't.

(LLas have a dmg/heat of 9/7 = 1.29 while MLas are at 5/4 = 1.25)

ML damage is 6/4 though

Edit: Doh, that's MPL.

Edited by Bront, 03 November 2013 - 01:31 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Bront, on 03 November 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

I've found Chainfire works well enough with MLs to mitigate heat and keep pressure on mechs. For LLs, I think running more than 4 is a waste of tonnage. Chain fire 2 in 2 groups, and you still heat up pretty fast. Chain fire all 4, and you can keep firing for a pretty long time, but you eventually still heat up pretty fast. Generally, I'd rather run with 2 LLs and 4 MLs on a Boars Head and simply not use the LLs at close range if heat becomes an issue (as MLs are more heat efficient). Use the tonnage saved for a larger engine and/or more heat sinks.

Then again, I don't have a Boars Head, but I've run plenty of Stalkers.

Chain fire is bad overall. It can help to reduce heat buildup, but up front damage is always - always - better than damage over time. There are circumstances where it can be used effectively for example, one group of 2 PPC's in groupfire mode, a second group of the same 2 PPC's in chainfire, so you can elect to fire one or both together if you're near heatcap.

If you have two groups of two large lasers (4 total) chainfire is pointless. Just group fire pairs. So long as you wait half a second after firing the first group, no ghost heat. You could put all 4 in one chainfire group, and tap the button every .5s (otherwise, you'll end up with 1.75s between firing) but that's reducing pinpoint damage. 2LL's together is not a tremendous amount of heat, and it's generated over the length of the beam.

What you really don't want to do - and I realise LL's are different because of beam time - is try to use chainfired pairs of weapons to bypass Ghost Heat. This is because you'll be virtually unable to hit both buttons at exactly the same time. If you, then, fire the second group a tiny fraction of a second after the first, and chainfire cycles at .5s, you'll end up firing with less than a .5 second delay thanks to the second group resulting in ghost heat generation very quickly. It's particularly easy to see with AC/2's. Multiple groups chainfired, then, are very bad.

Bront, on 03 November 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

ML damage is 6/4 though

Edit: Doh, that's MPL.

MPL is 6/5.

[Bront]

Wintersdark, on 03 November 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

MPL is 6/5.

Yeah, for some reason I thought ML was 6 damage. Probably should have deleted the post.

[MavRCK]

War Room Episode 4 - for MnDragon

[Texas Merc]

I have a question


If you only play with the same 6-8 people every night and use the same builds over and over also every night for almost two years on end how do you define the word FUN?


serious question.

e: Actually the real question is, when does it become old?

ee: the NGNG guys are streaming arma atm lol

Edited by Texas Merc, 05 November 2013 - 12:17 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Texas Merc, on 05 November 2013 - 12:15 AM, said:

I have a question


If you only play with the same 6-8 people every night and use the same builds over and over also every night for almost two years on end how do you define the word FUN?


serious question.

I get where you're coming from, I really do. I myself need to play a wide variety of mechs and loadouts to keep things fun.

But, as a serious answer:

Fun is different for everyone. For some, the fun is all in the team vs. team competition, and the mechs/fluff/variety are meaningless. For others, perfecting their favorite mech is fun, and they've no interest in other chassis. Fun is inherently subjective.

But "What is fun?" questions aside, the reality is that the builds and mechs don't stay the same week in and week out. They change constantly as balance changes and game mechanics change how weapons and mechs work, and as new maps and strategies push new strategies and tactics into play.

That's why MavRCK has to update this list so often.

Now, as has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, there's always room for debate and this list reflects consensus in current play, its not necessarily completely accurate nor applicable to everyone. Its more of a set of guidelines, and a good starting point.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Wintersdark, on 05 November 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

Now, as has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, there's always room for debate and this list reflects consensus in current play, its not necessarily completely accurate nor applicable to everyone. Its more of a set of guidelines, and a good starting point.

This pretty much sums it up.
A list of how 'competitive' a mech is.
I can guarantee you at my elo level at least - it is a lot more the mech than the pilot, and I have no clue how it is at the more competitive levels, but knowing that (for all I love them ) my Commando would not stand up to a decent Jenner in a one on one fight, is important to know.
Of course now if you are looking for a one on one fight in this game (and especially if you are doing it in a Commando) then you are very much doing it wrong.... but I hope you get the idea

[MavRCK]

You know what's not fun?

Waiting for 5-10 mins for a game...

Waiting 5-10 mins for a game and not finding one...

Waiting 5-10 mins for a game and not finding one... 4 times in a row...



But ya, the game gets old .... it's really playing with friends that is fun... leveling mechs gets tedious, but I figured I ought to... I'm not planning to do Awesomes.. I did enough of them when I grinded my first mech (pre-cadet bonus, pre-champion mechs, etc.)

Most of my teammates are into different games now... I love stompy robots...but here's hoping for community warfare and private matches / lobbies soon.

I really hope Solaris 7 is implemented - especially my community engagement suggestions.. That sort of stuff will really get people into the game:

http://mwomercs.com/...out-s7-for-pgi/

Edited by MavRCK, 05 November 2013 - 04:23 PM.

[Wintersdark]

MavRCK, on 05 November 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

You know what's not fun?

Waiting for 5-10 mins for a game...

Waiting 5-10 mins for a game and not finding one...

Waiting 5-10 mins for a game and not finding one... 4 times in a row...

Yeah, that sucks. I dearly love 12 mans, and can only play them very, very rarely... Then when I finally get an opportunity, I'll get one match then several failures before we give up. *cries*

For example, we recently set up a Google+ 12man, random folks all in Locusts. Sure, it wasn't competitive at all - and we're just random people, not an organized team - but it was crazy, crazy fun. Unfortunately, we only got one drop in until getting lost in "Failed to find match".

[MavRCK]

Gman's builds:



###Light Mechs (20-35 tons)



[JR7-F](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...1e3a63c2d2bdbe2), [JR7-D](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...e90141e1e2ab5cb), [RVN-3L](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4e6fbdce438ce9e), [RVN-3L](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...725a52a90835018), [SDR-5D](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f9a199579d3c0d5), [SDR-5D](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...88d1d2bb6da554c)





###Medium Mechs (40-55 tons)



[SHD-2D2](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3aed8183935b287), [SHD-5M](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3826a09e24ee4c2), [BJ-1](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...ef7c3393b926d67), [CN9-A](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0d0f93867b89b62), [TBT-7K](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...a77220cadd6f9f0), [CN9-YLW](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...9e6d134701ed775), [HBK-4P](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...fc3b17bb0856425), [KTO-18](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7fa307209a31c2d)





###Heavy Mechs (60-75 tons)

[CTF-3D](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7de9a29af16afb6), [CTF-3D](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...e240231506b7bf3), [JM6-S/DD/FB](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3b4d60dd40f192c), [CPLT-K2](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...bd533e50271b93b)





###Assault Mechs (80-100 tons)

[HGN-733C](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...67c6a0bab6a9301), [HGN-733C](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0a49974435db2e7), [AS7-DDC](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d247c9a57a3fa27), [AS7-DDC](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...117358eb78258d3), [STK-M](http://mwo.smurfy-ne...517d01c30e820df)

[Bront]

That DDC build is very vulnerable in the legs. I took 2 DDCs with leg armor like that out with my Locust 1V the other day with ease. I'd recommend at least another half-ton of armor on the legs (Leg armor should usually total the CT armor, if not be higher than it).

[MavRCK]

I don't use all these builds exactly, but they are similar to what I play and my teammates. Gman offered them up for people to see and learn what builds competitive players generally use.

[luxebo]

I like the builds a lot though I made adjustments. Also, how does the Jester fit in now?

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 09 November 2013 - 11:09 PM, said:

I like the builds a lot though I made adjustments. Also, how does the Jester fit in now?

It's a solid tier 2 heavy mech -- energy hardpoints in the arms, jump jets, 65 tons...

Looking at the heavy tier, it looks like a mess, I need to go through the list and clean it up.

I'll be away for work all of next week, so I won't be able to play, but I'll be able to do a nice update of the tier list in time for the Nov 19th patch...!

I'd like to work on the Solo Queue list and clean that up... I'm not sure if I want to make it into a tier 1-3 format like the competitive 12-man list.. what do you guys think?

The tier list is fairly time intensive and it's been nice just to take a week off from thinking about it. With the module changes and upcoming modules, there's going to be an update then a serious update to reflect these changes. The list is always playing catch up...

I'd also like to discuss tactics a little more.. perhaps summarize what tactics has been discussed and continue the theme regularly.. If you guys like it...?

Also, I've been in contact with some different players, especially the LORDS, and some have agreed to be interviewed and to discuss their views and perspectives on MWO. Some of you light mech fans will be happy to hear that Wispsy will be one of those players! I really value the different player's perspectives and hope it brings a fresh insight into the game for you guys.

ggclose bros!