59 replies to this topic

[Op4blushift]

Yeah, so maybe some people already know this.

So, while discussing how un-Awesome the Awesome is in MWO in another thread, it seems that part of it is due to the fact of just how good the Stalker is, not just in comparison to the Awesome, but in comparison to basically every assault in the game.

Reasons: (some of these are probably slightly off, but I'm sure you get my drift)


1. It has the smallest profile of all the assaults, and I'm pretty sure its about the same size as the Catapult, which is 20 tons lighter
2. It has a ridiculously small center torso. I mean, look at these shots of the hitboxes of a Stalker compared to an Atlas and Awesome. I understand that mechs need to be differentiated and stuff so we don't have everything being the same, but the CT on the Stalker is just too small in my opinion.








3. Basically all variants have 4 energy hardpoints mounted in the high mounted arms. This wouldn't be so much a problem if people didn't stuff PPCs in them, but since they do, it renders mechs like the Awesome (which were meant to be the PPC boats) useless.
4. More to do with how the Stalker completely overshadows the Awesome, but every variant except the 5M and 4F have 6 energy hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints. Compared to Awesome variants like the 8Q which only has 7 energy hardpoints and the 8R which only has 3 energy and 4 missile hardpoints, the Stalker just completely outclasses the Awesome in the weapons department.

The last reason is more how the Stalker is better then the Awesome, but I felt it should be included since they are in very similar weight ranges, and to show how the Stalker basically overshadows the Awesome in almost every job despite only being 5 tons heavier.

I know the Stalker has its own downsides as well (horrible torso twist on most variants, lack of fully actuated arms, slow turning speed, slow speeds etc) but in my opinion its upsides more then make up for this.

Thoughts? Am I completely wrong and is the Stalker fine and its just the Awesome that needs some loving or is the Stalker overpowered?

Edited by Op4blushift, 07 July 2013 - 08:11 PM.

[Wintersdark]

The stalker is not overpowered.

It's better than the Awesome, absolutely - but that's because the Awesome... well, isn't.

The stalker is an exceptional anti-Assault mech, but is very poor in comparison to Highlanders, Victors, and Atlases vs. other mechs. This is because of the very limited (less on the 3F but still limited) torso twist, and more importantly heavily capped engine size resulting in low speed and poor maneuverability - most critically in slow torso twist.

See, the speed of the torso twist is more important in this discussion than the amount, because unlike the remainder of the assault chassis', the Stalker lacks arm actuators. To track laterally moving mechs, it must twist or turn, and it's very bad at both. The other assaults all have arms with extensive reach and very quick movement, so they can use those arms against speedy targets.

Also, the Stalker's center torso is very, very easy to shoot: Just shoot it in it's groin. It's big, and it doesn't move when the Stalker torso twists.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Wintersdark, on 07 July 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

The stalker is not overpowered.

It's better than the Awesome, absolutely - but that's because the Awesome... well, isn't.

The stalker is an exceptional anti-Assault mech, but is very poor in comparison to Highlanders, Victors, and Atlases vs. other mechs. This is because of the very limited (less on the 3F but still limited) torso twist, and more importantly heavily capped engine size resulting in low speed and poor maneuverability - most critically in slow torso twist.

See, the speed of the torso twist is more important in this discussion than the amount, because unlike the remainder of the assault chassis', the Stalker lacks arm actuators. To track laterally moving mechs, it must twist or turn, and it's very bad at both. The other assaults all have arms with extensive reach and very quick movement, so they can use those arms against speedy targets.

Also, the Stalker's center torso is very, very easy to shoot: Just shoot it in it's groin. It's big, and it doesn't move when the Stalker torso twists.

Any Assault pilot worth their salt knows how to deal with smaller mechs and the lack of arm actuators.
The Stalker is too small and too strong.

Regardless of Side torso size, it is too good at what it does, whether using PPCs or not.

Stalkers are OP.

And lol at the idea it cant fight Medium or Heavy mechs better than the other Assaults.

Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 07 July 2013 - 07:40 PM.

[Doden Kriger]

Stalkers is Op due to the simple fact it cant peak with very little showing and fire weapons it should never be able to mount. Stalkers are Laser missle mechs not PPC boats thats why the awesome is truly held back cause there mechs right now that do its job better. Why PGI should treat the PPC much like a AC20. Only a few mechs in BT can boat PPCs and the mechs are made to do it. This is Why the awesome has a barn size Hit Box Much like the War Hawk

Edited by ARCTIC F0X, 07 July 2013 - 07:42 PM.

[Skyfaller]

Op4blushift, on 07 July 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

Yeah, so maybe some people already know this.

So, while discussing how un-Awesome the Awesome is in MWO in another thread, it seems that part of it is due to the fact of just how good the Stalker is, not just in comparison to the Awesome, but in comparison to basically every assault in the game.

Reasons: (some of these are probably slightly off, but I'm sure you get my drift)


1. It has the smallest profile of all the assaults, and I'm pretty sure%

Its no different when you compare a catapult with the other heavies. Mechs with tube torsos will be less prone to RT/LT hits from the front than mechs with human like torsos will.

The stalker is good in its sheer volume of weapons but it is pays for that capability with a lot of downsides to it. In a direct fight it goes down quite fast compared to other assaults.

The awesome can be really good mechs. The problem is people insist on driving them like if they were atlai or worse, brawler mechs. They're not. The Awesome is a long range highly mobile weapon platform. It has huge chest that is easy to hit..but its also damn fast and can carry a powerful payload of energy weapons or missiles.

If you put the assaults in 'roles' you get:

Atlas: 'Tank' and precision fire unit.
Stalker: Very high Damage support unit.
Awesome: Mobile high damage flanking unit.
Highlander: High damage, semi-tanky , main battle assault mech. something between an awesome and an atlas with some of the stalker's firepower.

all of these will probably be overrun by the battlemaster when it comes out. the hardpoints on that thing are spooky.

[Tennex]

probably due to a mix of reasons

• extreamly small for 85 tons
  
• symetrical hardpoints
  
• hardpoints mounted high on mech

But i think if they increased the size it would help to bring the stalker in line with the rest of the assaults.

[Skyfaller]

size is not an issue. if you put a stalker in front of an awesome or atlas its almost as big. The only reason it looks smaller is because of the cylindrical torso and it has no arms/shoulders.

[Doden Kriger]

I agree with how u put the Awesome i love my 9m and do very well in it. But when all it takes is one Lucky shot a from a 4,5, or 6 PPC stalker it just sucks. Cause no mechs in game right now should be capable of doing that Awesome is the PPC boat. Stalker shouldnt be but is that what i ment by a Mech that does it better. Not to mention i noticed the Stalker has this bug very often where u kill its torso and its arm and torso PPC remain maybe happens on other mechs but i have seen this alot on the Stalker

Edited by ARCTIC F0X, 07 July 2013 - 07:53 PM.

[Tennex]

Skyfaller, on 07 July 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

size is not an issue. if you put a stalker in front of an awesome or atlas its almost as big. The only reason it looks smaller is because of the cylindrical torso and it has no arms/shoulders.

[Skyfaller]

thats the very thing im talking about.

A stalker too dies VERY easy to a ppc boat hit... if it gets hit from the side in the side torso. The awesome gets hit in the side torso from the front. The armor amount in the torso of the awesome and stalker is practically the same: 68 awesome, 72 stalker. In comparison, the highlander has 76 and the atlas 84.

I agree the devs mucked up when it came to the PPC slottage. It really should take up as much slots as an AC20 in my opinion.

[Op4blushift]

Ok, I've redone the first post since half of it was deleted so it should be much more clear as to what I was trying to get across.

[Skyfaller]

Tennex, on 07 July 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

ok.. so you saying making the stalker a slight bit taller will make a difference? All it will do is help it crest its raised weapons better. The thing that makes the stalker's size an issue is its width. People compare it to the other humanoid torso assaults with arms and think the stalker is 'too small' for an assault. It has NO arms. It has NO shoulders...and its torso is a TUBE not a CHEST.

You're comparing it with a catapult there. See the catapults own torso? RT/LT are hard to see when its nose is facing you. Put that stalker next to an atlas or an awesome.

[Op4blushift]

Skyfaller, on 07 July 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

ok.. so you saying making the stalker a slight bit taller will make a difference? All it will do is help it crest its raised weapons better. The thing that makes the stalker's size an issue is its width. People compare it to the other humanoid torso assaults with arms and think the stalker is 'too small' for an assault. It has NO arms. It has NO shoulders...and its torso is a TUBE not a CHEST.

You're comparing it with a catapult there. See the catapults own torso? RT/LT are hard to see when its nose is facing you. Put that stalker next to an atlas or an awesome.

The thing is, the Catapult has a quite a large center torso hit box while it has small side torsos, while the Stalker is basically the opposite. And yeah, we probably shouldn't be comparing it to humanoid assaults, but the Stalker is the only 'tube' assault in the game, and that's causing it to be probably the best assault in the game right now (along with a bunch of other reasons which have already been noted).

[Skyfaller]

Op4blushift, on 07 July 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Ok, I've redone the first post since half of it was deleted so it should be much more clear as to what I was trying to get across.

Get a pic of the stalker' frontal areas ...from the front not a diagonal fore view.

You will see the side torso is no harder to hit on the stalker than it is on the catapult.

In fact, you want to know how to hit the side torso of a stalker every time? Stop aiming at the nose. Aim ABOVE the nose center ... right above the LR/RT missile launchers. That big, protruding heat-dissipation fan exhaust looking thing. When a stalker crosses my path I aim for that and his side torso vanishes in a few volleys.

Edited by Skyfaller, 07 July 2013 - 08:21 PM.

[Tennex]

Skyfaller, on 07 July 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

ok.. so you saying making the stalker a slight bit taller will make a difference? All it will do is help it crest its raised weapons better. The thing that makes the stalker's size an issue is its width. People compare it to the other humanoid torso assaults with arms and think the stalker is 'too small' for an assault. It has NO arms. It has NO shoulders...and its torso is a TUBE not a CHEST.

You're comparing it with a catapult there. See the catapults own torso? RT/LT are hard to see when its nose is facing you. Put that stalker next to an atlas or an awesome.

;ol whaaat. being tall has nothing to do with cresting the weapons. it all depends on the nature of the cover. It can shoot over taller cover. but it will also be more exposed over shorter cover, which would have been perfect for currently sized stalkers.

and if you read the volume. the stalker and catapult is only about 8%. When the tonnage difference is 20

Edited by Tennex, 07 July 2013 - 08:25 PM.

[Skyfaller]

Op4blushift, on 07 July 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

The thing is, the Catapult has a quite a large center torso hit box while it has small side torsos, while the Stalker is basically the opposite.

Um... you see the crotch area of the stalker? Thats your huge, easy to hit CT area. Again, the problem is people not knowing where to aim...or bothering to use the testing grounds to find it. They always fire at the stalker's nose and the damage gets spread in the RT/LT and CT.

[Skyfaller]

Tennex, on 07 July 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

;ol whaaat. being tall has nothing to do with cresting the weapons. it all depends on the nature of the cover. It can shoot over taller cover. but it will also be more exposed over shorter cover, which would have been perfect for currently sized stalkers.

taller would make it easier for it to crest small terrain obstacles like small buildings and terrain where taking one step forward in the up incline would expose the entire nose.

Quote

and if you read the volume. the stalker and catapult is only about 8%. When the tonnage difference is 20

That is a valid point. Can you compare the awesome/highlander to the catapult to see what their difference in volume is?

[Op4blushift]

Skyfaller, on 07 July 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

Um... you see the crotch area of the stalker? Thats your huge, easy to hit CT area. Again, the problem is people not knowing where to aim...or bothering to use the testing grounds to find it. They always fire at the stalker's nose and the damage gets spread in the RT/LT and CT.

And why should the Stalker get special treatment in regards to this when basically every other mech can have the CT easily hit by simply aiming for the middle of the mech? And yeah, I know you can hit the groin area to get hits on the CT, but you can do that for every other assault as well.

[Skyfaller]

Op4blushift, on 07 July 2013 - 08:31 PM, said:

And why should the Stalker get special treatment in regards to this when basically every other mech can have the CT easily hit by simply aiming for the middle of the mech? And yeah, I know you can hit the groin area to get hits on the CT, but you can do that for every other assault as well.

special treatment? its the same as other mechs as you said. The difference is you're saying its unfair the stalker has a tube torso where others dont...that the side torso on the stalker is hard to hit from the front and that the ct is also hard to hit from the front. They're not! The problem is the easy-to-hit location is not found on the middle of the mech's chest but above & to the side and below it.

Its the same with all mechs that have no arms. Jenners, Cicada, raven and catapult.

You know, I honestly WISH the stalker's whole front nose WAS the CT. That way I could take more hits in the better armored section and not worry about my torsos popping off from the front...like the catapult

[Op4blushift]

Skyfaller, on 07 July 2013 - 08:44 PM, said:

special treatment? its the same as other mechs as you said. The difference is you're saying its unfair the stalker has a tube torso where others dont...that the side torso on the stalker is hard to hit from the front and that the ct is also hard to hit from the front. They're not! The problem is the easy-to-hit location is not found on the middle of the mech's chest but above & to the side and below it.

Its the same with all mechs that have no arms. Jenners, Cicada, raven and catapult.

You know, I honestly WISH the stalker's whole front nose WAS the CT. That way I could take more hits in the better armored section and not worry about my torsos popping off from the front...like the catapult

I meant special treatment as in the fact that its center torso is tiny compared to basically everything else in the game. Also, I don't think I ever said that the side torsos are hard to hit, in fact most of the time those are hit instead of the center torso (which could KIND of count as a downside since it means XL engines are a no-go most of the time). The side torsos being so large also means that even after they're destroyed they absorb some of the damage that goes to the CT, making Stalkers even more durable.

Like I was trying to say before why should the Stalker have to be targeted in the groin area or above the CT to get reliable hits to the CT while every other mech just needs to be hit in the middle 'area' to get hits on the CT? Also, the groin area can only be hit if the whole mech is revealed, which is pretty rare given all the ridge humping Stalkers who only have to expose a bit of their arms to get shots off.