184 replies to this topic

[CCC Dober]

Alexander Caine, on 14 June 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

Whats with all the people saying the Fafnir is better at range than the Atlas? That's blatantly untrue...normal gauss outranges Heavy, and Atlas adds ERLLs and LRMs to that.

Fafnir is actually a rubbish design. Even slower than Atlas, poor arcs, main guns that blow it to pieces, **** poor backup weapons.
I'll say that again...SLOWER THAN AN ATLAS, and guns with a shorter range.

Pure crap.

Uhm have you ever been hit by a fully pimped Fafnis by chance? I could swear that there wasn't much ANY Mech could do when being hit by 2 Heavy Gauss and 2 Plasma Cannons at the same time. That thing was a 600m killing machine and it was only in NHUA servers where we found a Mech variant that could come close in raw killing power: the Warlord (Atlas variant) proved to be even nastier because the LBX40 2AL 2HRL and JJ were not getting screwed by the heat scale or ammo counts. That thing put up a worthy fight, easily on par with an optimized Kodiak.

Call me curious, but have you ever tried any of these rigs or ran comparable ones? Do you actually know about 1hit knockdowns and how these Mechs relate to that? Because me and my buddies did learn 'a bit' over the years and it appears that you don't really know all about the endgame, dissing one of the deadliest Mechs on the field that even works on HOLA servers. That's something other high damage dealers can only dream of. Just saying, no offense.

gamesguy, on 14 June 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

Why would knowledge of the hacked variant's existence automatically make me a hacker? You know about it as well, OMG YOU'RE A HACKER!!!!!!11111111

It's cute how you try to wiggle out of this, getting caught red headed and trying to hide the crumbled cookies. Awwwww ^^

Your kind never changes hahaha

[Argost]

So why did a discussion about an Atlas vs a Fafnir turn into an argument about the feasibility of the history of the battletech universe?

Like most Vs topics like this, there's too many variables to say for certain which would win. The atlas has supperior long range firepower to the Fafnir, but up close very little can stand up to those duel Hgause. The battle would largely depend on the terrain and the skill of the pilots. Personally I'd root for the Fafnir, mostly because I've never really liked the Atlas on an asthetic level.

[gamesguy]

Evinthal, on 14 June 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

First you are using THE WORST MW game to draw your conclusions from.

I'm using the table top numbers, the **** are you talking about.

Quote

Second you are trying to equate an ultra auto cannon to a standard auto cannon. Fail in a hand basket right there.

An Inner Sphere UAC does as much damage as a clan one. I know that 'omg but teh clans dont haz standard autocannons' and I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you would be logical enough to see that I was comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges.

The IS did not have ultra-ACs till well after the clan invasion, the only UAC they had access to was the UAC-5. When the clan stuff was first introduced the vast majority of IS mechs were still using regular ACs.

Quote

EDIT: Inner Sphere can also hot load their LRMs. Problem?

I can see I was wrong now. I apologize most sincerely.

Hot-loading has drawbacks, CLRMs don't explode if the launcher takes a hit(not to mention CASE for ammo hits). Plus CLRMs weigh literally half as much, which is a pretty damn big deal.

Quote

Hate to break this to you buddy, but the system includes the BV system. They are integral to each other. I'd just say that you are sore because you got beat by the clans a couple of times and are now crying foul because you refuse to change tactics and learn how to deal with the Clans. This would be akin to the American Revolutionary forces continuing to stand line to line with the British troops in the revolutionary war, instead of adapting to succeed.

No, when clan was first introduced the BV system did not exist. It was invented later in an attempt to balance the overpowered clan crap. And no, I've never been beaten by clan tech, because I don't play the TT and in MW4 I only used clan stuff like everyone else did.

Quote

Attacking someone's spelling or grammar is a bad way to go about trying to win people over to your cause.
Beat that straw man some more. Please. I find it hilarious.

Says the guy who just called me a sore loser even though I don't even play the TT game.

Strawman? I don't think you even understand what the term means.

Quote

You are the one getting bent out of shape over a discussion on the internet. I suggest you look in the mirror and ask yourself that very same question.

I said I am done with this. I would appreciate it if you grew up a slight bit and dropped it too.

I bid you good day sir.

It's pathetic how you're throwing insults left and right and then pretend to take the moral high ground. Classic terrible poster.

CCC Dober, on 14 June 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

It's cute how you try to wiggle out of this, getting caught red headed and trying to hide the crumbled cookies. Awwwww ^^

Your kind never changes hahaha

I've never even used a novacat in multiplayer in MW4, it's hilarious how hard you're trying to paint me as a hacker instead of using a real argument.

Edited by gamesguy, 14 June 2012 - 12:45 PM.

[Evinthal]

gamesguy, on 14 June 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

Strawman? I don't think you even understand what the term means.

Whoops, yes you are right there. I did use the wrong term. Thanks.

[Steel Talon]

Fafnir is for tactical combat that u can build to fit your needs at all ranges.

Variant with experimental IHGauss is my choice for long to mid range combat

dual HGauss or dual UAC/20 for mid to short
4 LBX/20 for CQC
4 LGAuss can also do well in sniper role

No missile, no annoying LAMS wasting your ammo & lights dodging them!!!

[Bandaids]

I love how this got to 6 pages in 24 hours, I was not expecting that. I also love all the feedback guys. this shed's alot of light on preferences and new idea's.

[Tsula]

I'm really not a fan of the Fafnir. Maybe because I dropped one in one round with a Thunder Hawk TDK-7X. Oh wait sorry this is Atlas vs Fafnir well honestly I like Atlas thou every mech is made for a different role.

[Chunkymonkey]

Fafnir vs Daishi D(the one with the dual HAG 40's) That would be a fight.

[Corka]

Evinthal, on 14 June 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

Whoops, yes you are right there. I did use the wrong term. Thanks.

I think you were looking for the term ad hominem

[Broken Moriarty]

CCC Dober, on 14 June 2012 - 07:35 AM, said:

@Moriarty
It is equally laughable that the IS could sink that low and seemingly wasn't incapable of recovering, until a member from Comstar stepped forwards to undo the active suppression of technology and knowledge. That was the biggest cockblock IMO. Also, losing means to reproduce technology over centuries of warfare makes sense, somehow. What doesn't make sense is the active, unnoticed and unopposed suppression/destruction of knowledge and technology throughout the Inner Sphere by a single institution, namely Comstar. Plus, they got away with it and the splinter faction (Word of Blake) was allowed to bomb the whole Sphere back to stone age later on. This wannabe dictator called Stefan Amaris totally pales in comparison to that, even though he is given credit for the destruction of the Star League as a whole. The Clans are not even in the same league and I think it's time to come clear with some obvious BS.

While the entire IS jumping down a technological hole is extremely unlikely and having a bunch of religious phone company nutjobs running around killing anyone how started reading about the scientific method is groan-worthy silly; those are framing devices for the creators' mad max-style shithole world of the future (the original FASA TT world, which evolved in a quite different direction with consequences for how silly the lore would increasingly become), where fresh, drinkable water can be rare and battlemechs were handing down from pilot to pilot for decades.

However, I tend to be more forgiving of story elements/background, which the creative team are making up to produce the world they want, then I am with authors being cavalier with numbers, which mean something specific in the real world and I don't like to have to keep reminding myself, however talented the author/creator may be, they simply don't understand the numbers/science/measurements they are talking about. That is why many authors are careful to avoid giving exact numbers, since us silly fans tend to go over them with a fine-toothed comb.

Schwarzer Adler, on 14 June 2012 - 10:14 AM, said:

@Broken Mirarty: The Clans can clone themselves as much warriors as they want to have. And the worst warrios can be demoted to the lower casts of Clan culture. Therefore I wouldn't worry to much about their population growth.

They do have the better military, but that military is indeed pretty small compaired to the forces of the Inner Sphere. That simply means, they are good fighters and conquerers, but have problems at holding the planets they take. This may be one reason for Clan Ghostbear to relocate their entire society into the IS.

I wonder if we have any numbers on the invasion-era Clan population. It might be interesting to figure out if they could have come to that through mostly natural growth (no immigration massively simplifies this problem) or if it would be like some Civilization type games where their population growth requires every woman to be constantly pregnant with quintuplets.

It seems to me that the authors missed an obvious and interesting parallel they could have drawn between the Clans and ancient Sparta. Both are warrior societies with superior, if limited, military machines. The difference is that however feared the Spartan army was, it was employed very carefully because it was also a fragile instrument of power. The Spartans lived in fear of losing too much of their army at once, whether they won the battle or not, because their entire society was based on having a large under-class of slaves who would take advantage of this weakness to revolt.

[blkhrt11214]

MechRaccoon, on 13 June 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

OH YEAH!?!? ATLAS-K CAN SNIPE TOO!

2 ER LARGE LASERS!

1 GAUSS RIFLE!

1 LRM20!

2 MEDIUM PULSE LASERS!

EDIT: Also, Atlas S2.

1 Heavy Gauss

1 LRM 15

2 ER large lasers
See? Atlas can snipe!

I know its not the best test platform but I ran a bunch of instant action missions on MW4 Mercs with several weapon load outs and the Fafnir beat the pants off the Atlas ( I used each mech vs the computer on Elite ) untill I used your load out with the LRMs and it made a difference.
I did use Clan LRM20s though...

... Cant wait for this game...

[TKG]

First off, this is what the fafnir actually looks like:

http://www.sarna.net...File:Fafnir.gif

Not so pretty huh? Apparently Micro$haft was too lazy to do the model right so we now have the 'breast Implant mech'.


The real issue here is in a straight mech comparsion the original poster failed to set guidelines so, it's harder to say which would be better.
From the context of ignoring Micro$haft's farce of a Mechwarrior game in a straight Atlas versus Fafnir using only TRO confirmed designs and variants I'd pick the atlas. This is not a point of bias, but looking at overal tactical flexibility, the fafnir is a gunnery-support assault mech yes it's firepower is good but only at short range. The atlas is a all purpose workhorse/ Command mech with a weapon that can hit you repeatedly at all ranges giving it a deffinate advantage on anything but an unobstructed battlefeid. The two are designed for different things, but the atlas pilot is less likely to throw away his or her chances on a frontal assault on a fafnir where as the fafnir HAS to frontal assault it's best chance at winning is tied up in it's 'boob-cannons' which by the way are stuck only in a torso-foreward arc and are probably not good for firing on the move due to the pilot needing to brace the mech or risk both missing and falling over doing damage to the mech in the process. I mean pitting a AS7-D against a Fafnir is kind of stupid, to get a fair comparison, you would need to start with the AS7-K at the least, the AS7-S2 at the most or even further along the Atlas II to keep the tech levels even and absolutely no custom designs.

As a final thought, is it even fair to compare the 3025 model atlas AS7-D to the Fafnir FNR-5 from 3067? Hell no it's not, thats like comparing a mackie to a original model Charger The time frames are so far apart that unless there was a highly skilled pilot involved the battle was crooked from the start.

Btw....what the heck is with all this love for the Heavy Gauss, seriously in combat it's just not that good of a weapon!

[Scarlett Avignon]

Lt muffins, on 13 June 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Edit: this cant be right Sarna say that this weapon get 4 shots per ton of ammo.

Trolololol

Welcome to actual Battletech and not Mechwarrior IV.

[Alexander Caine]

Problem is, as usual, that half the posters are talking about TT, some are talking about MW4, and others are just.....talking.

Without having a set system to gauge it on, it's impossible to say, and OP didn't specify.

In TT Atlas > Fafnir (if you compare same tech levels, lets not do the 3025 or 3050 Atlas here please), because Heavy Gausses are rubbish, and the Fafnir is a slow, crappy target with no good backup weapons and 2 bombs strapped to it.
In MW4, apparently Fafnir > Atlas, but the game was terrible so I can't say.

And if you do non-stock, it's irrelevant because both can carry whatever you bloody want.

Edited by Alexander Caine, 15 June 2012 - 01:23 PM.

[wanderer]

Bandaids, on 13 June 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

I was wondering about some feed back on You all's Choice in this matter like what would you pick if you had to. The Fafnir is more of a Sniper due to the types of weapons PCC and Giant Gauss cannons. It also has pretty bad over heating you can't Discharge all the weapons at once with out almost shutting down. As where the The Atlas is more of a Juggernaut kind of take a million hits and keep walking, but it also kind of has weak weapon selections for the most part.

The Atlas, as I'd have to wait years for the Fafnir. Also, don't take the MW4 Fafnir into account. Like most MW4 designs, it doesn't strongly resemble the actual 'Mechs performance. Stock Fafnirs don't have PPC's, though they do carry a pair of heavy gauss and a few backup medium lasers + ECM.

[Saxophonist]

Fafnir. Easy. The Atlas is, well, just a big target.

[wanderer]

CCC Dober, on 14 June 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

Uhm have you ever been hit by a fully pimped Fafnis by chance? I could swear that there wasn't much ANY Mech could do when being hit by 2 Heavy Gauss and 2 Plasma Cannons at the same time. That thing was a 600m killing machine and it was only in NHUA servers where we found a Mech variant that could come close in raw killing power: the Warlord (Atlas variant) proved to be even nastier because the LBX40 2AL 2HRL and JJ were not getting screwed by the heat scale or ammo counts. That thing put up a worthy fight, easily on par with an optimized Kodiak.

Call me curious, but have you ever tried any of these rigs or ran comparable ones? Do you actually know about 1hit knockdowns and how these Mechs relate to that? Because me and my buddies did learn 'a bit' over the years and it appears that you don't really know all about the endgame, dissing one of the deadliest Mechs on the field that even works on HOLA servers. That's something other high damage dealers can only dream of. Just saying, no offense.

If you're using MW4 for an idea of the capacity of an MWO design, I can tell you this: Your data is not only useless, but will give you completely the wrong idea as to the actual function, capacity, or even potential layout of a design. Microsoft built a game with Battletech-shaped Mechs and slapped "Mechwarrior" on it, and then added weapons that don't exist in-universe or do so in name-only, having completely different effects in many cases from their tabletop namesake.

Take whatever you learned in MW4 about how 'Mechs work and forget it. As an intro to MWO, it's worse than knowing nothing at all.

[Graw960]

I like to equip Fafnir's Big Boobs with two Clan Gauss Rifles, it's pretty powerful

[Alexander Caine]

wanderer, on 15 June 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

If you're using MW4 for an idea of the capacity of an MWO design, I can tell you this: Your data is not only useless, but will give you completely the wrong idea as to the actual function, capacity, or even potential layout of a design. Microsoft built a game with Battletech-shaped Mechs and slapped "Mechwarrior" on it, and then added weapons that don't exist in-universe or do so in name-only, having completely different effects in many cases from their tabletop namesake.

Take whatever you learned in MW4 about how 'Mechs work and forget it. As an intro to MWO, it's worse than knowing nothing at all.

True, but wasting your time dude. The MW4 pros think they know what mechs actually do/are like/can fit because of the godawful game.

I envision HUGE tears after launch.

[TKG]

wanderer, on 15 June 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

If you're using MW4 for an idea of the capacity of an MWO design, I can tell you this: Your data is not only useless, but will give you completely the wrong idea as to the actual function, capacity, or even potential layout of a design. Microsoft built a game with Battletech-shaped Mechs and slapped "Mechwarrior" on it, and then added weapons that don't exist in-universe or do so in name-only, having completely different effects in many cases from their tabletop namesake.

Take whatever you learned in MW4 about how 'Mechs work and forget it. As an intro to MWO, it's worse than knowing nothing at all.

For example the IS large, medium and small, lasers in MW4 actually are ranged or have their damage set to be the IS ER lasers apparently for some strange reason. MW4 wasn't a very good game.