181 replies to this topic

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Victor Morson, on 24 November 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

The average amount of missiles that will make it through a single AMS in your path (not on the target)

See, this is what should have been in the post I quoted. They're completely different situations.

For instance, now I agree with you.

[Koniving]

Bront, on 24 November 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Question.
How do you build a AC20 3xML Shadowhawk you mention in the OP?

He's quoting an effective design on the Blackjack, that he used on the Hunchback, and wants to pretend it's on the "greater" Shadowhawk. You know, since there isn't a single Shadowhawk that can carry more than 2 energy mounts...

This is a troll response, mind you. In case if anyone is confused.

[Victor Morson]

Koniving, on 24 November 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

This is a troll response, mind you. In case if anyone is confused.

I have to admit, I was at first. I was about to reply that there were models with more than 2 energy mounts but then saw that.

[Satan n stuff]

Victor Morson, on 24 November 2013 - 03:40 AM, said:

They nerf is not likely to change much, just due to the layout. Part of the Cent's strength is in it's giant "Everything hits these arms!" arms, and running armless builds. That's why ballistic Centurions are awful. They aren't adjusting the arms to my knowledge, so they missed the point entirely.

All of my Centurions, and I have every variant, use the arm hardpoints. Against a lot of the people I routinely fight trying to zombie would be suicide as they're perfectly capable of hitting the CT every time, as am I by the way. Zombie builds work fairly well against average players and newbs but tend to fail spectacularly once that high elo player gets you in their sights, and it's much easier to avoid being cored in 1-2 shots if you have some range, that's why I use ballistics on my cents. ( and PPCs )
The weight of the weapons isn't an issue because if you stay at range most of the time, you can safely use an XL engine big enough to let you reposition before you can be effectively countered.

[Koniving]

Victor Morson, on 25 November 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

I have to admit, I was at first. I was about to reply that there were models with more than 2 energy mounts but then saw that.

There actually isn't a Shadowhawk in MWO that has more than 2 energy mounts. One has 2 on the right arm. Another has 1 on each arm. Count the red hardpoints.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...dium_shadowhawk

[Victor Morson]

Koniving, on 25 November 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

There actually isn't a Shadowhawk in MWO that has more than 2 energy mounts. One has 2 on the right arm. Another has 1 on each arm. Count the red hardpoints.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...dium_shadowhawk

Doh; I was under the distinct impression that the 5M sported 3 energy mounts (2/1) not just 2. Still, doesn't change the fact the Shadow Hawk is awesome, but none the less you are correct.

Haven't even started ranking the 5M yet so I overlooked it. Still, +1 to you!

[TyrEol]

I like your selection and the accompanying clear explanations of why you've chosen them.

I'm sure other people will have their own opinions about what is their own favourite mech, or the easiest to learn on because that's what they used.

But I can't see how a new player can go far wrong buying one of these chassis to start with, even if they decide they want to try something else later on then these are still great chassis to have to fall back on.

The bit of advice I try to give most when I talk to completely new players is not to just buy the first thing they can, but play in the trial mechs (now decent champion variants) until they've finished getting cadet bonus and know a bit more about what mechs are available.

[Bront]

Koniving, on 24 November 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

He's quoting an effective design on the Blackjack, that he used on the Hunchback, and wants to pretend it's on the "greater" Shadowhawk. You know, since there isn't a single Shadowhawk that can carry more than 2 energy mounts...

This is a troll response, mind you. In case if anyone is confused.

I was attempting to point out the inaccurate of the OP in an amusing way. Apparently I failed.

[Koniving]

Bront, on 26 November 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

I was attempting to point out the inaccurate of the OP in an amusing way. Apparently I failed.

I was being playful.

Truth be told the Shadow Hawks don't really need energy hardpoints and I barely use them. Most of my rigs are heat neutral on regular maps and on the super hot maps I can fire constantly for over a minute before worrying about 'riding' my heat. The endurance really pays off.

Honestly I wish the game didn't punish endurance builds so much. So many things about MWO encourages high alpha, high damage, instant damage and so on. It really makes me sad that they took "double blind" tabletop so literally without looking at the lore until after they made up their own version of the rules. If they did, lasers and autocannons wouldn't have such a huge disparity between one another. Lasers would have the freedom of no ammunition limits. Autocannons would have different versions that can be on par with, slightly better or slightly inferior to lasers, and ultimately be an ideal low heat alternative at the cost of ammunition and moving parts that are easily destroyed (high slot numbers = easier to destroy). The only true instant-damage weapons we'd have then are Gauss Rifles and PPCs. I think the game would be hugely different then, and Victor's meta rigs and my non-meta rigs would both be "normal" with more variety on the field.

One can dream.

[TercieI]

Koniving, on 26 November 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I was being playful.

Truth be told the Shadow Hawks don't really need energy hardpoints and I barely use them. Most of my rigs are heat neutral on regular maps and on the super hot maps I can fire constantly for over a minute before worrying about 'riding' my heat. The endurance really pays off.

Honestly I wish the game didn't punish endurance builds so much. So many things about MWO encourages high alpha, high damage, instant damage and so on. It really makes me sad that they took "double blind" tabletop so literally without looking at the lore until after they made up their own version of the rules. If they did, lasers and autocannons wouldn't have such a huge disparity between one another. Lasers would have the freedom of no ammunition limits. Autocannons would have different versions that can be on par with, slightly better or slightly inferior to lasers, and ultimately be an ideal low heat alternative at the cost of ammunition and moving parts that are easily destroyed (high slot numbers = easier to destroy). The only true instant-damage weapons we'd have then are Gauss Rifles and PPCs. I think the game would be hugely different then, and Victor's meta rigs and my non-meta rigs would both be "normal" with more variety on the field.

One can dream.

I love the thought, but there will always be best answers.

And gamers will always find them.

[Victor Morson]

***** n stuff, on 25 November 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

All of my Centurions, and I have every variant, use the arm hardpoints. Against a lot of the people I routinely fight trying to zombie would be suicide as they're perfectly capable of hitting the CT every time, as am I by the way. Zombie builds work fairly well against average players and newbs but tend to fail spectacularly once that high elo player gets you in their sights, and it's much easier to avoid being cored in 1-2 shots if you have some range, that's why I use ballistics on my cents. ( and PPCs )
The weight of the weapons isn't an issue because if you stay at range most of the time, you can safely use an XL engine big enough to let you reposition before you can be effectively countered.

None of what you just said makes even a little sense. Maybe I'm not following.

Did you seriously just say that arm-mount Centurions are better than zombies against high ELO players? ...what?

Are you actually saying XL Centurion ALs running PPCs are a legitimately good idea?

Edited by Victor Morson, 26 November 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[luxebo]

I think he's saying that it's perfectly fine to put arm mounted weapons and run XL's on Cents, but it really would be a lot tougher to survive like that. I think he's also saying that many just core him to death, in that case, he needs more torso twist. It's much harder to survive either way (putting arm weapons or XL's on Cents) Imho.

[Victor Morson]

luxebo, on 26 November 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

I think he's saying that it's perfectly fine to put arm mounted weapons and run XL's on Cents, but it really would be a lot tougher to survive like that. I think he's also saying that many just core him to death, in that case, he needs more torso twist. It's much harder to survive either way (putting arm weapons or XL's on Cents) Imho.

I think that goes into objective fact and not really opinion, but you are right.

Arm mounted Cents are too easy to cripple, and XL Cents (Other than the 9D, a special case) are pretty easy to bring down. I'm kind of puzzled if he actually meant Zombie Cents are inferior, or if he merely wrote that kinda funny.

[Solkar]

scJazz, on 22 November 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

If a Newb is going to get an Assault then HGN>VTR
If a Newb is going to get a Heavy then CTF-3D>Everything else
If a Newb is going to get a Medium then SHD>Everything else
If a Newb is going to get a Light then ONLY THE MOST IQ LACKING MOUTH BREATHER WOULD GET ANYTHING BUT A JENNER!

The list is the list of the most min/max course. Yeah, Hunchbacks, Spiders, Victors, and Jagermechs might be more immediately useful but none of them will stand the course of time!

I beg to differ on the jenner being king... mostly because with or without hit box changes a spider is far more agile than a jenner, more fun to pilot, and just as effective (and has ECM)...

BUT, that said, the jenner is far better for most people. The spider takes a special type of twichy to play.

[CheeseThief]

For newbie recommendations, I believe the Hunchback is the ultimate learning mech.

The shadowhawk is probably the better mech, with jumpjets and 5 extra tons, but in my experience sitting someone in front of a mech with that many options is a great way to murder their bank balance, because they will sit there fooling with different builds over and over without gaining anything for it.

Also telling people to go use smurphy for builds is all well and good, but if we're advising new players then it is best to remember that they most likely haven't even experienced half the weapons in the game or know what constitutes for a good build when their only hands on is with the trials. Their going to build the {Scrap} mechs and waste c-bills on suboptimal loadouts smurphy or not simply because they don't have the experience with the game to know what works or not.


This is why the hunchback is the ultimate newbie mech.

The hunchback has specific weapon variants to play with, the energy one, the ballistic one, the missile one, so they are actively encouraged to buy more mechs to experiment rather than refitting the same one over and over. This means they unlock elite significantly faster because hunchbacks are so cheap, which leads to the the ever important double basic. They also don't require an XL and perform suitably well stock so new players always have a functional base to fall back on when their first few experimental builds turn out to suck and to top it off, the hunchbacks superior torso twist makes the mech exceptionally easy to drive which is always a good thing.

Hunchbacks are versatile, they can brawl, they can snipe, they can flank, they can boat LRM's, they can be fast, they can be slow, they can durable or they can be squishy and they have decent hitboxes to back it all up. Once a player has screwed around finding out what they like, then they can be properly directed to other mechs and 'meta' builds, but in my mind, before that there should be only Hunchback.

Edited by CheeseThief, 26 November 2013 - 08:45 PM.

[Victor Morson]

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

For newbie recommendations, I believe the Hunchback is the ultimate learning mech.

For the love of God why do people keep saying this?

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

This is why the hunchback is the ultimate newbie mech.

I guess I'm about to find out!

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

The hunchback has specific weapon variants to play with, the energy one, the ballistic one, the missile one, so they are actively encouraged to buy more mechs to experiment rather than refitting the same one over and over. This means they unlock elite significantly faster because hunchbacks are so cheap, which leads to the the ever important double basic.

They are not much cheaper than Shadow Hawks, which also have three very diverse variants, except energy boating. Which is also bad right now.

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

They also don't require an XL and perform suitably well stock so new players always have a functional base to fall back on when their first few experimental builds turn out to suck and to top it off, the hunchbacks superior torso twist makes the mech exceptionally easy to drive which is always a good thing.

Both the recommended Centurion and brawler AC/20 Shawk run standard, not XL, engines.

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

Hunchbacks are versatile, they can brawl, they can snipe, they can flank, they can boat LRM's, they can be fast, they can be slow, they can durable or they can be squishy and they have decent hitboxes to back it all up.

And they do all of this worse than competing 'mechs, as it stands.

The Hunchback is so close to good but it falls short.

PS: It's engine restrictions and it's hunch hitbox are the #1 reasons it's a poorly regarded mech. For further proof of this, note how well the 4SP (which minimizes the problem) performs other variants.

CheeseThief, on 26 November 2013 - 08:34 PM, said:

Once a player has screwed around finding out what they like, then they can be properly directed to other mechs and 'meta' builds, but in my mind, before that there should be only Hunchback.

They can mess around with dozens upon dozens of way to play.. in a better 'mech, too.

Edited by Victor Morson, 26 November 2013 - 09:31 PM.

[Stefan Schneider]

Good thread!
Fully recommended!

Edited by Stefan Schneider, 27 November 2013 - 12:56 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

the Raven 3L is a great mech for newbies too. especially if they stick with the team they can provide ECM cover and assist the team with lights and such.

[Victor Morson]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 27 November 2013 - 01:25 AM, said:

the Raven 3L is a great mech for newbies too. especially if they stick with the team they can provide ECM cover and assist the team with lights and such.

While there's a couple Raven 3Ls that are kind of making a resurgence (2 ER LL builds primarily) I really can't endorse that kind of setup for a newbie.

Sitting with the main group trying to ECM scattering pugs that aren't appreciating it or really using it, while not having the firepower to go seriously toe to toe with other lights (having to focus on the heavies) seems like a terrible "first light 'mech experience."

To top this all off, the other Raven models you need to master to fully max the chassis are horrendous. I don't think many newbies would enjoy grinding a 2X.

I'd mark the Raven down as something to consider once you've gotten deeper into the game, and if you decide you want an ECM Light, by all means consider it. I'm glad the Raven is coming back around. But I absolutely recommend new players to the Jenner as a first pick, without hesitation. Odds are even in the long term if they do pick up a Raven, they'll still want to log way more hours in the Jenner.

Edited by Victor Morson, 27 November 2013 - 01:58 AM.

[Satan n stuff]

Victor Morson, on 26 November 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

None of what you just said makes even a little sense. Maybe I'm not following.

Did you seriously just say that arm-mount Centurions are better than zombies against high ELO players? ...what?

Are you actually saying XL Centurion ALs running PPCs are a legitimately good idea?

Yes, when your opponent can place shots more or less where he wants them you're not going to get much benefit from that damage reduction, and therefore you'll be a lot safer fighting at long range where you're harder to hit and as such not as likely to be cored in two shots. Do you not understand the logic or have you honestly never fought players who can drop a Centurion in 2-3 shots?
I'm probably not the most skilled player, so if I can do this consistently, do you think others can't? Most zombie Centurions I fight last 4-10 seconds when it's just me shooting at them, when they're being focused they usually go down in 1-2 seconds. Against quite a few of the players I often see ingame they die just as fast.

Edit:

luxebo, on 26 November 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

I think he's saying that it's perfectly fine to put arm mounted weapons and run XL's on Cents, but it really would be a lot tougher to survive like that. I think he's also saying that many just core him to death, in that case, he needs more torso twist. It's much harder to survive either way (putting arm weapons or XL's on Cents) Imho.

Not really, it's tougher to brawl with them but that's not really what a medium is supposed to do anyway. As for me possibly not torso twisting enough, I can assure you that isn't a problem with me. It's not a problem for the zombie cents I've killed either, it's just that whenever they stop torso twisting to attempt to shoot me their CT magically takes damage. A lot of good players can hit the CT from most angles, and if you're being focused you're not going to be able to prevent all enemies from getting a good angle. If you're fighting one on one you have no choice but to give them a good angle, because all your weapons are torso mounted.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 27 November 2013 - 06:59 AM.