10417 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

LikeUntoBuddha, on 12 January 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

Thanks Tesunie again.

I'm going to keep asking this until it makes sense.

Ok, the reason I came here.

What does "Targeting Time Boost" mean?

What does "Targeting Gain Time Boost" mean?

I know what I think they mean but I tend to be wrong. "Targeting Time" sounds like to me like the time it takes to lock on your target. "Targeting Time" is on the BAP and "Targeting Gain Boost" is on the Command Console. But, on Smurfy is says both are for as you said, simply gathering Info. The same with a targeting computer.

ONLY THE TAG "accelerates lock". I remember having this discussion before. And I will say the same thing. WHO THE FUNK CARES about a increase in targeting data? I've been told it is so important. Which is BS.

If we were really in that world I'd be all over my engineers to increase "lock speed" instead. As a Missile Mech you need FASTER TARGETING! Hell, I'd put my engineers in prison until they improve targeting time!

Here is one reason this makes little sense. You cannot aim at a part of a target if you are using LRMs etc. So how does knowing a enemy mech that is 500ms away and over a hill has a bad leg help? (I know, so you can tell your teammates...which rarely if ever happens)

Here is the thing and I'm going to have to record this and compare them but I'd swear on the practice map with BAP and the CC, I gain target lock faster.

Thanks again, I just find it hard to understand the stupid ways items are used here.

I'm going on a leap here and say they mean the same thing. I believe part of the problem is that PGI updated those abilities at two different times with a lot of time between the two. There are some things in MW:O that I've noticed say the same thing different ways. I'm chalking it up to them forgetting how they put it a few years ago and just wrote in what they thought they had labeled it before. Annoying. Yes. Understandable. I believe is also a yes.

In lore... You technically wouldn't be able to do half the things this game lets you do. Technically, LRMs aren't even homing weapons, unless you pay for special ammunition. (SRMs though are semi-homing missiles...) Just saying.


Gathering information can be a useful skill, just not for LRMs. Getting information can be key in a brawl. Also, if you don't have line of sight, I believe you don't contribute at all to data gathering. (I could be wrong here.)


You shouldn't be getting faster missile locks with CC and BAP (and Targeting Computers). Most people take APs with their LRM mechs not for it's sensor benefits, but more so for it's ability to cancel out nearby ECm so their locks don't end up getting disrupted.

[Panzerkuh]

What are the most commonly used/best to buy engines for Heavy mechs?

[Tesunie]

Panzerkuh, on 12 January 2018 - 03:03 PM, said:

What are the most commonly used/best to buy engines for Heavy mechs?

250 engines are a common engine size for many mechs (255 for XL because it's the same weight). This is because 250 engines have built in 10 heat sinks, which have better cooling dissipation when you have DHS upgrades on.

For heavy mechs, probably a 275 engine would be of more benefit, depending upon the build. Most likely a 275 LFE, maybe an XL engine... (If it's a clan mech, CXL all the way.)

To be honest, I kinda make my intended build, then fit an engine that best works with the build, trying to stay above 250 if and when possible. I also like my mechs on the faster side, around 80 KPH. So most mediums get a 250, heavies around 275, ect.

I will make note, engines have a heat sink built into them for every 25 increment until they have 10 sinks inside them. Then, for every 25 increment above 250 (where they have 10 built in sinks), you can place an additional heat sink inside the engine (this doesn't count as "internal" though, but they wont take up crit space). So it is often best to build mechs within 25 point engine increments, unless the build itself does not permit due to weight restrictions.

[TravisNo]

what is error code 2, why am i getting it, and what can i do to stop getting it and be able to play the game again?

[TooDumbToQuit]

Dear Tesunie;

Please let me know when you try ATMs. I went to the academy and picked "Shooting Gallery" Where they go side to side.

I used a Maddog with a ATM 12 and a LRM 20 with Artemis. I shot both at the same time at the same target. At around 300-400 m, the ATMs started missing against any mech with speed moving side to side.

I made a video and checked it carefully. I would post it but I forgot to change the audio inputs so the news I listen to is loudly in the background.

There is a funny part that I might take out as a tiny clip. I'm shooting at one mech and the LRMs land but the ATMs miss and kill the Locust behind him. That cracked me up, lol.

P.S. What is the deal with Captain Adams? He keeps eyeballing me....

Edited by LikeUntoGod, 13 January 2018 - 10:13 AM.

[BTGbullseye]

LikeUntoGod, on 13 January 2018 - 10:11 AM, said:

P.S. What is the deal with Captain Adams? He keeps eyeballing me....

He's... ...fond... ...of newer mechwarriors. He was transferred to training so they could be traumatized off the field, so as to not affect their battlefield performance as much.

[Tesunie]

LikeUntoGod, on 13 January 2018 - 10:11 AM, said:

Dear Tesunie;

Please let me know when you try ATMs.

I've been placing it on some of my mechs here or there right now. No large commitments to the system yet. So far, I have it on a Huntsmen and an Arctic Wolf, and each seem to be able to get reasonable results.

I've never thought of taking them to the academy and checking them out there. So I've only brought them into live combat. If you can keep people within it's 3 damage range, it's a good damage dealer. Even at the 2 damage ranges it isn't bad, but LRMs start to out perform them then.

So far, I've had mixed results and feelings. On the one side, I feel LRMs are better overall in more situations. On the other side, I've seen ATMs take chunks off a mech when inside it's limited "Magic" ranges. So... I guess this is a weapon that depends upon how you use it,

So far in live, I've not seen any of the issues myself. But that doesn't mean it might not be there...

[Tim East]

LikeUntoBuddha, on 12 January 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

ONLY THE TAG "accelerates lock". I remember having this discussion before. And I will say the same thing. WHO THE FUNK CARES about a increase in targeting data? I've been told it is so important. Which is BS.

Here is one reason this makes little sense. You cannot aim at a part of a target if you are using LRMs etc. So how does knowing a enemy mech that is 500ms away and over a hill has a bad leg help? (I know, so you can tell your teammates...which rarely if ever happens)

I care about the increase in data gathering rate. It's good for anyone, but great for direct fire mechs with accurate pilots because you can aim for the weak spots.

When using LRMs and knowing a target has a bad leg, you know that you are likely to be able to shoot them with a lot of missiles and they aren't likely to be able to get away from them. It's useful information.

Tesunie, on 14 January 2018 - 12:57 PM, said:

I've been placing it on some of my mechs here or there right now. No large commitments to the system yet. So far, I have it on a Huntsmen and an Arctic Wolf, and each seem to be able to get reasonable results.

I've never thought of taking them to the academy and checking them out there. So I've only brought them into live combat. If you can keep people within it's 3 damage range, it's a good damage dealer. Even at the 2 damage ranges it isn't bad, but LRMs start to out perform them then.

So far, I've had mixed results and feelings. On the one side, I feel LRMs are better overall in more situations. On the other side, I've seen ATMs take chunks off a mech when inside it's limited "Magic" ranges. So... I guess this is a weapon that depends upon how you use it,

So far in live, I've not seen any of the issues myself. But that doesn't mean it might not be there...

Their trajectory is weird and definitely not as good as LRMs, and the minimum range is worse I think because they seem to do no damage at all much further out than LRMs, but they can rip someone up at the right distance. I have a Stormcrow that I equipped with them, and because of its mobility it does pretty well. Also extremely weak to AMS fire. I don't hate ATMs, but I'm not impressed either.

[BTGbullseye]

Just see my location for my opinion of ATMs. (and yes I do run them on a few mechs)

[Leone]

Tim East, on 14 January 2018 - 01:19 PM, said:

Also extremely weak to AMS fire. I don't hate ATMs, but I'm not impressed either.

My suggestion to deal with ams would be to bring an SRM launcher. Since SRMs have more HP, you fire 'em right afore you launch your Advance Tactical Missiles, letting the srms chew through the ams. Of course, this assume you're using ATMs within SRM range, but that's where I've found 'em most useful.

~Leone.

Edited by Leone, 14 January 2018 - 04:43 PM.

[Tim East]

Leone, on 14 January 2018 - 04:43 PM, said:

My suggestion to deal with ams would be to bring an SRM launcher. Since SRMs have more HP, you fire 'em right afore you launch your Advance Tactical Missiles, letting the srms chew through the ams. Of course, this assume you're using ATMs within SRM range, but that's where I've found 'em most useful.

~Leone.

Do you think it'd be worth it to use SSRM instead so that you're not managing different fire patterns and slightly better range?

[Tesunie]

Tim East, on 14 January 2018 - 10:47 PM, said:

Do you think it'd be worth it to use SSRM instead so that you're not managing different fire patterns and slightly better range?

And it would also share more similar ranges (270 vs 350 I believe?). I mean, if it's just there to distract AMS, SSRMs might just be the wiser choice.

[dragnier1]

I stopped mwo before the skill change was implemented live due to a kaput gc, have two questions as i'm not familiar with it.
This SP thingy, must i spend cbills on it?
Does the current skill system mean you no longer need 3 variants of the same mech (eg. jenner)?

[BTGbullseye]

dragnier1, on 15 January 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

This SP thingy, must i spend cbills on it?

Apart from HSP (which you got for free from any of your pre-skill tree mechs that had ) it costs 800xp and 40000 c-bills to purchase a single SP. It is mech specific.

dragnier1, on 15 January 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

Does the current skill system mean you no longer need 3 variants of the same mech (eg. jenner)?

That is correct. You can max out any mech with only 1 variant in your mechbay.

[dragnier1]

BTGbullseye, on 15 January 2018 - 03:45 AM, said:

Apart from HSP (which you got for free from any of your pre-skill tree mechs that had ) it costs 800xp and 40000 c-bills to purchase a single SP. It is mech specific.


That is correct. You can max out any mech with only 1 variant in your mechbay.

Thanks for this. Hopefully ghost heat was stripped as well

[Koniving]

dragnier1, on 15 January 2018 - 04:28 AM, said:

Thanks for this. Hopefully ghost heat was stripped as well

Nope.
Best to look at Smurfy for Heat Penalties to understand what is screwed now.

Keep in mind, if you fire your Ultra 10s too quickly, even if you have just two which ghost heat says is okay, you'll get punished by ghost heat anyway. Be sure to wait half a second before you double tap.

[TooDumbToQuit]

As far as ATMs, I have used ATMs and Streaks. They work well together.

I also use ATMs with LRMs. I carry about twice as much LRM ammo as ATM ammo. I like being able to hit someone at any range.

[BTGbullseye]

LikeUntoGod, on 15 January 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

I like being able to hit someone at any range.

Which you can do with Clan LRMs... They just rapidly decrease inside minimum range. LRMs even do better damage than ATMs in all but a 90m band. (damage per ton, and way less heat)

[Churzy]

Now that we have LFE, any reason to use STD at all? I get that XL is bad on Heavy/Assault (as they become extra frail) but I'm under the impression that losing both Side Torsos is about as likely as getting CT'd, so no real tradeoff. Am I missing something here?

[Tesunie]

Churzy, on 21 January 2018 - 10:37 AM, said:

Now that we have LFE, any reason to use STD at all? I get that XL is bad on Heavy/Assault (as they become extra frail) but I'm under the impression that losing both Side Torsos is about as likely as getting CT'd, so no real tradeoff. Am I missing something here?

Depends upon the mech. If you have head/CT weapons, a Std engine can be handy to continue dealing damage after losing both side torsos. If you have a mech known for losing it's side torsos (even without a CT weapon) (such as the Stalker), you may not want to incur the heat and speed penalties of losing a side torso with the mech when it happens.

Honestly, it depends upon the mech, the build on the mech and it's intended role and risks willing to be taken.