304 replies to this topic

[MavRCK]

The Unknown Pilot, on 20 January 2014 - 03:39 PM, said:

I still love the folks who insist PPC's and AC/20 should have any synergy at 600 meters.....usually because every 'Mech they play has PPC's and usually poptart capable.

I do like the projectile drop idea though, always works with my slower real life bullets anyway. However my Soviet semi-auto with a 100 round drum has yet to jam or suffer ghost heat!

There shouldn't be synergy... totally agree...

As a long-time brawler fan, I'm going to protect and pushing brawling a bit hence my suggestions on the AC10 / 20.

[SnagaDance]

Hey, nice list. Can't really agrue with Awesomes being in the bottom tier, though I think the 8R deserves to be one tier higher than the rest because it makes such a great Missile boat. Maybe just for PUG-matches.

[MavRCK]

Updated -- Week of 21/01/2014 - PATCH NOTES - 1.2.261 - 21-JAN-2014


Youtube limits my videos to 2 hours so it broke the 2.5 hour video into 10 parts! Check out the twitch.tv channel for the full video.

[Bront]

SnagaDance, on 21 January 2014 - 05:53 AM, said:

Hey, nice list. Can't really agrue with Awesomes being in the bottom tier, though I think the 8R deserves to be one tier higher than the rest because it makes such a great Missile boat. Maybe just for PUG-matches.

Battlemaster 1S does the missileboat better, with more tonnage, better speed options, and a better profile/hitboxes. That said, Missileboating isn't why mechs get upgraded in a teir,

[travelbug]

god tier for 3d?

[MavRCK]

travelbug, on 21 January 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

god tier for 3d?

The Urbanmech isn't a heavy-mech.

[SnagaDance]

Bront, on 21 January 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Battlemaster 1S does the missileboat better, with more tonnage, better speed options, and a better profile/hitboxes. That said, Missileboating isn't why mechs get upgraded in a teir,

I'd still say the Awesome is marginally better having 4x15 launch tubes so no broken up salvos. And that 5 ton advantage? Not that much really if you actually want to use that extra speed. And I actually find the hotboxes on the Awesome perfectly fine for an XL missileboat (and for that only) I just don't ever lose those side torsos.
The Awesome might not feature much in competitive teamplay, but the 8R is definately a good min-max build. I guess most people just don't want to go through the pain to actually get it mastered.

[Bront]

SnagaDance, on 23 January 2014 - 01:41 AM, said:

I'd still say the Awesome is marginally better having 4x15 launch tubes so no broken up salvos. And that 5 ton advantage? Not that much really if you actually want to use that extra speed. And I actually find the hotboxes on the Awesome perfectly fine for an XL missileboat (and for that only) I just don't ever lose those side torsos.
The Awesome might not feature much in competitive teamplay, but the 8R is definately a good min-max build. I guess most people just don't want to go through the pain to actually get it mastered.

If you go 4x15, then yes. But 2x15+2x10 works quite well too, is more ammo efficient, and lets you alpha with less heat issues if you choose to alpha. I also like the high mount on the TAG.

It's a marginal difference though, so it might simply come down to preference. The 1S can be used for things beyond just a missile boat effectively though,

[MavRCK]

Hmmm.. good discussion.. I'm making notes for future reference. Thanks.

[IraqiWalker]

God, we're back to this scrap storm again. This tier list is still the most flawed thing on this side of deep-fried ice cream.

What are these mechs tiered for? What roles? You can't just lump all light mechs in like that. For instance if you want scouting you NEVER take a jenner, while they can scout, they are absolutely awful at it. The whole point of scouting is to feed information to your team about the enemy location and composition. You can't do that when the enemy has a lock on you (due to lack of ECM) and raining fire on you.

On the other hand the Jenner is an exceptional gun boat, it is great for brawling, light hunting and assassination or drive-by hits during a large brawl.


The reason I don't see this list helping in competitive play is that 12 comps actually rely on the mechs to fulfill specific roles. Damage isn't the only way a mech contributes to the fight. So if I needed a light mech to be a scout and not a gunboat I would pick the Spider 5D, or the Raven 3L, or the COM2D. No the Jenner, on the other hand if it looks like we want to brawl, then yeah I'll go jenners.

If I wanted my mediums to be brawlers I'd pick Centurions over Shadowhawks and Hunchies (except 4SP), if I wanted fire support mediums I'd go for Shadowhawks, if I wanted escorts and satellites I'd go for the hunchies.

That's why this list is flawed in my opinion, it only measures firepower, which competitive teams care less about. They care more about getting things done in an optimal manner.

Role warfare is the main facet of this game, and it really comes into play in competitive 12 comps.

[MavRCK]

IraqiWalker, on 23 January 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:

[blah troll blah troll didn't watch videos blah didn't read all the posts troll blah didn't watch videos blah troll argh anger blah blah]

hi Shrek! Gosh - I'm so proud to have celebrities following my tier list!

Edited by MavRCK, 23 January 2014 - 03:13 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

MavRCK, on 23 January 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

hi Shrek! Gosh - I'm so proud to have celebrities following my tier list!

Wow, you really think I'm trolling here? The reason I posted that rant is because this list is flawed.

I watched some of the videos. The problem is still the same. Your list is based only on damage potential, not actual role warfare.

My suggestions aren't just opinions or theories. I have designed multiple builds for every mech in the game. I'm not someone who's just mouthing off without comprehension.

It makes things worse that this list is placed in the New Player Help section as well. Considering that it is unhelpful to new players. Who definitely can't get competitive right off the bat.

I'm glad that you choose to just ignore criticism towards your list, instead of improving it. Good job.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 23 January 2014 - 03:27 PM.

[MavRCK]

IraqiWalker, on 23 January 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

"rant"

You're "ranting" and being a troll. The list explains the value of all mechs and what roles they are suited for and why. Please stop posting here.

Edited by MavRCK, 23 January 2014 - 03:29 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

MavRCK, on 23 January 2014 - 03:28 PM, said:

You're "ranting" and being a troll. The list explains the value of all mechs and what roles they are suited for and why. Please stop posting here.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm a troll. Are you sure you comprehend the word's meaning?

I also am telling you it doesn't talk about role warfare appropriately. It's lacking in that regard. You mention roles that the modules are good for, but nothing about where which mech excels. Look at your list again, and double check.

You'd need to be more in-depth to explain what mechs are better at. Instead you have the ranking based on "In order of ability to influence a match - Best to Worst" which is ambiguous at best, and flat out confusing at worst.

[MavRCK]

IraqiWalker, on 23 January 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm a troll. Are you sure you comprehend the word's meaning?

I also am telling you it doesn't talk about role warfare appropriately. It's lacking in that regard. You mention roles that the modules are good for, but nothing about where which mech excels. Look at your list again, and double check.

You'd need to be more in-depth to explain what mechs are better at. Instead you have the ranking based on "In order of ability to influence a match - Best to Worst" which is ambiguous at best, and flat out confusing at worst.

You're trolling because you're refusing to acknowledge that the list does what you say -- it's just not your cup of tea.. so instead of agreeing to disagree and SHUT UP -- you post over and over and over again. Just because you don't like something, don't like the way it's portrayed, don't understand what something is expressing, et cetera doesn't mean you have the right to, need to, should continue to shout and scream and throw a temper tantrum in someone else's face.

So often just being patient and listening will permit exactly what answer you're searching for to appear.

So yes, you're a troll and a great example of the malady of these forums.

Edited by MavRCK, 23 January 2014 - 03:50 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

IraqiWalker, on 23 January 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm a troll

Just because you disagree with it doesn't mean it is wrong either
There is a lot I disagree with in the list - but the way it is phrased and the way the game runs, it is a very useful resource for the average human, and by extension, player.

On the other hand, whether you meant to troll or not, the way you phrased it was rather trollish.

[IraqiWalker]

MavRCK, on 23 January 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

You're trolling because you're refusing to acknowledge that the list does what you say -- it's just not your cup of tea.. so instead of agreeing to disagree and SHUT UP -- you post over and over and over again.

So yes, you're a troll and a great example of the malady of these forums.

Wow, thank you very much for having one of the largest cases of narcissism this side of Napoleon.

You post a list, I raise critique for it, you ignore it and say no, it does what I am asking for, even though I'm telling you it doesn't.

Do you see what's going on here? It's literally /that/ simple.

All I was trying to do was help you improve the list by showing you where it was lacking, and instead you just call me a troll.

Shar Wolf, on 23 January 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

Just because you disagree with it doesn't mean it is wrong either
[----]
On the other hand, whether you meant to troll or not, the way you phrased it was rather trollish.

I'm not disagreeing with the list, I'm saying it's incomplete and flawed. There's a difference there. I'm disagreeing with him saying that it isn't incomplete.

Also, thank you for the mediation Shar, I did not intend to sound trollish. I am being serious about this.

[mack sabbath]

Quick question.

I see this thread discusses two distinct groupings of builds: solo/pugging & competitive 12 man drops.

For the "solo" part of it in a crappy ELO, does this Stalker F build seem okay? I have them mastered, but haven't played them in almost 9 months. The build looks hot until you either discount the streaks at range, and discount or chain fire the big guns up close.

Thanks!

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...50586abe340875b

[Capfailboat]

Iraqi what corps are you with? Do they accept this as the bible of what is good and what isn't in their 12m comps? How often in a week do you play in competitive comps? I think your perspective on this list is a bit off.

Die Primate Die, on 23 January 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

Quick question.

I see this thread discusses two distinct groupings of builds: solo/pugging & competitive 12 man drops.

For the "solo" part of it in a crappy ELO, does this Stalker F build seem okay? I have them mastered, but haven't played them in almost 9 months. The build looks hot until you either discount the streaks at range, and discount or chain fire the big guns up close.

Thanks!

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...50586abe340875b

Prolly drop the ER's for regular large. This will help with heat. The 3F is a solid choice for the talker chassis, it has the greatest turning radius.

[travelbug]

still the best list around.

you may have your own personal preferences, but i feel this list does reflect the community's general sentiments on mech viability as a whole.

good job mav!