464 replies to this topic

[Febrosian R Gillingham]

Only thing I'd disagree with (other than placement of a few mechs) is the idea that its best for a new player to go straight for the top builds. Sure, as far as player retention its better since they won't get thrashed as badly every game and they'll probably stick around longer. Definitely better as far as cbill value also, since they can still use those mechs as they improve all the way up to the competitive level. I still wish I knew that dual ac2's on a Raven 4x was not the best way to grind out my first mech, especially before the cadet bonus was implemented.

But having the top builds straight away lets a newer player skimp on a lot of the learning process, so they will get up to a certain level and plateau there for a while and become frustrated. For example, starting in a Raven 3L (assuming its built right) - you can pretty much auto-win any light fight at that level by just circling, so you don't need to learn much about torso twisting or breaking a circle strafe to spread damage. Slower, crappier lights need to worry about that much more and will be forced into doing it. You won't really need to worry about snipers at that level since you're so fast and snipers there won't be able to hit you, whereas the worse lights will be forced to appreciate cover more since they are easier targets.

I would argue that being forced to learn stuff like that early on when you know that you are bad at the game is better than being forced later on when you start to think you're getting pretty good. Imo its much easier to learn something once, correctly than to get pretty far only to realize you need to relearn everything you thought you knew. I guess though players are sorta forced to do this somewhat if they want to get elite/master efficiencies.

[Kmieciu]

Febrosian R Gillingham, on 27 May 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

Only thing I'd disagree with (other than placement of a few mechs) is the idea that its best for a new player to go straight for the top builds.

On the other hand there are people that spent their cadet bonus on a Dragon and a Spider and are getting owned on a regular basis. Many of them already left the game. New players should be informed, which chassis is easy to use and have great potential.
For example: Jenner and CPLT-K2 are both very accessible to a new player, and have a lot of room for skill improvement. Spiders and Dragons require a lot of skill, but deliver inferior performance at the same skill level.

[Just wanna play]

80Bit, on 27 May 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

The 2D is the best commando because 3xSSRM2 + ECM = own face. If one of the 35 ton lights could run triple SSRM2 it would instantly become king of the lights. Only the low weight/armor/ keeps the 2D from total domination.

low weight also creates its own advantages, and what if you dont use streaks, this really is a list for what does the meta game best and not what is the best, what gets stuff up on that list is obvious and all the list does is encourage the meta game

im partially raging because he made a list saying all of the mechs i own are at a "significant competitive disadvantage".....

Kmieciu, on 28 May 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

On the other hand there are people that spent their cadet bonus on a Dragon and a Spider and are getting owned on a regular basis. Many of them already left the game. New players should be informed, which chassis is easy to use and have great potential.

im confused whats wrong with starting with a spider?? thats what i started with :/

Edited by Just wanna play, 28 May 2013 - 02:47 AM.

[zraven7]

WaddeHaddeDudeda, on 27 May 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

I lol'd!

We are TEAMplayers.
So we'd like to play in a TEAMenvironment.

The so called "official tournaments" are not more and not less than single player events to feed the Elo system with data.
Not the "best" player wins there.
Check the forums. There are more than enough threads where it is shown how to game the system.
So much for your "official tourney".


EDIT;

LIES!
(very last post at the bottom of this page)

Sorry, Wadde. I see your posts all over, but for some reason, it never clicked that you were in the same guild as mav. I'm gonna mark it up to "not enough coffee". It explains so many other of my blunders.

[Mycrus]

*looks at the subforum

*looks at this whole thread

*shakes head...

[Opus]

MavRCK

Thank you for removing the Name & Shame: I always thought KAOS was way above doing such things

Your work here is amazing it shows your dedication to the game & franchise - some will find it very helpful, some won't...

keep up the good work

Edited by Opus, 28 May 2013 - 04:44 AM.

[Alik Kerensky]

So let me get this straight... premades (8-mans) can't handle an actual challenge anymore so they should use your picks for mechs to be "competitive"... That only the choice of a mech can make up for lack of skill and/or the ability to improvise in a fluid combat situation... lol your funny.

To Quote a favorite anime of mine, "If we all reacted the same way, we'd be predictable, and there's always more than one way to view a situation. What's true for the group is also true for the individual. It's simple: Overspecialize, and you breed in weakness. It's slow death."

Not to sound snippy if you read this and imagine question marks... they were rhetorical.

Edited by Alik Kerensky, 28 May 2013 - 05:19 AM.

[IceSerpent]

Thoummim, on 27 May 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

While I agree you need an insane amount of match to score top10, there is still a lot of skill involved its completly unfair to calli it unskill the first tourney definitely was now its a lot better.

Your perfect match in the official tournament is when 8 players on the opposing team are much worse than you are (so that they let you rack up a lot of damage and don't kill you in the process) and other 7 players on your own team are also much worse than you (so that they don't compete with you for kills/assists). Getting that is pure luck, unless you game the system, which is frowned upon by PGI. So the whole tournament basically revolves around getting just the "right" players in the match.

Quote

Run hot or die (or something else) is for most player unknown or at best a phrase they have read somewhere on the forum. So if you say tournament they will think : "something versus the world".

Which is why I said that OP is talking about a different kind of tournaments.

[Hayashi]

I'm having difficulty understanding the placement of the HBK-SP under the P, and the placement of the X-5 so far under the 3M.

BAP + Streaks is an extremely potent combination.

The DRG Flame and 1C should both also be in at least tier 2.

The Awesome 9M should be tier 2.

The Cataphract 4X, Spider K and Awesome-PB deserve a tier 4 of their own given how bad they are.

[WaddeHaddeDudeda]

Hayashi, on 28 May 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I'm having difficulty understanding the placement of the HBK-SP under the P, and the placement of the X-5 so far under the 3M.

The DRG Flame and 1C should both also be in at least tier 2.

The Awesome 9M should be tier 2.

1. Can't explain this because it's Mavs ranking. The 4P actually is "better" than the 4SP since it can deliver a 45 pinpoint alpha right into your face and works especially good against other lights and mediums. I'd even rank the AL before the 4SP since they can pretty much hold the same weapons, but the AL is much more durable (tanking damage + zombie Mech).
As for 3M > X5 that simply because basically ALL Cicadas are bad from a competitive point of view (almost any medium or even Jenners can do the job as good or better).
The huge advantage of the 3M is simply ECM, because good teams used it to give their lights (usually 2 x 3Ls) the ECM superiority.
2 x 3L + 1 3M will own a pair of opfor 3Ls ANY day.

2. Not sure about the Flame, but as for the 1C I'd occur (but once again, it's Mavs ranking, so "X should be there, Y should be there" comments may give him some ideas to re-think things, but ultimately it's his ranking).

3. Kindly disagree. The Awesome may not be a bad Mech from its hardpoints and speed/agility - but its hitboxes makes it to one of the very worst assaults (if not MECHS in general) in the whole game, ESPECIALLY when you take a look at other competitors in the assault class.



EDIT: For all you naysayers: if you are not able to add anything CONSTRUCTIVE, how about you **** this lawn and actually start an OWN PROJECT to help out this community?

Edited by WaddeHaddeDudeda, 28 May 2013 - 10:47 AM.

[Koniving]

It's interesting and very World of Tanks-like to throw mechs into tiers. I'm aware this is the list as the owner of the thread feels it should be assorted. I disagree, however, to some of the values placed on certain mechs.

I won't go into huge detail, but my modifications to this list would be as follows:

Spoiler

The HBK 4SP belongs in tier 1 alongside the 4P, not in tier 2. It is one of the most affordable and versatile rigs in the Hunchback chassis. 4J and 4H belong in tier 2, not 3, due to the versatility in their large energy weapon counts. The 4G belongs right where it is, as there can never be enough energy weapons to offset the disadvantages of the ballistics.

The Cicada 2B should be in tier 2 (two of its energy weapons are arm mounted, allowing it to do more than the 2A which is all torso-mounted and thus virtually unable to fight enemies at superior heights or down below without entering the vulnerability of being trapped down low).

Dragon 5N belongs in tier 2. Equipped with triple AC/2, XL 300 engine, x amount of ammo it's like a much more survivable Jager 6-S. True, losing its right arm it can lose that advantage, however the narrow side torsos and high difficulty in hitting its weaker components when torso twisting to spread damage, it has both speed and a survivable nature that allows it to rival the quality of both the Jager JM6-S and JM6-DD.

Raven 4x I feel belongs higher, however not everyone uses it to jump overtop of Atlases to shoot them in the back time and again to wipe out virtually any assault (except Awesomes) and so it's reasonable to be where it is. I'm certain opinions on it will increase again when knockdowns return, as one of its most glorified traits is the ability to 'drop-kick' enemy assaults to knock them down.

The Death's Knell and Commando 1-B are competitively on par with the 2-D. True, they don't have ECM, however in both default and customized rigs both perform equal to or even better than the 2-D, especially post-original missile nerf and post-LRM fix.

The Commando 1-D needs to be dropped to a Tier 4 for having an exponentially dramatic disadvantage; there is an ongoing bug associated with its torso-mounted missile launcher hinder it to the point of doing half-damage or less. It happens because the missiles literally fire 'inside' of each other, quite literally causing twin volleys of 6 missiles (12 total) to count as only 6 missiles. I reported this issue early in closed beta but the issue has yet to be fixed. Was told it would be addressed with missile spread, but the results are shown by simply watching them fly. The only way it will likely be fixed is when the weapon model swaps are implemented for the Commando line.

I'll be honest and let you know that I generally find the A1 in any configuration to be inferior to the C1 when you drop the missiles for twin ER PPCs.

There are more that I would rank differently, but that's as far as I'll place here. Remember that anyone's rankings of any mechs is most likely based on either their personal or group observations or their personal or group opinions. What plays well for someone may not play as well for someone else as the variants and their hardpoints are designed to cater to various gameplay styles. Some mechs are compatible with many playstyles, others are very dedicated to specific styles of play.

Below is a mechlab image taken at 4:58 PM May 28th, 2013.

Like the original list you should take these minor modifications with a grain of salt and be aware that all arrangements of the quality of mechs are relative to the biased opinions of those who use them.

Edited by Koniving, 28 May 2013 - 01:07 PM.

[scJazz]

Koniving, on 28 May 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

It's interesting and very World of Tanks-like to throw mechs into tiers. I'm aware this is the list as the owner of the thread feels it should be assorted. I disagree, however, to some of the values placed on certain mechs.

I won't go into huge detail, but my modifications to this list would be as follows:

Spoiler

The HBK 4SP belongs in tier 1 alongside the 4P, not in tier 2. 4J and 4H belong in tier 2, not 3. The Cicada 2B belongs in tier 2 (two of its energy weapons are arm mounted, allowing it to do more than the 2A).

Dragon 5N belongs in tier 2, equipped with triple AC/2, XL 300 engine, x amount of ammo it's like much more survivable Jager 6-S.

Raven 4x I feel belongs higher, however not everyone uses it to jump overtop of Atlases to shoot them in the back time and again to wipe out virtually any assault (except Awesomes) and so it's reasonable to be where it is.

The Death's Knell and Commando 1-B are competitively on par with the 2-D. True, they don't have ECM, however in both default and customized rigs both perform equal to or even better than the 2-D.

The Commando 1-D needs to be dropped to a Tier 4 for exponentially dramatic disadvantage; an ongoing bug associated with its arm-mounted missile launcher hinder it to the point of doing half-damage or less. I reported it early in closed beta but it got ignored. The only way it will be fixed is when the weapon model swaps are implemented for the Commando line.

I'll be honest and let you know that I generally find the A1 in any configuration to be inferior to the C1 when you drop the missiles for twin ER PPCs.

There are more, but that's as far as I'll go.

Like the original list you should take these minor modifications with a grain of salt and be aware that all arrangements of the quality of mechs are relative to the biased opinions of those who use them.

Too late for being a voice of reason in this thread Koniving. They have gone completely Ad Hominem.

Feels more like CAOD in EvE now!

Edited by scJazz, 28 May 2013 - 12:09 PM.

[Cubivorre]

scJazz, on 28 May 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

Too late for being a voice of reason in this thread Koniving. They have gone completely Ad Hominem.

Feels more like CAOD in EvE now!

Quoting this. Because it's what I would have said. ie, 'i lik ur poast dood1!!1'

Although if I can say I agree with anything nearly wholeheartedly - That's the module list. Pretty much dead on, good goin' Mav

Edited by Cubivorre, 28 May 2013 - 12:29 PM.

[MavRCK]

Koniving, on 28 May 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

It's interesting and very World of Tanks-like to throw mechs into tiers. I'm aware this is the list as the owner of the thread feels it should be assorted. I disagree, however, to some of the values placed on certain mechs.

I won't go into huge detail, but my modifications to this list would be as follows:

Spoiler

The HBK 4SP belongs in tier 1 alongside the 4P, not in tier 2. 4J and 4H belong in tier 2, not 3. The Cicada 2B belongs in tier 2 (two of its energy weapons are arm mounted, allowing it to do more than the 2A).

Dragon 5N belongs in tier 2, equipped with triple AC/2, XL 300 engine, x amount of ammo it's like much more survivable Jager 6-S.

Raven 4x I feel belongs higher, however not everyone uses it to jump overtop of Atlases to shoot them in the back time and again to wipe out virtually any assault (except Awesomes) and so it's reasonable to be where it is.

The Death's Knell and Commando 1-B are competitively on par with the 2-D. True, they don't have ECM, however in both default and customized rigs both perform equal to or even better than the 2-D.

The Commando 1-D needs to be dropped to a Tier 4 for exponentially dramatic disadvantage; an ongoing bug associated with its arm-mounted missile launcher hinder it to the point of doing half-damage or less. I reported it early in closed beta but it got ignored. The only way it will be fixed is when the weapon model swaps are implemented for the Commando line.

I'll be honest and let you know that I generally find the A1 in any configuration to be inferior to the C1 when you drop the missiles for twin ER PPCs.

There are more, but that's as far as I'll go.

Like the original list you should take these minor modifications with a grain of salt and be aware that all arrangements of the quality of mechs are relative to the biased opinions of those who use them.

<3

Wish we had more posts like this.

This really helps people understand the ins and outs - the specifics - and the opinion of someone of different mechs.

More so than.. You're wrong. Blah blah blah...

Watch my latest video:

2:52 Quote: There is no reason to take [these mechs] until you are a significantly mech pilot in a tier 2 or tier 3.

[REDACTED]

Kmieciu, on 28 May 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

On the other hand there are people that spent their cadet bonus on a Dragon and a Spider and are getting owned on a regular basis. Many of them already left the game. New players should be informed, which chassis is easy to use and have great potential.
For example: Jenner and CPLT-K2 are both very accessible to a new player, and have a lot of room for skill improvement. Spiders and Dragons require a lot of skill, but deliver inferior performance at the same skill level.

^^

Just trying to help players ............

Looks like maybe I encroached on the stomping grounds and expertise of some forum warriors here...

Edited by Prosperity Park, 28 May 2013 - 02:55 PM.
removed user-target comments

[Cubivorre]

MavRCK, on 28 May 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Looks like maybe I encroached on the stomping grounds and expertise of some forum warriors here...

It's not that - When known players such as yourself announce a list like this and other players see some of their favorite mechs at the bottom, they're gonna get ********.

And that's fine, some of our favorite mechs aren't competitive mechs. I know some of mine aren't - it's just a disheartening fact. Some people just take more offense to it than others. By creating this thread, you had to know you were gonna get a lot of flak from it. Accurate or not.

EDIT: f.l.a.k. is a bad word?! Man, we're taking censorship back a few decades.

EDIT EDIT: I see. I looked at the wrong word. Time to stop drinking at this hour.

Edited by Cubivorre, 28 May 2013 - 12:40 PM.

[MavRCK]

Hayashi, on 28 May 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I'm having difficulty understanding the placement of the HBK-SP under the P, and the placement of the X-5 so far under the 3M.

The SP got a demotion because it became surpassed by the CN9A. The P got an promotion because with the SRM nerf a high alpha medium laser build because more useful.

The X-5 is low because in competitive 8s, you would only take a 40 ton medium over another medium for the ECM (ie. the 3M) Otherwise, would you choose an X-5 over a CN9A, HNK9P or a 4SP? I wouldn't.

This is a similar thought-process when it comes to the heavies. The real issue is that the tier 1 3D is so much better than tier 2-3 mechs... it's hard to classify the tier 3 mechs...

Before SRM nerf, the A1 Slapcat was deadly... a tier 1 alternative... it's still a great brawler... So it's up there.. But the dragon never was... sure you can go gauss 2 ppc... but you lack jumpjets... plus 5-10 tons (ie. Cataphract - Catapult)... so we're hitting the realms of third place.. fourth.. fifth..

The lower tiers are harder to place.. We're really talking about 9th place and 10th place... Should 9th place be a tier 2.. or should it be tier 3..

Worthy of debate.. I welcome it... Hopefully someone prove me wrong and show us stuff we didn't know... help us innovate and discover a new build!

Innovate - create - refine --- much better than "i hate your list" -- "you're wrong".

Edited by MavRCK, 28 May 2013 - 12:42 PM.

[MavRCK]

Cubivorre, on 28 May 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

It's not that - When known players such as yourself announce a list like this and other players see some of their favorite mechs at the bottom, they're gonna get ********.

And that's fine, some of our favorite mechs aren't competitive mechs. I know some of mine aren't - it's just a disheartening fact. Some people just take more offense to it than others. By creating this thread, you had to know you were gonna get a lot of flak from it. Accurate or not.

EDIT: f.l.a.k. is a bad word?! Man, we're taking censorship back a few decades.

EDIT EDIT: I see. I looked at the wrong word. Time to stop drinking at this hour.

Lol.

Now I know what poor Elementz went through with his list.

To be in KaoS, you got to have nerves of steel.. so this is nothing compared to practice under Kriestov...

The difficulty of keeping discussion on point is rough...

Then you get people who make it their raison d'etre to remove you from the forums... or drown you out in hate.



The people who suffer are those new to the game, those spending their MC and their first bunch of 15 million cbills -- those new players who are super excited to buy their first mech...

Look guys, getting coal isn't fun for any kid.. remember how it felt to be disappointed...? to feel screwed over? to be taken advantaged?

THAT'S WHY THERE IS A LIST.

HELP OTHERS.

If you don't have anything good to say, go watch Bambi, and delete your post.

kk thanks bai!

Edited by MavRCK, 28 May 2013 - 12:47 PM.

[beard0fzeus]

I know you get a lot of flack from idealogues claiming the uselessness of tier lists, but I would like to personally thank you for putting this up here. I am a new player (just started this week), and I did not look at any forums before cashing in all my cadet bonus on my first and still only mech...an AWESOME AWS-8t (sad trombone). I have spent a boat load of cbills putting in an XL300 engine and tweaking different combos of PPC's, SRM6's, ER PPCs, ER LRG L's, LRG Pulse L's, etc etc. I am uber noob sauce, and am still learning to turn sideways not to expose my fatbox to the world like lilo and hilton. I really wish I could go back in time before I blew my wad of cbills on trying to frankenstein this chump mech into something functional and watch your vids and see this list. I am gathering now that what I really wanted was a striker. Beyond my noob-thanks, I was also curious about your data collection process for crafting these lists. Besides personal expertise and game experience, do you come to a consensus with your fellow gamers? Do you have access to data sheets like world of logs showing the trends in win % and average dmg for different mechs accross a wide swath of data points? It would be cool to see big data spreadsheets with win/dmg ratios by chasis and by items on the chasis (similar to lolking for league of legends). If no such data sheets exist, could the community start logging game data and contributing to a data set? Just some thanks, questions, and food for thought.
-noobimus maximus

[MavRCK]

beard0fzeus, on 28 May 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

I know you get a lot of flack from idealogues claiming the uselessness of tier lists, but I would like to personally thank you for putting this up here. I am a new player (just started this week), and I did not look at any forums before cashing in all my cadet bonus on my first and still only mech...an AWESOME AWS-8t (sad trombone). I have spent a boat load of cbills putting in an XL300 engine and tweaking different combos of PPC's, SRM6's, ER PPCs, ER LRG L's, LRG Pulse L's, etc etc. I am uber noob sauce, and am still learning to turn sideways not to expose my fatbox to the world like lilo and hilton. I really wish I could go back in time before I blew my wad of cbills on trying to frankenstein this chump mech into something functional and watch your vids and see this list. I am gathering now that what I really wanted was a striker. Beyond my noob-thanks, I was also curious about your data collection process for crafting these lists. Besides personal expertise and game experience, do you come to a consensus with your fellow gamers? Do you have access to data sheets like world of logs showing the trends in win % and average dmg for different mechs accross a wide swath of data points? It would be cool to see big data spreadsheets with win/dmg ratios by chasis and by items on the chasis (similar to lolking for league of legends). If no such data sheets exist, could the community start logging game data and contributing to a data set? Just some thanks, questions, and food for thought.
-noobimus maximus

Man, i am so sorry hear about your awesome.. I wish I could give you 15 million cbills from my account so you could buy a stalker and try it out.

Frankly, if PGI - IGP you can do that.. go ahead and debit my account.

In KaoS, we have some strong personalities that battle it out.. I get the benefit of listening to all different sides.. It may not show, but I'm probably considered a mild to moderate personality in KaoS.

I would love, love, love to see data from the games.. from 8s, 4s, pugs etc.. But right now we have the tournament 8 scene.. like screens I posted.. when you talk or overhear what another team brings to a match, it begins to reaffirm the list in my mind..

When you have top teams all bringing the same mechs.. there's a good reason! From Russian Clan Wolf, to SJR, to DV8... these guys are pushing to be the best of the best...

The day I see an awesome there... okay, I'll play that mech and try it.. and ask.. and take a some of flak from my team.. I still take flak for the spider... (Tas..)

But you're idea of having percentage win:loss, weapons... all that data is exactly what is needed to begin to balance the game especially when it goes live...

[Demosthones]

Cubivorre, on 28 May 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

It's not that - When known players such as yourself announce a list like this and other players see some of their favorite mechs at the bottom, they're gonna get ********.

And that's fine, some of our favorite mechs aren't competitive mechs. I know some of mine aren't - it's just a disheartening fact. Some people just take more offense to it than others. By creating this thread, you had to know you were gonna get a lot of flak from it. Accurate or not.

Agreed, one of my fav mechs is the CTF-4X. Its slow, but can pack an insane amount of dps in those ballistic arms. I have no arguments in it being a third tier mech, however in my hands its one of the best damage per match options.

To the OP: have you compared your list to the recent tourney for the mediums to see which mechs performed the best? I would like to hear what you have to say comparing the top scoring chasis in mediums to your list and why you think they performed better or worse than you expected. This isn't really for new players, but I think it would be interesting.