31 replies to this topic

[irish]

As any good Merc can tell you the other reason that mediums and heavys tend to make up the bulk of any battletech/mechwarrior force is the almighty c-bill. Sure an Atlas can blow a big whole in something, but even interplanetary governments are not made of money. You simply can't afford to put 11 assult mechs and 1 scout on every single planet.
Think of it this way. Does everybody drive a Aston Martin One-77, with a few people driving Ninja® ZX™-10R for scout duty? I don't know about you but I drive a Ford. Do I want one of the other two? Maybe but I'll take the Ford over walking any day of the week.

[PirateLincoln]

Another one of these troll threads? This has been rehashed about a dozen times, hasn't it?

[SideSt3p]

So, I'll preface this with: This is my opinion, I believe the rolls depend greatly on your Commander and the team's playstyle/synergy. These opinions are from how I like to play and how my friends and I interface in Team Based games.

We have always tended to enjoy a very mobile force. We focus on making an enemy overextend and making them pay for their mistake. The idea is to push or goad them into pushing, trading and getting out with no losses or major damage taken. I think League of Legends is a great example, you poke, and poke and poke until the enemy gets annoyed/bored/mad. They chase you going from their safe zone into the mid, finally into your tower zone. You pounce. And bam, get a kill or get them so low they have to back to regen health and they lose exp/gold/lane presence.

From that perspective:

Medium 'Mechs: More durable than a Light 'Mech, but carrying enough armarment to be dangerous and armor to survive, a Medium 'Mech is the harrassment and sting. You can't leave a Medium 'Mech alone because eventually it WILL be dangerous to your force and able to cause serious damage. With it's speed higher than most Heavy/Assault 'Mechs (Charger excluded obviously ) it is able to poke in and get out before most retribution will come. I intend to use these as a mobile goading force, harrasing slower and more ponderous designs and keeping people on their back foot as well as tangling up enemy forces.

Heavy 'Mechs: While not packing as many weapons or as much armor as an Assault 'Mech, they tend to provide a level of mobility a lot of Assault 'Mechs can't (again...that pesky Charger is the exception ). I intend to use these as 'Calvery'. A lance of Cataphracts (I'm thinking modified CTF-3L's) can get in their fast enough to bring the hammer down on an Assault 'Mech the Mediums have tangled up and then get out before the enemy can group up.

So this is my view of the classes. Thoughts?

[CW Roy]

The 'Mech itself makes more difference than simply medium and heavy, and so do the possible loadouts -- so they could fit in a few places I bet.

Edited by cw roy, 07 June 2012 - 06:35 AM.

[Alpha Six]

Thanks to everyone who has replied. I started playing mechwarrior in 3 and 4 (the era of the where tonnage was everything) so I'm still trying to wrap my head around how a smaller Mech like the hunchback is able to go up against larger mechs. You guys have really helped to clear up where these in between weight classes fit.

[Joanna Conners]

irish, on 07 June 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

As any good Merc can tell you the other reason that mediums and heavys tend to make up the bulk of any battletech/mechwarrior force is the almighty c-bill. Sure an Atlas can blow a big whole in something, but even interplanetary governments are not made of money. You simply can't afford to put 11 assult mechs and 1 scout on every single planet.
Think of it this way. Does everybody drive a Aston Martin One-77, with a few people driving Ninja® ZX™-10R for scout duty? I don't know about you but I drive a Ford. Do I want one of the other two? Maybe but I'll take the Ford over walking any day of the week.

What kind of Ford? Are we talking a rusted out 80s Escort or a 2005 GT or 2013 GT 500? Because if it's the latter I'll definitely take 200mph over walking any day of the week as well.

[Kobold]

I'd like to point out that a full-armored Atlas has roughly only 50% more armor than a well armored heavy mech. Further, a Dragon with his base engine is only about 12% slower than a Raven.

Mech abilities exist on a continuum. There are very few sharp cutoffs in ability, but more a sliding scale of balance.

[Ogryn]

Even in the multiplayer arenas of MW4, I always preferred a twin LB10x Uziel with AMs and near max armor. Not really a canon fit, but incredibly fun for me to play. Or a Shadowhawk with jump jets, AMS and a LB20x. Close, circle, hammer.

Wouldn't work without cover. Got railed repeatedly if I screwed up. But Fafnirs and Daishis can't circle fast enough to keep up.

Tabletop? City fighters. Total city fighters. SLower method meant that I had to keep movement up and block LOS. Against players online, I had to block LOS and move erratically. FUN to play for me, but not necessarily the most efficient. But the fun was why I played them.

[Kobold]

Also I'll note that again a lot of this comes down to matchmaking. If they are smart, they will have some sort of base number for your mech, and a multiplier for the player skill (much like BV factoring in player skill). A very deadly pilot in a very overgunned mech might find himself with a lot of newbs in Commandos as teammates on a regular basis, where if he voluntarily ran around in a CN9-A he'd have more skilled teammates.

[SyberSmoke]

People like to make sure there is a fine line and purpose to something. But in Battletech those lines are VERY blurry. This is just because you can build a mech from 20 tons to 100 tons and in 5 ton increments. This is blurred even more because armor is constant, 1 ton of armor always equaled the same amount. So an Atlas with 14 tons of armor equals any other mech with 14 tons of armor.

What does this mean? It means that you get to choose how you play your mech. If you want to snipe you can build it that way. If you want to brawl, strap on what you need and allot of armor. Heck, The catapult is seen as a support mech, but strip off those LRM15's and put on 4 SRM-6s and you have a heavy hitter at close range, and 24 SRM missiles can really screw up an enemy mech.

So it is not about the mech...it is about you and how you desire to play it!

[Joanna Conners]

SyberSmoke, on 07 June 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:

So it is not about the mech...it is about you and how you desire to play it!

Well said!

[Seabear]

If one thinks of combat as a 1v1 proposition, the roles of the medium ansd heavies is blurry, but if one thinks of combat in terms of teamwork , the perspective changes greatly. Historically, role warfare has been the standard configuration of successful combat units. To use a Napoleonic coamparision:
Heavies correspond to the line infantry. They make the advances, take and defend ground, and generally form the solid base around which the lighter units manuver. These , along with the mediums are the most common units found on the battlefield.
Mediums are equivalent to the regular cavalry. The make the sweeps, attack the flanks and carry out sweeping raids. While they can take and defend ground, it is not what they do best. Just like cavalry did not attack formed infantry, mediums should not take on line troops head on in most cases.
Assualts are to MW what The Old Guard wass to Napoleon, the Battle winners, held in reserve until the the moment when their prescence will tip the balance. There are never many of them, and they have to be released at the proper time.
Lights are the light cavalry, scouting, harrassing the heavier troops when they are occupied witjh heavier foes, pursuing a broken or fleeing enemy. Let each fulfill it's asssigned role and no one is left exposed.