101011, on 21 July 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:
My apologies, I only skimmed the Wraith article, and apparently totally missed out on the numerous IS things. I am not arguing that it should become Battletech, there are many reasons it should not, I am arguing that generalists are not always inferior to specialists. So, let's see: Wraith, introduced 3055(?), Catapult, introduced 2561. So, a 'mech built 500 years later is superior? Wow! Devastator, introduced 3036, Atlas, introduced 2755. (281 year difference) See the pattern? Let's go a bit forward in time.
Argus (60 tons, introduced 4 years after Wraith) Armed with RAC 5, 2 ERML, MG, LRM10. 5/8 movement.
Wraith (55 tons, introduced 4 years before Argus) Armed with LPL, 2 MPL. 7/11/7 movement.
These would be a more even match.
Imp (100 tons, introduced 14 years after Devastator) Armed with 2 ERPPC’s, LRM15, LPL, 2 MPL, 2 ML. 3/5 movement.
Devastator (100 tons, introduced 14 years before Devastator) Armed with 2 GR, 2 ERPPC’s, 4 ML. 3/5 movement.
Another even match. Overall, the Imp trades the 2 gauss rifles for LRM’s and a LPL, and upgrades half the ML’s to MPL’s.
Yeah, I admit I kind of went for the first mechs that popped into my mind for the comparisons. I guess some better comparisons between mechs would be:
- Griffin vs. Wolverine
- Uh, almost any Medium vs. Shadow Hawk
- Awesome vs. Zeus
- Atlas II vs. Devastator DVS-2
- King Crab - 0000 vs. Atlas-D
Another thing to keep in mind with the comparisons is that
Battletech brawling/sniping is very different from MWO's brawling/sniping. Either way, the
Hellstar was pretty much the endpoint of the "optimal design" minigame until Catalyst gave the Scientist Caste Rebellion iATMs...