43 replies to this topic

[Biplane]

Spiketail Drake, on 25 July 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

I'd suggest the SRM6 and ignore that other missile point, or put a streak in it for against other lights. Or run it with AMS, like this: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...aad0de5b0f8920a

(Yes, i know it isn't the max engine, you waste tonnage because you can't equip the 300xl and you don't need that extra heatsink anyway in this build.)

I've already got the AMS, but no BAP. I'm planning to stick with my 280XL, I think.

It probably does make more sense to run the SRM6, but it just feels bad to waste shots with that spread. I love the SRM4's spread. You're probably right, though. SRM2 in the left arm probably wastes any many shots or more with its screwy 1 tube firing.

I'll have to try both approaches, as soon as my RVN-2X stops being so darn fun to drive.

[Booran]

I got my 4X as a first Raven, still trying to get c-bills to fit it like I want to but I've found a build that works disturbingly well for me when on paper it shouldn't.

It runs stock enginge (is that std175?), endo, 2xLL and 1xMG.. Usually I'm in a group and people tend to rather shoot the heavies and assaults so I can sneak around and blast away on their flanks and rears.
Can't wait till I get money for XL engine and double heat sinks so I can stuff maybe a second machine gun or go with another ballistic.

[Biplane]

Biplane, on 26 July 2013 - 04:25 AM, said:

I've already got the AMS, but no BAP. I'm planning to stick with my 280XL, I think.

It probably does make more sense to run the SRM6, but it just feels bad to waste shots with that spread. I love the SRM4's spread. You're probably right, though. SRM2 in the left arm probably wastes any many shots or more with its screwy 1 tube firing.

I'll have to try both approaches, as soon as my RVN-2X stops being so darn fun to drive.

So I finally, settled on Cranky Crow. It's working wonderfully, so far. I alternate between putting the ammo in the torso or legs, but it hasn't made much difference so far.

[Alistair Winter]

Bumping this for great justice.

Raven pilots out there still need help.

EDIT; Hmmmn, this thread is now horribly out of date. Need to update the builds ASAP.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 22 September 2013 - 08:13 AM.

[PEEFsmash]

As someone pointed out, this guide will probably gimp the **** out of any light mech pilot trying to learn to win, unless they somehow choose the one build that is good here.

If you re-titled the guide: A guide for new players who don't care about winning" then I'd be okay with it. Otherwise, if I was a new player reading this I would assume you actually cared about putting together the best builds possible, which you haven't, and I would choose something with the assumption that they are all really good builds, which they aren't.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 22 September 2013 - 08:26 AM.

[RedDevil]

PEEFsmash, could you post some builds? I'm thinking of picking up lights, but I'm not sure why I wouldn't just pick the Spider....

[PEEFsmash]

reddevil, on 24 September 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

PEEFsmash, could you post some builds? I'm thinking of picking up lights, but I'm not sure why I wouldn't just pick the Spider....

Go check out my guide, its in this subforum. There you will find my builds with demonstrations of how to play them.

[Mogney]

If you find that guide please bump it, I have given up looking, and its really hard to search on my phone lol.

[RedDevil]

Is it this guide with a video replay?
http://mwomercs.com/...nue-to-improve/

[Alistair Winter]

PEEFsmash, on 22 September 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

As someone pointed out, this guide will probably gimp the **** out of any light mech pilot trying to learn to win, unless they somehow choose the one build that is good here.
If you re-titled the guide: A guide for new players who don't care about winning" then I'd be okay with it. Otherwise, if I was a new player reading this I would assume you actually cared about putting together the best builds possible, which you haven't, and I would choose something with the assumption that they are all really good builds, which they aren't.

I have to say I've learned a lot since I initially made this guide, and your criticism is quite valid. Many of those builds were sub-optimal, and I definitely put more focus on having fun before than I do now. This is what I was referring to in my last post, it's just unfortunate that it took me so long to clean it up.

I also agree that I should have made the intent of the guide a bit clearer, so new players knew what they were getting. I've tried to remedy that, to a certain degree.

With that said, as much as I usually give you props for your cynical, elitist approach to MWO (I mean that in a good way), I think we have different views on what approach new players should take. You seem to be of the opinion that new players should emulate top level players as much as possible, while I tend to advise new players to start out with builds that are easier to use, though not quite as effective among "competitive players". That's actually an oversimplification - I would say that people who are already very experienced with FPS games should actually emulate top level MWO players, while people of less skill / talent should take the easier, but longer road, so they don't lose all motivation and blow their brains out.

[PEEFsmash]

Alistair Winter, on 14 October 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

I have to say I've learned a lot since I initially made this guide, and your criticism is quite valid. Many of those builds were sub-optimal, and I definitely put more focus on having fun before than I do now. This is what I was referring to in my last post, it's just unfortunate that it took me so long to clean it up.

I also agree that I should have made the intent of the guide a bit clearer, so new players knew what they were getting. I've tried to remedy that, to a certain degree.

With that said, as much as I usually give you props for your cynical, elitist approach to MWO (I mean that in a good way), I think we have different views on what approach new players should take. You seem to be of the opinion that new players should emulate top level players as much as possible, while I tend to advise new players to start out with builds that are easier to use, though not quite as effective among "competitive players". That's actually an oversimplification - I would say that people who are already very experienced with FPS games should actually emulate top level MWO players, while people of less skill / talent should take the easier, but longer road, so they don't lose all motivation and blow their brains out.

Yeah...I guess I think that new players that want to improve should emulate top players by using easy to use builds that are used by some top players...it's a combination but yes I take your point.

[Tesunie]

As far as the Raven 4X goes, I have a really nice loadout. I'd like to present the Carrion Eater (a true raven): http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b3fd0090a14b71f

If people can be patient, this loadout can be very good, espesually in groups, even for new players. This loudout will depend completely upon how you use it and being wise on when to charge and when to run.

The idea behind the design is to contribute and soften up targets at long ranges with the LRM system. Hold yourself back with the rest of the team for the opening salvos of the match, don't rush in, and don't worry about direct combat. Stay on the outside of combat at first. Once you start to see enemy units that are wounded (armor gone, internals exposed), charge in. Use the medium lasers to finish any armor that might be left, and use the machine guns to good effect upon the internal section of your targets. Most times, you will eat your target within short order.

The best part is, even though you are holding back with the big boys of your team, you are still very much contributing to the team effort by using those LRMs. Try to spot if you feel up to it, but always be ready to run, and don't stray too far from your team.

I have found that this mix of weapons is very effective, if used in the right manner. You need the speed from the engine to charge into MG range quickly, to take advantage of the holes in the armor, and to evade and escape to find other targets. You can engage effectively at any range. Don't expect to hold your own in a stand up fight, you don't have the LRMs to out LRM/Snipe a larger foe more geared for it. Don't go in and try to solo a pristine target, you don't have the weapons to be very effective.

This mix of weapon types and speed is a combo I find that can only be done on the Raven 4X properly (so far). I have found it to be effective in many situations, and no other mech can duplicate it's success that I have seen. I have even convinced my wing man to run this build a few times, and he was impressed with it. He's been running Ravens since he joined the game, so I kinda consider him an expert and trust his opinion on my mech loadout.

My current stat line with this loadout (from the moment I bought it):
Matches played: 51
Kills: 47
Deaths: 38
Total Damage Done: 9,895
Damage per match: 194

This includes some matches with a slower standard engine, single heatsinks, and a non-artemis LRM10. Since I have played this mech, my K/D ratio has actually improved, which makes me at least feel better...

I'd just like to finished by saying, I don't think this Raven is the weakest Raven of them all, it's just got the most quarks to it, which makes it more difficult to find interesting or good builds for it. (It's stock configuration is surprisingly good, with a few tweaks...)

Edited by Tesunie, 14 October 2013 - 07:57 PM.

[Tesunie]

PEEFsmash, on 22 September 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

As someone pointed out, this guide will probably gimp the **** out of any light mech pilot trying to learn to win, unless they somehow choose the one build that is good here.

If you re-titled the guide: A guide for new players who don't care about winning" then I'd be okay with it. Otherwise, if I was a new player reading this I would assume you actually cared about putting together the best builds possible, which you haven't, and I would choose something with the assumption that they are all really good builds, which they aren't.

Not to be mean, but your statement is off here. Who determines if a build is good or not? What might work for one person, might not work for another. I have several mechs that many would not consider to be good mech builds, but I find that in my hands they do very well. Does this mean it isn't a good build? So, I ask again, what determines a good build? Are there certain conditions that are needed to be fufilled before they are considered "good" loadouts? Does it have to be a mech you made and can use effectively before it is a good loadout? Is it a mech that everyone tends to grab and play and have it flood the field before it is a good loadout? Does it have to fill a certain role(s)? Does it have to be an easy to use role/loadout?

I define loadouts by how they operate in my own hands, and I'm willing to give some loadouts that don't look very good a try and see how they work. I also try to consider other ways that the build could be used to make it more effective. Sometimes, a good loadout just doesn't match my play style. Othertimes, they just don't interest me. So, before you riddicule someone else's build, consider some of these factors in. What is a bad build to you, might be a great build to me.

[PEEFsmash]

Tesunie, on 14 October 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

Not to be mean, but your statement is off here. Who determines if a build is good or not? What might work for one person, might not work for another. I have several mechs that many would not consider to be good mech builds, but I find that in my hands they do very well. Does this mean it isn't a good build? So, I ask again, what determines a good build? Are there certain conditions that are needed to be fufilled before they are considered "good" loadouts? Does it have to be a mech you made and can use effectively before it is a good loadout? Is it a mech that everyone tends to grab and play and have it flood the field before it is a good loadout? Does it have to fill a certain role(s)? Does it have to be an easy to use role/loadout?

I define loadouts by how they operate in my own hands, and I'm willing to give some loadouts that don't look very good a try and see how they work. I also try to consider other ways that the build could be used to make it more effective. Sometimes, a good loadout just doesn't match my play style. Othertimes, they just don't interest me. So, before you riddicule someone else's build, consider some of these factors in. What is a bad build to you, might be a great build to me.

It is objectively true that there are builds that have no success at the highest level, and ones that do. A bad build is a build that provides disadvantages at the top level. No great player is using 97kph Ravens in top level play with any success. That's what I mean.

[Tesunie]

PEEFsmash, on 14 October 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

It is objectively true that there are builds that have no success at the highest level, and ones that do. A bad build is a build that provides disadvantages at the top level. No great player is using 97kph Ravens in top level play with any success. That's what I mean.

I've got a "Hollander 2" Cicada 3C that I use well. Just a single gauss, a single medium laser, and runs with speed tweek at around 90 KPH. I do fairly well with it. Others, well, I posted the build in a topic before and I already know how horribad they think it is...

I've run my Raven 4X with stock standard engine, and it worked just fine. I will admite I upgraded the engine to the largest XL in time and it worked better, but I could run it slower and be fine with it.

Define "top level play" for me? Is that only 12 v 12 premades? Is it "I want to win at all cost" play? What is it? Is it the same as "competitive" play? (Not being rude here, just trying to make a point is all.)

My point is basically that each person needs to determine what is a good build to themselves and what works for them. Suggestions are great. Bringing forth builds that you personally have had experience with and know it works or have seen a build work well, is helpful too. However, I strongly suggest people explore, experiment and figure out what works for them and their current play style. I like my LRMs, I shall admit it. Someone else might not and will call my builds "cheese" or "bad". They might like ACs and PPCs (I don't mind them myself either personally) and I might call their mechs ineffective compaired to my builds.

My suggestion to anyone in this game (and any game really) is to try out everything. Give everything at least a try once. Test out every weapon system you can. It can only improve your personal skills, as well as help you find what your personal combat style is and mech loadouts that work for you. I have a Stalker with single heat sinks that I feel is fairly effective. I've been told how bad it is by other people. It works for me, even if I do believe it could be improved. It might not be so effective for them. My point here is, it's a good build to me, a very bad build to them. What works for one person, might not work for the next.

[Alistair Winter]

I dare say you're both right and both wrong. Allow me to use an example, to set things in perspective and to move me away from the thin ice of discussing elite level gaming.

If you look at martial arts, it's constantly evolving, much like gaming. People use different attacks and different counters, they have different styles. Now, most martial artists will try to emulate the top dogs, whether we're talking about boxing, kickboxing, judo, BJJ, wrestling or MMA. While this has a lot of merit (safer to emulate a world champion than to follow the ramblings of your local instructor with no qualifications), it also leads to a lot of people shutting their eyes to effective technique and fighting styles.

If you look at MMA ten years ago, people were advocating a very limited arsenal of techniques and a very specific style of fighting, because most of the top fighters had similar backgrounds. Non-standard, esoteric techniques and styles were dismissed as ineffective, "because none of the top fighters are doing it". Lo and behold, ten years later, the scene has changed completely, even though the rules are almost completely the same (unlike MWO, where the rules change, forcing a faster evolution). Styles and techniques that were previously considered ineffective are now more widely appreciated. Of course, this was all predicted by Bruce Lee who said it was all about the fighter and not about his style of fighting (the whole "be like water" spiel) and he was only quoting Miyamoto Musashi, a samurai who figured this out centuries ago.

Fast forward to MWO in 2013 - if you're only judging builds by whether they conform to top level play, then you're not taking into account that the game is constantly evolving and that good players will figure out how to make different builds and styles viable. Now, PEEFsmash may be aware of this and simply advising new players to take the safer road of emulating top players instead of trying to discover greatness on their own. It's not bad advice. I tend to recommend the safe road myself, albeit in a different way.

On the other hand... I very much dislike the idea that "anything goes". The flip side to Bruce Lee's coin is that if you're doing exceedingly well with a bad build / technique (and let's face it, most people who claim they are the bee's knees in their Death's Knell with 4 small lasers are either lying or simply playing very poor players) then your accomplishment is probably a result of your skills rather than your build. It doesn't necessarily mean your build is good, just because you do well with it.

People constantly abuse the "I did 900 dmg in my Spider 5V with flamers" argument, as if proving that all builds are equally viable. They're definitely not.


@Tesunie: Your LRM15 Raven build is very similar to a Raven 2X build that was in the first version of this guide, but now removed. I also found out that a Raven with an LRM15 can potentially do a lot of damage and punch above its weight. I've since removed it, because I now feel that light mechs are hard enough to play to begin with, that you don't need the additional burden of being almost defenseless in certain scenarios. And LRMs require a lot of situational awareness that new players don't have, especially for a light mech.

While I no longer play an LRM Raven, I do have a Gauss ECM Cicada, which is kind of in the same boat. I do ok with it at my level, but I certainly would never recommend it to new players

Edited by Alistair Winter, 15 October 2013 - 01:47 AM.

[Tesunie]

Alistair Winter, on 15 October 2013 - 01:40 AM, said:

@Tesunie: Your LRM15 Raven build is very similar to a Raven 2X build that was in the first version of this guide, but now removed. I also found out that a Raven with an LRM15 can potentially do a lot of damage and punch above its weight. I've since removed it, because I now feel that light mechs are hard enough to play to begin with, that you don't need the additional burden of being almost defenseless in certain scenarios. And LRMs require a lot of situational awareness that new players don't have, especially for a light mech.

While I no longer play an LRM Raven, I do have a Gauss ECM Cicada, which is kind of in the same boat. I do ok with it at my level, but I certainly would never recommend it to new players

I agree with your previous statement, as it is basically what I was just wanting to point out.

As for the LRM Raven, I find it works well with the 4X, espesually if you keep to a group. I know it's not for everyone, and some people would argue that light mechs are so fast that they don't need LRMs as they can get into close range quickly. I find that, espesually with MGs, I want to hang back and wait till later in the game to really start running through the enemy formations (using my speed, just not as a scout persa). LRMs permit my Raven to preform that role, while still helping the team. Not to mention, at least with the Raven 4X, it doesn't have the hardpoints to support too much else for weapons. It is a style of play, and it isn't for everyone. It isn't designed for a one on one match (target is pristine), but even in a match like that it can still do decent damage before it dies (which is why I hang out with the team or nearby scouting only).

In the case of my 4X, the LRMs are there to try and breach armor at a safe distance or to cause damage while I close into range. It is not intended as a primary weapon to deal most of my damage. (Do not know what other weapons was on the 2X you are talking about.) The 4X I have designed, you have to keep telling yourself that you are a carrion eater, there to attack the weak and dieing. It's a very strong team playing build.

My and my wingman ran two side by side, very effective I'd have to say in groups. It is not a "run solo" kind of mech, which probably places it, admittedly, into the low end of the scale, as many people prefer light and fast mechs that can run solo and not need a team. If used in a team, no rushing forwards (another common fast mech tactic) and no scouting (or limited), it can be very effective. Might be a good mech for new players, if they are informed and can manage to stay with a decent amount of their team, holding their speed untill engagement happens.


My Cicada doesn't have ECM (yours is probably better for the ECM). I find that the 90ish KPH is fast enough to move behind the enemy team. I love poking my nose out from behind a rock and shooting the enemy in the back. Even funnier when I see them startle and slowly turn around and then I disapear behind the rock. It's a style of play. (Made with the Cicada 3C.) I will not say it's a killer mech or massive damage. It is a haraser/sniper, though it's worked decently enough in a brawl a few times (not recomended for the design).

[MrSocks]

Here's my RVN-3L build I'm currently using. I don't really have a name for it but I guess it's kind of a spotter/harasser. TAG to mark targets, LRM5 to annoy people at range and SSRM2 and 2 medium wub wub lasers for close range. XL295 engine so I can book it to safety when I inevitably bite off more than I can chew.

I don't score an amazing amount of kills but get plenty of TAG and assist bonuses.

Edit: I made a few changes to it. Basically swapped the pulse lasers for normal ones, the LRM5 for another SSRM2, added BAP and AMS and increased the leg armour.

Edited by MrSocks, 18 October 2013 - 08:34 AM.

[RudyTuttie]

is it just me, or did I just blow my starting c-bills on the wrong mech.. the raven 2x. I'm doing better with the free rotation spider. 111 kph seems just too slow for a light mech and it seems mediums can easily keep up with me blasting me. I think the 3l with 136kph + ecm is well worth the cost premium.

Edited by RudyTuttie, 21 October 2013 - 10:22 AM.

[eFTy]

Tesunie, on 14 October 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

As far as the Raven 4X goes, I have a really nice loadout. I'd like to present the Carrion Eater (a true raven): http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b3fd0090a14b71f

If people can be patient, this loadout can be very good, espesually in groups, even for new players. This loudout will depend completely upon how you use it and being wise on when to charge and when to run.

The idea behind the design is to contribute and soften up targets at long ranges with the LRM system. Hold yourself back with the rest of the team for the opening salvos of the match, don't rush in, and don't worry about direct combat. Stay on the outside of combat at first. Once you start to see enemy units that are wounded (armor gone, internals exposed), charge in. Use the medium lasers to finish any armor that might be left, and use the machine guns to good effect upon the internal section of your targets. Most times, you will eat your target within short order.

The best part is, even though you are holding back with the big boys of your team, you are still very much contributing to the team effort by using those LRMs. Try to spot if you feel up to it, but always be ready to run, and don't stray too far from your team.

I have found that this mix of weapons is very effective, if used in the right manner. You need the speed from the engine to charge into MG range quickly, to take advantage of the holes in the armor, and to evade and escape to find other targets. You can engage effectively at any range. Don't expect to hold your own in a stand up fight, you don't have the LRMs to out LRM/Snipe a larger foe more geared for it. Don't go in and try to solo a pristine target, you don't have the weapons to be very effective.

This mix of weapon types and speed is a combo I find that can only be done on the Raven 4X properly (so far). I have found it to be effective in many situations, and no other mech can duplicate it's success that I have seen. I have even convinced my wing man to run this build a few times, and he was impressed with it. He's been running Ravens since he joined the game, so I kinda consider him an expert and trust his opinion on my mech loadout.

My current stat line with this loadout (from the moment I bought it):
Matches played: 51
Kills: 47
Deaths: 38
Total Damage Done: 9,895
Damage per match: 194

This includes some matches with a slower standard engine, single heatsinks, and a non-artemis LRM10. Since I have played this mech, my K/D ratio has actually improved, which makes me at least feel better...

I'd just like to finished by saying, I don't think this Raven is the weakest Raven of them all, it's just got the most quarks to it, which makes it more difficult to find interesting or good builds for it. (It's stock configuration is surprisingly good, with a few tweaks...)

This is very similar to the build I ended up using after I bought the 4x. The learning curve has been pretty steep, but I'm doing pretty ok now. I prefer a bigger engine and two jump jets with just a LRM10, though. This also means I have more shots, so I can pummel a few mechs repeatedly or spread the missiles around.
The only thing that sucks about the build is you pretty much have to run from enemy lights unless you have some good back-up...