176 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Mystere, on 19 October 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:

I have a very simple question: Why are people using the fully-loaded weight for size comparisons as opposed to the stripped-down weight?

because these are not omni mechs. Those components are hard designed into those mechs (which is why they shouldn't be so easily customizable. The AC20 is structurally part of the Hunchback mech, and removing it totally modifies the structure, no small undertaking.)

Mechs are not just bare bone structures waiting for cut and paste guns and armor.

[Blackfire1]

Most who know me know I was a 3D Animator. Only 'was' because I came too late into the industry. Everyone who Models knows.
SCALE is number 1. MWO as we know has horrible scaling. Look at cars and Semi trucks in Crimson Straight vs a mech cockpit.

I have to agree. The Scale of the Shadow hawk is off. Not much. Only about 7.5%- 10% max.

[verybad]

Actually, I'm not feeling like the scale in the Shad is giving me problems.It's fluffed as a large mech in the TT. I hadn't tried it in MP till today, but it's the gem of the group so far for me. Being smaller might make it better, but I don't see it as being the problem people are making it out to be.

[Bishop Steiner]

Blackfire1, on 19 October 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

Most who know me know I was a 3D Animator. Only 'was' because I came too late into the industry. Everyone who Models knows.
SCALE is number 1. MWO as we know has horrible scaling. Look at cars and Semi trucks in Crimson Straight vs a mech cockpit.

I have to agree. The Scale of the Shadow hawk is off. Not much. Only about 7.5%- 10% max.

yes, visually it is off. Since it is not remotely impacting its actual in game performance though, *shrug*. Easily the best PHX mech, and could be the best Medium, period.

[Blackfire1]

I still eat people alive in my hunchback 4h with LBx10 and 5 medium lasers. I've not gotten the skill curve with the shadow hawk. The size still throws me off.

[Shadey99]

I've tried to like the Shadowhawk, but even after 2 dozen games in mine I find people just have to easy a time hitting me unless I play jump sniper (pop tart) and I'm not a good jump sniper. Even with a standard engine I die way to fast for how tall I am. Give me a Thunderbolt, Battlemaster, or Locust and I am fine. Hand me a Shadowhawk and I will die (20 deaths of 24 games, I'm safe to say I will die).
Btw The SHD is not my only Medium, so it's not a 'trouble playing mediums' kind of thing. Though I also don't own any of the other oversized mediums.

Edited by Shadey99, 21 October 2013 - 06:09 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Shadey99, on 21 October 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

I've tried to like the Shadowhawk, but even after 2 dozen games in mine I find people just have to easy a time hitting me unless I play jump sniper (pop tart) and I'm not a good jump sniper. Even with a standard engine I die way to fast for how tall I am. Give me a Thunderbolt, Battlemaster, or Locust and I am fine. Hand me a Shadowhawk and I will die (20 deaths of 24 games, I'm safe to say I will die).

sorry to hear that. I am well nigh unkillable in the thing.

Might I ask your loadouts? Seems like two real common issues with SHD pilots is the universal "don't twist enough", but also that too many people try to specialize them too much, and the mech is not a great dedicated scout hunter, brawling face ripper or support/sniper, but is best in roles where it can do all of the above. As long as I don't rush in and get face ***** by focus fire, but just play patiently, use my Ballistic to suppress at range, and then as the engagement unfolds, work my way in and use my energy and missiles for close in fighting, I do fine.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 06:11 AM, said:

sorry to hear that. I am well nigh unkillable in the thing.

Might I ask your loadouts? Seems like two real common issues with SHD pilots is the universal "don't twist enough", but also that too many people try to specialize them too much, and the mech is not a great dedicated scout hunter, brawling face ripper or support/sniper, but is best in roles where it can do all of the above. As long as I don't rush in and get face ***** by focus fire, but just play patiently, use my Ballistic to suppress at range, and then as the engagement unfolds, work my way in and use my energy and missiles for close in fighting, I do fine.

I do quite well using the Shadowhawk as a light mech hunter, but then I run an XL355 in mine to be able to move at 115 kph with Speed Tweak.

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 October 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

I do quite well using the Shadowhawk as a light mech hunter, but then I run an XL355 in mine to be able to move at 115 kph with Speed Tweak.

to each their own. If I wan't to over engine and overspecialize a Medium for that role, even without JJ I feel the KTR is better for that role. Over engining the Shad means under-utilizing the available hard point load outs, and IMO makes them far less effective against larger machines, and less overall useful in a general sense.

By running a 280XL, I can carry a pair of Mlasers, 4x SSRM2 and either a UAC5 or an LB-10X, which allows me to fight any size opponent. I don't have the pursuit speed to chase Lights across the map, but I have more than enough speed and maneuverability to defend against them, which is all IMO a Medium should need to do. If I am haring off across the map hunting their Lights, not only am I not supporting the larger Mehcs in my unit and helping defend them, but I am settign myself up to get isolated and wolfpacked.

Just my outlook on the Shad as a chassis. Though I am also, admittedly, trying to very much differentiate the role and loadout of each variant, but so far, IMO, the Shads shine best when carrying max JJ and XLs between 275-300 ratings. Too much emphasis on speed dilutes firepower, too much emphasis on heavy guns dilutes it's speed and maneuver capability, and hence, the hallmark of the Shad, tactical versatility. Overall, even without JJs, I think the HBK and YLW are better suited as AC20 mechs, the Kintaro as a Scout Hunter, etc. But then, I think the downfall of too many mechs in this game is over-specialization, so I could be biased. Specialization certainly has it's place, just too many people take it to extremes, which really works best in 12 man drops where your roles can be built around and supported.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

to each their own. If I wan't to over engine and overspecialize a Medium for that role, even without JJ I feel the KTR is better for that role. Over engining the Shad means under-utilizing the available hard point load outs, and IMO makes them far less effective against larger machines, and less overall useful in a general sense.

By running a 280XL, I can carry a pair of Mlasers, 4x SSRM2 and either a UAC5 or an LB-10X, which allows me to fight any size opponent. I don't have the pursuit speed to chase Lights across the map, but I have more than enough speed and maneuverability to defend against them, which is all IMO a Medium should need to do. If I am haring off across the map hunting their Lights, not only am I not supporting the larger Mehcs in my unit and helping defend them, but I am settign myself up to get isolated and wolfpacked.

Just my outlook on the Shad as a chassis. Though I am also, admittedly, trying to very much differentiate the role and loadout of each variant, but so far, IMO, the Shads shine best when carrying max JJ and XLs between 275-300 ratings. Too much emphasis on speed dilutes firepower, too much emphasis on heavy guns dilutes it's speed and maneuver capability, and hence, the hallmark of the Shad, tactical versatility. Overall, even without JJs, I think the HBK and YLW are better suited as AC20 mechs, the Kintaro as a Scout Hunter, etc. But then, I think the downfall of too many mechs in this game is over-specialization, so I could be biased. Specialization certainly has it's place, just too many people take it to extremes, which really works best in 12 man drops where your roles can be built around and supported.

My build does quite well against all mech classes, but that's due to me preferring to fight as a fast medium that has JJ to overcome many obstacles in the game. Assaults and Heavies have trouble shooting me when doing a circle of death as their shots will land behind me as I run around them. I've soloed just about every mech chasis and won even when they had tonnage and firepower against me like taking down a Battlemaster and a Highlander before dying. Not bad for a mech that only has a single laser and 3-4 Streaks.

Load out plays a role, but it's more of the skill of the pilot that determines who will win an engagement. If an engagement is not in my favor, I have the speed and maneuverability to get away from medium, heavy, and assault mechs.

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 October 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

My build does quite well against all mech classes, but that's due to me preferring to fight as a fast medium that has JJ to overcome many obstacles in the game. Assaults and Heavies have trouble shooting me when doing a circle of death as their shots will land behind me as I run around them. I've soloed just about every mech chasis and won even when they had tonnage and firepower against me like taking down a Battlemaster and a Highlander before dying. Not bad for a mech that only has a single laser and 3-4 Streaks.

Load out plays a role, but it's more of the skill of the pilot that determines who will win an engagement. If an engagement is not in my favor, I have the speed and maneuverability to get away from medium, heavy, and assault mechs.

I wish they had Solaris "Duel" mode ready, would be fun test our theories out against each other, you in your SpeedHawk, me in a Victor. I'm betting 'roid raging uber-Centy on a pogostick on this one!!!

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

I wish they had Solaris "Duel" mode ready, would be fun test our theories out against each other, you in your SpeedHawk, me in a Victor. I'm betting 'roid raging uber-Centy on a pogostick on this one!!!

Neither theory is better than the other. You prefer your build because it's your playstyle. I prefer my build because that is my playstyle. Surely, you must remember me from the Closed Beta days running a fast Streak Kitty and slaughtering entire teams with it. I killed you more than once in it and yet, people said that it was a terrible build for an A1.

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 October 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Neither theory is better than the other. You prefer your build because it's your playstyle. I prefer my build because that is my playstyle. Surely, you must remember me from the Closed Beta days running a fast Streak Kitty and slaughtering entire teams with it. I killed you more than once in it and yet, people said that it was a terrible build for an A1.

It was a little harsh on my CN9-AH (ah, even with nerfed engines and only SHS, how I miss thee). I recall my Gauss-A-Pult being less impressed.


*Sighs*

Closed Beta, when the most "broken, OP" mechs were Catapults with Gauss and fast Awesomes with a lotta Mlasers. Seems kinda quaint now, don't it? Oh for the halcyon days of yore.....

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 October 2013 - 07:25 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

It was a little harsh on my CN9-AH (ah, even with nerfed engines and only SHS, how I miss thee). I recall my Gauss-A-Pult being less impressed.

Your Gauss-A-Pult was a beast and you did really well with it, but by that time you knew a good portion of my tricks. lol

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 October 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

Your Gauss-A-Pult was a beast and you did really well with it, but by that time you knew a good portion of my tricks. lol

and Caustic Valley seemed very prominently featured in the map rotation, which was distinctly advantageous to the GaussKitty. Especially before DHS were introduced.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

and Caustic Valley seemed very prominently featured in the map rotation, which was distinctly advantageous to the GaussKitty. Especially before DHS were introduced.

Yup that is very true.

I build my mechs to work within a lance that has synergy between itself and the other mechs. Some people build their mechs for soloing and working on their own. Neither approach is wrong, but we both know that a mech designed with lance synergy in mind will be more successful. A good example is the 8 mans I used to run in Closed Beta. They were all designed to be fast and hard hitting, so this is why the drops I led were 98% successful. The entire unit was built around the synergy of fast movement. I've refined this even further these days, but I can't get into details without giving away Carrion Crow's Murder Lance secrets. Let's just say that what Murder Lance is doing is a continuation of the old Closed Beta drops, but takes into account the changes to the game. To date, Murder Lance has a 98% win rate due to the synergy of the mech builds and the teamwork within the lance. The lance accounts for most of the damage and kills in a 12 man PUG match.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 21 October 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

to each their own. If I wan't to over engine and overspecialize a Medium for that role, even without JJ I feel the KTR is better for that role. Over engining the Shad means under-utilizing the available hard point load outs, and IMO makes them far less effective against larger machines, and less overall useful in a general sense.

I get that. Right now I am running a XL295, but that is only because I had a XL295 to use. The mech would be better with a XL275 I think. Then I could have some extra tonnage for JJs or some additional ammo. The XL295 is fast, but I am willing to loose some speed for additional capabilities.

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 October 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

Yup that is very true.

I build my mechs to work within a lance that has synergy between itself and the other mechs. Some people build their mechs for soloing and working on their own. Neither approach is wrong, but we both know that a mech designed with lance synergy in mind will be more successful. A good example is the 8 mans I used to run in Closed Beta. They were all designed to be fast and hard hitting, so this is why the drops I led were 98% successful. The entire unit was built around the synergy of fast movement. I've refined this even further these days, but I can't get into details without giving away Carrion Crow's Murder Lance secrets. Let's just say that what Murder Lance is doing is a continuation of the old Closed Beta drops, but takes into account the changes to the game. To date, Murder Lance has a 98% win rate due to the synergy of the mech builds and the teamwork within the lance. The lance accounts for most of the damage and kills in a 12 man PUG match.

but we both know that a mech designed with lance synergy in mind will be more successful. as long as it is dropping in a lance.

Important caveat. Same problem a lot of 12 man warriors have with their build elitism. What works fabulously in the relatively controlled environment of a full lance of premades, or more to the point, 12 mans. In the totally unpredictable land of PUG warfare, you cannot afford to be totally specialized.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

but we both know that a mech designed with lance synergy in mind will be more successful. as long as it is dropping in a lance.

Important caveat. Same problem a lot of 12 man warriors have with their build elitism. What works fabulously in the relatively controlled environment of a full lance of premades, or more to the point, 12 mans. In the totally unpredictable land of PUG warfare, you cannot afford to be totally specialized.

You bring up an excellent counterpoint. I am still pretty successful in my lance synergy build in a PUG environment because I know how to work within the lance I'm given. Some people don't. Either way it ultimately comes down to the pilot using what they've designed.

[Warge]

Malleus011, on 15 October 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

After all, this is what I paid for.



Not this:

One of the reasons why I'm still happy with PP's refund.

Malleus011, on 15 October 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

Thank you for your attention and consideration. I appreciate your efforts to redress my concerns as one of your valued core customers.

As ex-PGI's valued core customer to present valued core customer: welcome on island, man.

Edited by Warge, 21 October 2013 - 08:01 AM.