42 replies to this topic

[Dudeman3k]

Here is what I run on my CN-A

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...abed54435cb463f

my aim was to hit all bases and have a very effective balanced mech.

I used the medium as to it's role as a balanced platform.


With this mech I tried multiple play styles, and the out comes were as follows

- long range support - 338dmg, 0 kills, 4 assists. -------------- loss
- mid range brawler - 105dmg, 0 kills, 2 assist ------------ loss
- close range brawler - 70dmg, 1kill, 0 assist ------------- loss

I can see what PGI was aiming for when playing with such a balanced platform. Long, strung out battles, weaving in and out of cover, firing, deflecting shots via torso twists.... it was an epic battle playing as a mid range brawler against a "trial mech" (atlas-RS-C)..... untill the PPC + Gauss came around a corner an one shot me.

Using the LRM's to get some DMG out while closing in through well timed volleys was simply way too much fun..... untill you get cored by a mech not using a "well balanced" build in turn.. then the fun ends pretty abruptly. There is no long drawn out battle, using every well timed shot and strategic placement of fire.... there is no adrenaline of fighting a mech(s) using a whole broad range of weapons.... you quickly find yourself missing all your limbs the moment you try to play like how they would in the "novels".

for a second, while fighting that Atlas in the lake of forest colony, it felt like a mechwarrior game. Fighting with every thing you have, trying to get the distances to effectively use all of your diverse weapon systems, moving through rocks and hills to find even the slightest advantage over your opponent.... but when pitted against a pin-point high alpha mech... your options are no longer to have fun, but rather run, die, or let your team pin-point high-alpha him first.

PGI, I think I found what your visions were for a short minute... and with that, I actually had fun... for about 45 seconds at least.

Is this pin-point high alpha game really what you were intending to build?

[jeffsw6]

Dudeman3k, on 19 July 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

while fighting that Atlas in the lake of forest colony

I think I found your problem.

[Shadey99]

There are more than 3 roles in this game. Did you try flanking? I can flank fine in a Cicada 2A/2B/X-5. Or maybe light hunting? Scout? Or how about you don't try to do any one role, but multiple roles as needed?

I can't see your build (gives me an error), so I have no idea what you tried this with. Even so I agree, willing taking on an Atlas head to head in a Medium is very careful work (I've taken them out in my Cicadas, but it is not easy). Your sample size also seems low and from a methodology stand point I think you wanted to come to the conclusion it could never work.

[Abrahms]

So what youre saying is that you dont like it when people in heavier mechs take heavier weapons, and then can actually aim with them?

2xPPC+1xGauss is 35 damage, and they wont all hit the same spot because of different travel speeds and convergence quarks. Especially if you are moving.... If you sit still though, yes all 35 dmg can hit one spot.

Thats also the same as what a single hunchback boating medium lasers can do to a single spot...


You were jut outgunned, outweighed, and outplayed... of course you will lose

The bigger issue is how they will balance the mech weights in a game, not the pinpoint accuracy. Sorry, first person games rely on player skill, get used to it or get better.

[MasterErrant]

the convercence issue is gettinghitwith two erppc and a gauss in the head as you leave the lover base in the forest. twice this week. that's a cata standing at the top opf the rockpile hitting an awsome and a highlander just leaving the seaside base about thirty seconds into the game. it happens often enough that it isn't a fluke. if "I" (or anyone else) am stationary taking hits from a mech within it's effective range take target hits that's my fault. if anyone takes targeted hit at extreme range while moving, it's either cheating or that games fault.

I don't have a problem with a swaybacks 6pack hitting a silgle logation....it's supposed to. I do have a problem with it happening at 500 meters. likewise two AC's on one arm of a jeager but not four on two arms. it's an antiaircraft machine designed to throw a cone of fire in fron of fighters moveing exponentially faster than mechs. (And the lack of Aircraft in this itteration of the game is moot)

Convergence doesn't need to be stopped it needs to be limited. it takes a lot more skill to maneuver into an effective range and use terrain to protect yourself that it does to stand out of the enemy's range and take potshots.

[Sheraf]

Here is my Stalker 3F build
STK-3F

[jeffsw6]

Shadey99, on 19 July 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

There are more than 3 roles in this game. Did you try flanking? I can flank fine in a Cicada 2A/2B/X-5. Or maybe light hunting? Scout? Or how about you don't try to do any one role, but multiple roles as needed?

No, there are exactly two roles in this game: assaults, and cap-rushing

[Amsro]

The tears once ER/PPC's get nerfed back to normal heat.

[Deathlike]

The great part of the OP's post... the cfg cannot be loaded.

How thoughtful.

[stjobe]

I sometimes run this CN9-A build.

Basically it's a standard -A with ES making weight available for Artemis. It's a "balanced build" (some would call it a "frankenmech") since it retains the original weapons of the -A instead of going for a triple-ASRM-6 brawler build (which has become usable again with the SRM buff - not nearly as good as it was, but usable).

The problem with the above build is that it simply cannot compete with the more optimized triple-ASRM-6 build for damage since it spreads its tonnage over three weapon systems as compared to two (and two reticules as opposed to just one), and it also spreads its damage over several range bands instead of staying to just one. It's not a big-alpha build, and therefore it's sub-par when going up against those builds.

It is, however, insanely fun to play; if done correctly it actually gives you a feel for what BattleTech fighting should be like: Long, drawn-out battles of attrition, played out over a range of distances, riding the heat limits and only occasionally being in that perfect zone where all your weapons are able to bear on the enemy at once - and when you do, it's immensely satisfying to see him stripped down to almost nothing.

Too bad it's usually not that way, but rather a 35-point alpha to the chest followed by a 40-point alpha and that's that.

I wish the standard builds weren't so sub-par compared to the more optimized ones; I do believe we'd have a better game with more interesting matches if that were the case.

[mike29tw]

I don't know why people are so obsessed with "balanced" build.

Different players playing multiple dedicated roles is always superior to everyone playing omni-purposed "balanced" builds. It has been, and will always be, like this in almost any games. You can only be at one place and can only do one thing at any given time. It doesn't matter if you have Gauss+6 M.Lasers+LRM10s, you will never be able to snipe with your Gauss AND brawl with your M.Lasers AND offer long range indirect fire support with your LRMs simultaneously. It's just not going to work. Ever.

[Gaan Cathal]

mike29tw, on 21 July 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

I don't know why people are so obsessed with "balanced" build.

Different players playing multiple dedicated roles is always superior to everyone playing omni-purposed "balanced" builds. It has been, and will always be, like this in almost any games. You can only be at one place and can only do one thing at any given time. It doesn't matter if you have Gauss+6 M.Lasers+LRM10s, you will never be able to snipe with your Gauss AND brawl with your M.Lasers AND offer long range indirect fire support with your LRMs simultaneously. It's just not going to work. Ever.

There's a collective mythology that it's 'more Battletech' despite the fact that the occasional well designed canon mechs are the stand out successes there too.

[stjobe]

mike29tw, on 21 July 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

I don't know why people are so obsessed with "balanced" build.

Different players playing multiple dedicated roles is always superior to everyone playing omni-purposed "balanced" builds. It has been, and will always be, like this in almost any games. You can only be at one place and can only do one thing at any given time. It doesn't matter if you have Gauss+6 M.Lasers+LRM10s, you will never be able to snipe with your Gauss AND brawl with your M.Lasers AND offer long range indirect fire support with your LRMs simultaneously. It's just not going to work. Ever.

It's because that's what the TT builds were like, and those builds were used both in the novels and many TT tournaments (stock-only games). It's anchored in lore in the phrase "Life is cheap, BattleMechs aren't" - if you only had a handful of 'mechs (say, oh, 4-12) in your mercenary company, you'd get more use out of them if they could do multiple things, engage the enemy at every range instead of them being specialists every one of them. It meant you could take on a wider range of assignments and ultimately earn more money.

In the current death match scheme of things, none of that matter - except when the all-assault team gets outcapped by the "balanced" team. And then the whining and insults begin. With a more balanced team (or better tactics) they may have gotten their fight, but no matter.

Either way, there's your explanation.

[GridIroN]

stjobe, on 21 July 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

I sometimes run this CN9-A build.

Basically it's a standard -A with ES making weight available for Artemis. It's a "balanced build" (some would call it a "frankenmech") since it retains the original weapons of the -A instead of going for a triple-ASRM-6 brawler build (which has become usable again with the SRM buff - not nearly as good as it was, but usable).

The problem with the above build is that it simply cannot compete with the more optimized triple-ASRM-6 build for damage since it spreads its tonnage over three weapon systems as compared to two (and two reticules as opposed to just one), and it also spreads its damage over several range bands instead of staying to just one. It's not a big-alpha build, and therefore it's sub-par when going up against those builds.

It is, however, insanely fun to play; if done correctly it actually gives you a feel for what BattleTech fighting should be like: Long, drawn-out battles of attrition, played out over a range of distances, riding the heat limits and only occasionally being in that perfect zone where all your weapons are able to bear on the enemy at once - and when you do, it's immensely satisfying to see him stripped down to almost nothing.

Too bad it's usually not that way, but rather a 35-point alpha to the chest followed by a 40-point alpha and that's that.

I wish the standard builds weren't so sub-par compared to the more optimized ones; I do believe we'd have a better game with more interesting matches if that were the case.

I improved your build by about 1000%: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...5da1d9a70a28220

[stjobe]

GridIroN, on 21 July 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

I improved your build by about 1000%: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...5da1d9a70a28220

1,000%? Not by a long shot.

It's a Centurion. Nobody tries to kill it by legging it. Why? Because that's 72+72=144 damage instead of 96 to kill it by front CT coring (or 60 from behind). Also, those side torsos... I wouldn't put ammo in there even with CASE, they get targeted way more often than the legs - because XL engined CN9s (yes, there are some about) die to a ST core. And again, a ST is 72 damage to core from the front and 58 from the back - way easier than legging.

CN9-A and AL hit location priority is RA > ST > CT; CN9-D is ST > CT.

Over about 800 or so drops with CN9s, I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've died by legging.

[Angel of Annihilation]

MasterErrant, on 20 July 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

the convercence issue is gettinghitwith two erppc and a gauss in the head as you leave the lover base in the forest. twice this week. that's a cata standing at the top opf the rockpile hitting an awsome and a highlander just leaving the seaside base about thirty seconds into the game. it happens often enough that it isn't a fluke. if "I" (or anyone else) am stationary taking hits from a mech within it's effective range take target hits that's my fault. if anyone takes targeted hit at extreme range while moving, it's either cheating or that games fault.

I don't have a problem with a swaybacks 6pack hitting a silgle logation....it's supposed to. I do have a problem with it happening at 500 meters. likewise two AC's on one arm of a jeager but not four on two arms. it's an antiaircraft machine designed to throw a cone of fire in fron of fighters moveing exponentially faster than mechs. (And the lack of Aircraft in this itteration of the game is moot)

Convergence doesn't need to be stopped it needs to be limited. it takes a lot more skill to maneuver into an effective range and use terrain to protect yourself that it does to stand out of the enemy's range and take potshots.

That is one damn good Catapult pilot if he is doing what you say. That is 1000m plus range and even with advanced zoom, you can barely make out any detail on the target much less see the tiny little cockpit on a moving mech. What is happening here is your confusing skill with convergence.

[GridIroN]

stjobe, on 21 July 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

1,000%? Not by a long shot.

It's a Centurion. Nobody tries to kill it by legging it. Why? Because that's 72+72=144 damage instead of 96 to kill it by front CT coring (or 60 from behind). Also, those side torsos... I wouldn't put ammo in there even with CASE, they get targeted way more often than the legs - because XL engined CN9s (yes, there are some about) die to a ST core. And again, a ST is 72 damage to core from the front and 58 from the back - way easier than legging.

CN9-A and AL hit location priority is RA > ST > CT; CN9-D is ST > CT.

Over about 800 or so drops with CN9s, I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've died by legging.

The build you have hinges on PUGS being smart enough to realize it isn't economical to blow out your leg, which isn't a very smart bet, IMO. My changes make several improvements...

1. Adds case, so in case anyone DOES decide to blow out your leg (which I find ludicrous that you've only been blown out once or twice...I've been blown out quite a few times) your ammo isn't going to travel.

2. The case comes at the cost of shield arm armour, which isn't that much of a loss IMO. It's practically a free case.

3. The LRM ammo shouldn't be in your leg when it can be in your head anyway.

4. Both HS shouldn't be in 1 torso.

These are my opinion, but as a fellow Centurion pilot, I'm pretty steadfast my changes are better. No offence. Personally, I wouldn't run your build, but if I had too, those would be my criticisms. Interested what you have to say though.

Edited by GridIroN, 21 July 2013 - 04:54 PM.

[Josef Nader]

stjobe, on 21 July 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

1,000%? Not by a long shot.

It's a Centurion. Nobody tries to kill it by legging it. Why? Because that's 72+72=144 damage instead of 96 to kill it by front CT coring (or 60 from behind). Also, those side torsos... I wouldn't put ammo in there even with CASE, they get targeted way more often than the legs - because XL engined CN9s (yes, there are some about) die to a ST core. And again, a ST is 72 damage to core from the front and 58 from the back - way easier than legging.

CN9-A and AL hit location priority is RA > ST > CT; CN9-D is ST > CT.

Over about 800 or so drops with CN9s, I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've died by legging.

Odd, almost every death I eat in my Cents are to legging, and I rarely die to CT coring until I've lost both arms and both side torsos. The way it usually goes is that I get the drop on a sniper, knock a few holes in him, and then one of my legs flies into the sun. Then the sniper leisurely lines up his second shot and finishes me.

It's certainly a lot easier than coring out a Cent who's twisting well.

[El Bandito]

Well lets try not to blame PGI for the pin-point alpha meta. They probably didn't want it.

Most probable explanation is that PGI is too inept and lazy to make a completely new shooting mechanics for alphas.

[Rippthrough]

stjobe, on 21 July 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

It's a Centurion. Nobody tries to kill it by legging it.

Then there's more morons around than I thought. Biggest, easiest target on a cent, the leg. Leg it, headshot it.