10417 replies to this topic

[NatsumeAshikaga]

I've searched and searched... Asked my friends who play. No concise answer.

With the 'nother load sale, I'm looking to get a Linebacker and a Hunchback IIC. Which variants of the two are the best options for a fairly penniless newbie?

Edited by NatsumeAshikaga, 19 May 2018 - 04:42 AM.

[Tesunie]

NatsumeAshikaga, on 19 May 2018 - 04:40 AM, said:

I've searched and searched... Asked my friends who play. No concise answer.

With the 'nother load sale, I'm looking to get a Linebacker and a Hunchback IIC. Which variants of the two are the best options for a fairly penniless newbie?

Depends upon what you are looking for it to do.

The Linebacker is an Omni-mech, so it basically doesn't matter which one you buy for it's base as you can change out all the pods to fit your needs. (This changes the hard points on them mech, FYI.) Unless you are looking for set of 8 quirk bonuses, it's not super important which one you buy. I run a laser version on the Prime changing out a few pods here or there for more energy hard points. The meta is to use it as an SRM bomber, which probably is based on the D, with side pods possibly taken from the A or Prime for up to six missile hard points. You could even mix in parts from the H (a side torso) to give it a bit of jump capability...

For the Hunchback IIC, the IIC-C looks like a good one, or even the base IIC version. Each can do the meta dual UAC10 and two ERMLs. The IIC-C could provide more flexibility if you want smaller ballistics with more energy. The IIC-A can do laser meta, or the twin ERPPC jump sniping. Then of course the IIC-B can carry any missile you may desire...

So on the Hunchback IIC, there is no concise answer. Any of them could be good. All depends upon what you want to use. The Linebacker, just doesn't matter which one you probably get in the end, as they can mix and match their omni-pods to fit your needs and their Set of 8 quirks aren't worth it (at this time) to take at the expense of a build...

[Alexander of Macedon]

NatsumeAshikaga, on 19 May 2018 - 04:40 AM, said:

I've searched and searched... Asked my friends who play. No concise answer.

With the 'nother load sale, I'm looking to get a Linebacker and a Hunchback IIC. Which variants of the two are the best options for a fairly penniless newbie?

I'll just speak to the hunchies.

IIC: The primary dakka carrier. 4B & 2E in the CT. Most commonly used with 2x cUAC/10 and 2x cERMLas. Can also do 2x cUAC/20 or cLB20-X.

IIC-A: The best for both ERPPC poptarting and laserboating. 8E, with high mounts in both side torsos. Also has space for plenty of JJs and DHS.

IIC-B: The missileboat. 4M (20x4) with two in each ST & 2E in the CT. Very good for ATM poptarting. Too fragile and too few hardpoints to do cSRMs or cS-SRMs effectively. If you're really desperate to run cLRMs, it's not too bad for that. ATMs are way better though, since the JJs compensate for their flat angle.

IIC-C: The one nobody cares about. 2B in the STs. 4E, two in the CT and two in the arms. There's no reason to buy this one--you're going to strip arms for extra tonnage on a ballistic build anyways, and four low E mounts isn't enough for anything else. Don't buy this.

IIC-DW: The hero variant, the Deathwish. 1B RT, 1E LT, 2E in each arm. It's just a clan HBK-4G with no quirks. If you're going to spend real money, spend it on something else.

e: Scratch that. If you're super broke, you can buy the IIC-C instead of the IIC since it comes with cUAC/10s instead of cUAC/20s. The tradeoff is that you can never run a meme build with cUAC/2s.

Edited by Alexander of Macedon, 19 May 2018 - 07:26 PM.

[BTGbullseye]

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 May 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

IIC: The primary dakka carrier. 4B & 2E in the CT. Most commonly used with 2x cUAC/10 and 2x cERMLas. Can also do 2x cUAC/20 or cLB20-X.

You completely forgot about the 4x UAC2 version... I've eaten Annihilators to death in under 15 sec beyond their max range several times.

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 May 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

IIC-C: The one nobody cares about. 2B in the STs. 4E, two in the CT and two in the arms. There's no reason to buy this one--you're going to strip arms for extra tonnage on a ballistic build anyways, and four low E mounts isn't enough for anything else. Don't buy this.

You mean the one that comes standard with the near-meta loadout, you recommend NOT buying?!? What is wrong with you? Just because all you do is strip a little off it, doesn't mean it's worse than something you have to build up to it.

[Alexander of Macedon]

BTGbullseye, on 20 May 2018 - 03:44 AM, said:

You completely forgot about the 4x UAC2 version... I've eaten Annihilators to death in under 15 sec beyond their max range several times.


You mean the one that comes standard with the near-meta loadout, you recommend NOT buying?!? What is wrong with you? Just because all you do is strip a little off it, doesn't mean it's worse than something you have to build up to it.

Dude, I remembered and edited

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 May 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

e: Scratch that. If you're super broke, you can buy the IIC-C instead of the IIC since it comes with cUAC/10s instead of cUAC/20s. The tradeoff is that you can never run a meme build with cUAC/2s.

about thirty seconds after I posted... several hours before you replied.

[BTGbullseye]

Alexander of Macedon, on 20 May 2018 - 05:11 AM, said:

Dude, I remembered and edited


about thirty seconds after I posted... several hours before you replied.

How does "e:" indicate an edit? Also, why not just put the info up where it makes a difference, and just note the changes in the edit text? Or even don't bother noting you changed something 30 seconds later, like I did when adding this sentence?

Edited by BTGbullseye, 20 May 2018 - 05:26 AM.

[Alexander of Macedon]

BTGbullseye, on 20 May 2018 - 05:26 AM, said:

How does "e:" indicate an edit? Also, why not just put the info up where it makes a difference, and just note the changes in the edit text? Or even don't bother noting you changed something 30 seconds later, like I did when adding this sentence?

Because... that's pretty common shorthand for an edit in most parts of the internet, and has been for a long while? Especially on older platforms that don't auto-note edits.

Never mind that it's two lines below the original bit I wrote on the C, or that it's blatantly obvious from the context that it was an edit (given the content of the sentence and that it was right above the little auto-notification of an edit having been made). Or that it was added long before you would ever have seen or replied to the post, so I'm not sure how you would have overlooked it.

[Tier5ForLife]

Where can you find the number of active players per month etc?

[Horseman]

LikeUntoBuddha, on 23 May 2018 - 04:19 AM, said:

Where can you find the number of active players per month etc?

On ISEN's leaderboards,which use data scraped from the Quick Play leaderboards:
https://leaderboard.isengrim.org

[BTGbullseye]

Alexander of Macedon, on 23 May 2018 - 03:45 AM, said:

Or that it was added long before you would ever have seen or replied to the post, so I'm not sure how you would have overlooked it.

You underestimate how long I leave tabs open for.

[Horseman]

Alexander of Macedon, on 23 May 2018 - 03:45 AM, said:

Because... that's pretty common shorthand for an edit in most parts of the internet, and has been for a long while? Especially on older platforms that don't auto-note edits.

I don't know what parts of the internet you've been around, but this is the first time I've seen someone use this shorthand in 18 years of using dozens of highly popular (and populated) forums.

[Tesunie]

As much as I agree with Bullseye and Horseman about never seeing e: as an editing shorthand (nor have I ever seen "wrote on the C" and have no idea what that means at the moment), I think it is not overly important to the overall portion of this thread.

I can understand Bullseye, as I too have had a post up while thinking what to type, only to find it's been edited when I go to quote it or after I've posted. It happens on these forums.

As for that specific post in question, I don't know why you ever discouraged the IIC-C, as it has it's own place and can do the meta build on it just as easily, while also providing additional energy options if ever desired for potentially different builds.

PS: It's also typically good form to strike any portion of your post that has just became irrelevant from your own edit. It makes the changes a lot more noticeable and clear for all to see. (Just as an FYI for next time.)

[IllCaesar]

What are some popular hero mechs in the Medium class right now? I've got three lights and the two PGI originals that were given away some I'm looking at something in the medium range. I know the Highroller is popular but other than that I don't see too many medium heroes. The Hellspawn interests me as a laser vomit build (plus I've always liked the Hellspawn) but nothing else seems to catch my eye.

[Tesunie]

IllCaesar, on 23 May 2018 - 05:08 PM, said:

What are some popular hero mechs in the Medium class right now? I've got three lights and the two PGI originals that were given away some I'm looking at something in the medium range. I know the Highroller is popular but other than that I don't see too many medium heroes. The Hellspawn interests me as a laser vomit build (plus I've always liked the Hellspawn) but nothing else seems to catch my eye.

Huntsmen's hero is always a solid choice. The Pheonixhawk Roc isn't bad either (or at least I don't mind it) as well as the Blackjack Arrow can fit in with the current MG meta thing...

Most people don't use mediums though, so don't be too surprised that you don't see their heroes all that much. A lot of people suggest and use heavy mechs.

[IllCaesar]

Tesunie, on 23 May 2018 - 06:17 PM, said:

Huntsmen's hero is always a solid choice. The Pheonixhawk Roc isn't bad either (or at least I don't mind it) as well as the Blackjack Arrow can fit in with the current MG meta thing...

Most people don't use mediums though, so don't be too surprised that you don't see their heroes all that much. A lot of people suggest and use heavy mechs.

I'm well aware of what's popular but I don't really do too well in the Heavy and Assault class. The Legend Killer might be a good fit, as I do enjoy my Rifleman that runs 2xLB10X and 6xML, but otherwise none of them interest me... unless the Protector is finally decent again.

[Tesunie]

IllCaesar, on 23 May 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

I'm well aware of what's popular but I don't really do too well in the Heavy and Assault class. The Legend Killer might be a good fit, as I do enjoy my Rifleman that runs 2xLB10X and 6xML, but otherwise none of them interest me... unless the Protector is finally decent again.

Don't worry, what other people seem to do good in, I seem to do badly in as well. I also have low interest in heavy mechs... It's actually my least favorite class of mech.

Personally speaking, I like my Huntsmen the best, followed by the Crab and Uziel. I own more medium mechs than any other type. As for hero mechs, I don't own very many. I have the Roc, Phacket, Flourence (Crab hero) and a free Grid Iron I never wanted. Any other special mech came from mech packs, such as my beloved Huntsmen Prime(S), Uziel(S) and Crab 27®.

[Spare Parts Bin]

I do love my Pahket,Huntsman Hero. One UAC-10 or 2LBX2s, plus 3-4 ERMLs or ERSLs.

[Tesunie]

Spare Parts Bin, on 23 May 2018 - 07:24 PM, said:

I do love my Pahket,Huntsman Hero. One UAC-10 or 2LBX2s, plus 3-4 ERMLs or ERSLs.

I have so many Huntsmen builds... So many...

My Pahket (I can never remember how to spell that) currently has four SRM4s and two ERLLs. It does well, and I'm never stranded in a situation I can't at least do something in... but then again I've already had "meta" players tell me how bad the build is...

I actually don't think I have any Huntsmen with a ballistic equipped to it anymore. Maybe next time there is a sale I should purchase another one (would make my total up to eight then) just to give ballistic builds a go again. I did at one point have an UAC10/LBx10 and three ERML Huntsmen B build at one point... Ranked well on the Huntsmen leaderboards with that one back in the day.

[Colin Pryde]

Two questions:

There used to be stuff that was buyable only with GXP, people avoided converting GXP to XP because it was considered a 'lesser' use of the resource. Is that gone and GXP's only use is to convert to XP now?

I see consumable modules still exist, but are pilot and weapon modules gone?

[Koniving]

Colin Pryde, on 25 May 2018 - 01:30 AM, said:

Two questions:

There used to be stuff that was buyable only with GXP, people avoided converting GXP to XP because it was considered a 'lesser' use of the resource. Is that gone and GXP's only use is to convert to XP now?

I see consumable modules still exist, but are pilot and weapon modules gone?

1) Effectively, yes. It can be converted for any mech, while XP is locked to a specific copy of a mech variant... So you can't even share it between your Atlas D and your other Atlas D.

2) No longer necessary, those are all in the new skill tree as unlockable nodes. Seismic is under Sensors (with 2 nodes on separate sides for the full effect). Hill Climb is either mobility or operations. More range for your AC/2? Welp just take universal range nodes under firepower.