[Disc] Shadowhawk Problem....
#1
Posted 18 October 2013 - 09:57 PM
Seriously, despite the horribly close cannon in my left shoulder that blocks half of my already hideously narrow field-of-view, I can see the top of Catapult from my cockpit! PGI! It's just a 55-toner! I was worrying that Shadowhawk may outclass Hunchback when it comes out... NOEP. Hunchback may has a giant hunch but Shadowhawk has giant EVERYWHERE. Especially side torsos. Both of them. The few points of extra armor are absolutely not enough to justify the size and the slower reaction comparing to a 50-toner.
Anyway, I'm having a really hard time grasping Shadowhawk. Now the rant's over. I'm gonna play some Thunderbolt. Btw - yet another really solid 65-toner.
Also, if you wanna try out Medium...get yourself a Hunchback.
#2
Posted 19 October 2013 - 12:44 AM
Shawks:
Much, much higher speed cap
Jump Jets
Less reliant on a giant, easy to cronk hunch
Flexible
Resilient
Hunchbacks:
Compact
Agile (Awesome torso twist!)
The hunchback is arguably a better ninja-striker, sneaking in, hitting hard and escaping, as it's small profile and heavy payload allow it to approach unnoticed and kick face in. Still the premier Atlas's Little Buddy, IMHO.
The Shadowhawk, however, is a much more flexible chassis overall. Jump jets add substantial tactical advantages particularly on some maps, like Canyons or Crimson Straights. A larger engine cap and multiple missile hardpoints make shadowhawks excellent light hunters too. Speed and agility make the Shawk a much better support medium for a fast, agile assault like a Victor, too.
The size difference just isn't a big deal, at least not when your playing against average+ players: They're going to hit you just as often in a hunchback as they are in an Atlas.
#3
Posted 19 October 2013 - 03:20 AM
#4
Posted 19 October 2013 - 03:46 AM
I might not be a very good player, but in my experience most of the times the CT gets hit WAY more than the others.
Point is: I like them a lot.
#5
Posted 19 October 2013 - 05:23 AM
I also think the height is an advantage in a lot of situations. Nothing is quite as satisfying as jumping up, and delivering a salvo of SSRMs onto an opponent, then dropping back behind your building. Your not jumping very high to do it.
Edited by Bhelogan, 19 October 2013 - 05:27 AM.
#6
Posted 19 October 2013 - 09:41 AM
The height is kind of a non-issue for me. Sure, out in the open, brawling, I wish I had a slimmer profile to hit, but I've also got enough speed and maneuverability to stay out of those situations most of the time. Vis-a-vis terrain, it's really no big deal. The cockpit-level weapons generally mean that if they can see you, you can shoot them. I've even been able to shoot over the heads of friendly heavies and assaults while standing on the slightest of rises.
The shadowhawk isn't perfect but then, if it was, there would be even more reason to complain about it
#7
Posted 20 October 2013 - 10:08 AM
Comparing it to a hunchie, the Hunchie is a much more focussed chasis. You want energy hardpints? Where, here's 9. You want an AC20? Here it is. If that's what you want to do, the Hunchie is likely better. If you want a more flexible or more mobile chasis, the Shadowhawk is your mech.
#8
Posted 20 October 2013 - 09:49 PM
Their ballistic torso are also high priority target like on the Hunchback and Atlas.
However, they have slim side profile and large arms that can work as shield, it even comes with a blank arm just for that (except 1 variant).
The ballistic are mounted high on the torso, this coupled with being tall allow them to snipe over ledge or over the head of teammate. Jump jet makes this task even easier.
#9
Posted 21 October 2013 - 04:08 AM
#10
Posted 21 October 2013 - 04:20 AM
Helmstif, on 18 October 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:
Seriously, despite the horribly close cannon in my left shoulder that blocks half of my already hideously narrow field-of-view, I can see the top of Catapult from my cockpit! PGI! It's just a 55-toner! I was worrying that Shadowhawk may outclass Hunchback when it comes out... NOEP. Hunchback may has a giant hunch but Shadowhawk has giant EVERYWHERE. Especially side torsos. Both of them. The few points of extra armor are absolutely not enough to justify the size and the slower reaction comparing to a 50-toner.
Anyway, I'm having a really hard time grasping Shadowhawk. Now the rant's over. I'm gonna play some Thunderbolt. Btw - yet another really solid 65-toner.
Also, if you wanna try out Medium...get yourself a Hunchback.
You're doing it wrong then. Not only is the SH one of the most survivable mediums in the game right now even with an XL engine, but the hardpoints allow for some pretty heavy firepower while still having the mobility of a medium mech with JJ's.
I routinely do 500+ a game with all 3 varients by using cover when needed and sticking with lancemates.
If you find you're consistantly getting your *** kicked, you're doing it wrong. IMO it's actually the best mech in the entire phoenix pakage since the Battlemaster has that same CT issue that the Orion and Kintaro had at release. The TB is solid too however, I'll give ya that.
#11
Posted 21 October 2013 - 04:42 AM
I don't think the battlemaster has an issue with CT like the kintaro. It just has a BIG CT, look at it it's a big freeking cross on its chest, in its defense though it does allow the use of an XL without to many issues as long as you aren't brawling but even then torso twisting spreads damage EVERYWHERE on it.
The thunderbolts seem solid, but still working on loadouts i like personally.
Only having issues with the locusts, I keep thinking of them as driving a supercharged pinto loaded with a few barrels of gasoline. a fireball waiting to happen LOL
#12
Posted 21 October 2013 - 04:47 AM
I do think that they should scale the thing down a bit... if only for aesthetics sake. Right now - looking at it, the eyeballs say it should tip the scales at 80+ tons... 55's should just be smaller.
#13
Posted 21 October 2013 - 05:08 AM
#14
Posted 21 October 2013 - 06:06 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users