242 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

The Cataphract 4X has never and will never be* superior to the 3D or Ilya.

* Unless they ever quirk the 'mechs, anyway.

Edited by Victor Morson, 06 August 2013 - 03:46 PM.

[Void Angel]

And yet, people still play them, if only to master the chassis - and no matter how much you squirm and try to weasel the discussion around to something irrelevant, the relative efficiency of the 4X is in no way relevant to your absurdly inaccurate (and yet repeated) claim that the AC/5 has "heat problems." The more you try to misdirect and hoodwink the discussion to defend your error, the less honest you seem to be.

[phaloxian]

Rushin Roulette, on 25 July 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

You forgot to add a point;

6: Reading this list.


Point 1 is more or less just useless. Every weapon has its place and use on a build (Although I am really struggling to find one for the NARC launcher).

Rushin Roulette, on 25 July 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

You forgot to add a point;

6: Reading this list.


Point 1 is more or less just useless. Every weapon has its place and use on a build (Although I am really struggling to find one for the NARC launcher).

The NARC launcher has its place on Logistics-based builds who focus on full on support, not recommended for lights due to utter lack of damage and almost not being able to defend themselves unless you go with a Jenner and become a build that isn't even close to support...

[I C Wiener]

Rushin Roulette, on 25 July 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

You forgot to add a point;

6: Reading this list.


Point 1 is more or less just useless. Every weapon has its place and use on a build (Although I am really struggling to find one for the NARC launcher).

QFT

[phaloxian]

I C Wiener, on 07 August 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

QFT

I still agree because even though I have seen GREAT Logistics/other builds when you try to incorporate Logistics into some stuff it just doesn't work BUT if you have a 'Mech with enough slots for Logistics modules and some upgrades like Endo-steel and other stuff like that you can make a killer build especially because I don't think modules take up space, unless they changed that within the last 10 minutes[I really hope this doesn't turn into a George Lucas fiasco, honestly...], you could have some serious fire power and still provide a serious tactical advantage...you just have to have enough speed and A LOT of money and that's an ouch because you test ridiculous amounts of things, so yeah.

[Royalewithcheese]

You can improve the tactical advantage offered by the NARC beacon by spending the 4+ tons and 3+ crit slots NARC+ammo uses up on almost literally anything else.

[Gremlich Johns]

@Victor Morson

While I applaud your OP, I take exception to number 1 of your list. Different pilots make their builds to suit their combat style. For example, my CNT-9A runs an LBX-10, 3xSSRM2 and 2xMLas and is quite effective provided I play as a medium pilot should. I run mediums mechs almost exclusively and sometimes, you just cannot put the "better" weapons on them. What works, works.

[NineTails]

Royalewithcheese, on 07 August 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

You can improve the tactical advantage offered by the NARC beacon by spending the 4+ tons and 3+ crit slots NARC+ammo uses up on almost literally anything else.

Quoted for great justice.

[Victor Morson]

Gremlich Johns, on 07 August 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

@Victor Morson

While I applaud your OP, I take exception to number 1 of your list. Different pilots make their builds to suit their combat style. For example, my CNT-9A runs an LBX-10, 3xSSRM2 and 2xMLas and is quite effective provided I play as a medium pilot should. I run mediums mechs almost exclusively and sometimes, you just cannot put the "better" weapons on them. What works, works.

While I wish that were the reality we are living in, it is sadly not. If you want to drive something that is flat out inferior because you're getting a kick out of it, feel free any time.

However, do not try to endorse it as good or viable. The Centurion you described would last approximately 15 seconds tops against my Centurion 9A with tripple 6s and 2 Medlas, and it's likely you wouldn't even effectively scratch the paint.

There's several reasons for that:

- The weight from the LBX/10 is going to force you to run slow, or XL. Both are terrible ideas in a Cent 9A.
- It doesn't halve half the punch.
- It can't direct it's punch, with scatter shot / random tracking weapons.
- It offers a negligible range advantage at best.
- Arm mounted Cent designs lose their firepower in seconds.

If you like it for kicks, that's fine, but endorsing it to anyone is doing them a disservice.

Edited by Victor Morson, 08 August 2013 - 03:45 AM.

[Tskeet]

Having fun with a variety of weapons is all well and good but it seems like some people are too emotionally attached to particular weapons and chassis' to talk about things rationally. The argument is about what guns allow a pilot to destroy an enemy as quickly as possible, while taking as little damage as possible, taking into account their accuracy, heat, and damage relative to size and weight.

For example it's not to say a 4X with 4 AC5's is the worst chassis/build/weapon, but the point is that 2 PPCs and a Gauss are simply more optimal.

[Void Angel]

You can't put that on a 4X; other than the arm weapons, it has two CT laser hardpoints and a missile launcher in the head, of all places.

But even if we were to compare different chassis, two ERPPCs and a Gauss Rifle are only clearly superior as a sniping loadout, and even single combat setup - but there are no RP servers, and no one is going to be doing Zelbrigen. The SniparWarrior cookie cutter weapon load-out is an inferior setup for some combined-arms roles. If someone using a 4X or similar 'mech as a support brawler for Atlases and other assaults loads out with 4 AC/5s, they can do a LOT of damage to the enemy while hiding behind the assaults. That Gauss ERPPC combo will do 8.75 dps, with a 25-pt 35-pt alpha; the quad-AC/5 build will do 13.32 dps with a 20 point alpha. So you're looking at 4/7ths of the alpha power as a trade-off for more than half again the dps. Sure, the SniparWarrior will win a one-on-one slugging contest (one of the reasons the ERPPC is a bit overpowered right now,) which is why a quad-AC/5 build is bad - but a dual-AC/5 with dual-UAC/5s will shred things very quickly. And it actually has a higher alpha ( until jam) than the PPC monkey's build. Once you go with that setup, you're back to ripping off both his legs before he can snipar you to death.

Edit: Addition is hard. Harder than multiplication, apparently...

Edited by Void Angel, 09 August 2013 - 01:41 AM.

[Tskeet]

Yes, the 4X does have specific hard points and is slow as a bulldozer, and its only real viable build is as you describe, which is why it is not a preferred chassis for most situations.

And a 2 PPC/Gauss alpha is 35.

But the point is that you really have to put a lot of more effort into making certain weapons and builds work, so even if you play with friends and know their loadouts, you can't control what map you drop on and you're taking a bigger risk than if you chose another type of build. And of course in a solo drop, good luck finding a couple Atlas' to let you hide behind them

[Void Angel]

Duuuuur, you're right; but the UAC/AC/5 combo will still rock the world of a dedicated SniparWarrior build - all the while being a more all-around setup for those varying maps. Not that I personally prefer the 4X either. If I'm feeling like some Heavy action, I drop in Hoppy, my 3D. But I still might use a UAC/AC combo on another 'mech in the future, if I feel the build calls for it - because it's not always a bad weapon to choose.

The OP made that claim, and then went on to say that the AC/5 had "heat problems," and was a hot weapon which was in all ways an inadequate replacement for a Gauss Rifle. I corrected these inaccuracies with math, and it is in this context that I have been discussing the AC/5 - not as the best weapon for all builds, but as a viable armament in certain circumstances.

[Tskeet]

I still feel like we're missing the point the OP made which was to recommend tried and true weapons to new players. What you like to do is quite irrelevant because you're clearly an experienced player who can afford to "bend the rules" so to speak. This is the same argument that any game has where some weapons/units/strategies are simply superior to others, regardless of how much fun a good player can have with them.

Perhaps he came off too strong but he was certainly on the right track with his general analysis.

[Sean von Steinike]

You know what bad weapon/build is? One you don't have fun with or don't do well with. Gauss is a great weapon.....except when I use it. I have tried it on many different mechs and many different configurations and it just does NOT work for me on most builds. No amount of rah rah rah about how great a weapon is going to make it good if the pilot can't make it work effectively for them. While there are weapons that are better than others in general and on paper and for most pilots, I'd still recommend that someone try all of them to see what works best for them. And most importantly, if you are not having fun with your mech or weapon setup, then you need to change no matter how great the build supposedly is.

[stjobe]

You're going to have to take MGs off the list of weapons not to mount since Tuesday's patch.

They now do 1 DPS vs armour, 3 DPS vs internal structure, and 11 DPS vs internal components. For a single MG.

Mounting four of them on a SDR-5K or CDA-3C you'll get 4 DPS vs armour, 12 DPS vs IS, and you'll strip out any components pretty much instantly with 44 DPS on those.

Even in twos they're not the waste of tonnage they previously were (2 DPS vs armour isn't that hot, but 6 DPS vs IS and 22 vs components mean they're useful as a cooldown or backup weapon against breached targets).

[Victor Morson]

Void Angel, on 09 August 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

Duuuuur, you're right; but the UAC/AC/5 combo will still rock the world of a dedicated SniparWarrior build - all the while being a more all-around setup for those varying maps.

No it won't.

[Void Angel]

And now we're just down to "nuh-UH." The difference between you and me is that I try to base my opinions on demonstrable facts - while you base them on your subjective impressions and then back them up with a fallacious appeal to your own authority.

Math up, or shut up. I've already slapped down two of your fairy tale assertions with hard numbers. You haven't rebutted a thing, except to rationalize your error or deflect the conversation - hey, that's what you're doing now! If you can't offer more than deception and bullheaded insistence on proven error, why should I listen to you?

Math up, or shut up.

[Victor Morson]

Void Angel, on 09 August 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

And now we're just down to "nuh-UH." The difference between you and me is that I try to base my opinions on demonstrable facts - while you base them on your subjective impressions and then back them up with a fallacious appeal to your own authority.

This is really mind boggling that you'd try to claim an AC/5, UAC/5 Cataphract 4X would even stand a chance against a properly designed 3D, let alone try to claim it is "fact." I run across builds like this all the time and they are, at best, easy difficulty.

There's a ton of reasons for it. I like the Ultra/5 just fine for pugging, but even that is pretty screwed if it runs into a proper sniper or proper brawler, neither of which it can contend with. At all. And the regular AC/5 are just terrible.

Void Angel, on 09 August 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

Math up, or shut up. I've already slapped down two of your fairy tale assertions with hard numbers.

*sigh* There's a reason that literally none of the best players seriously use that setup and it has to do with a lot more than the actual math on the guns. The biggest thing is a Gauss/PPC 'mech can spot you for a second, fire a shot, and then disappear; while an SRM 'mech will just obliterate that thing's XL engine in about 30 seconds.

The bottom line is with AC/5s like that you're going to damage lots of areas of the 'mech, all while having to keep your front facing them. Compared to a big punch combo where you'll damage ONE area, with plenty of times to evade, there is simply no argument that can be made for this.

It's like Machine Guns (I'm investigating their crit usage right now, I'm talking past-patch and probably this one too): They show great DPS if you're just looking at math for their cost, but the bottom line is because they need to constantly be on to deliver it, they're entirely worthless.

Void Angel, on 09 August 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

You haven't rebutted a thing, except to rationalize your error or deflect the conversation - hey, that's what you're doing now! If you can't offer more than deception and bullheaded insistence on proven error, why should I listen to you?

Math up, or shut up.

There's no error.

AC/5s = Tons of plinking shots that have slower-than-Gauss velocity and are likely to spread over the target, while preventing your ability to be evasive between shots

Gauss/PPC = One big punch in as little as 4 seconds, that'll hit exactly where you want it to with super fast velocity. Also it's not going to explode from ammo and it's far lighter meaning you'll have room for armor and engine upgrades.

In fact, you want math apparently (having repeated it twice in one paragraph) so:

AC/5 - 8 Tons
UAC/5 - 9 Tons

2x AC/5 + 2x UAC/5 = 34 tons.
/w 3 tons of ammo per gun = 56

Space left over on Cataphract: 14 Tons

PPC - 7 Tons
Gauss - 15 Tons

2 PPC + Gauss = 29 Tons
/w 3 tons of ammo per gun = 32 Tons

Space left over on Cataphract: 38 Tons

- DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GOOD AND BAD BUILDS: -
24 TONS

So my point is even if you were right and 2 UAC/5 and 2 AC/5 were far superior to twin PPC and a Gauss, by the time you've finished cramming enough ammo on it to make it usable, you will be left with a horrendously slow 'mech (so slow you'll likely need to invest another ton for a required heatsink) with a notoriously easy to kill frame.

Slow 'mechs versus PPC + Gauss = Not pretty. At all. They'll be darting around your slow, slow, XL Cataphract obliterating you as an after thought. On top of that, the 3D will have more staying power with plenty of ammunition for the Gauss and two no-ammo weapons, while your 4X is likely to run dry even with 3 tons - God help you if you try to skimp with 2.

I think it's clear who's the winner of this fight from every angle you look at it. Which one of us is in the fairy tale again?

EDIT: Oh yeah. Your Phract can't jump, either. So there's that.

Edited by Victor Morson, 10 August 2013 - 12:55 AM.

[AntharPrime]

Rushin Roulette, on 25 July 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

You forgot to add a point;

6: Reading this list.


Point 1 is more or less just useless. Every weapon has its place and use on a build (Although I am really struggling to find one for the NARC launcher).

I love it when someone on my team has a NARC when I'm running my Catapault, those extra seconds you gain from the missle lock speed really pays off.