304 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

SnowdogJJJ, on 28 December 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Get list for new players.. at least they are not starting with a mech that is sub par, like I did.
I just got my grand daughter (4 yrs) the shadow hawk to start with.

Thanks again Mavrck for updating this.

I wouldn't normally recommend a 3 AC/2 Shadow Hawk but if you're having your grand daughter play, you might consider setting that one up. Lots of dakka and sound, alright damage (even if it's not the best setup for experienced players), and super easy to use: Just point at the target and click away.

Definitely worth a look and would probably be a lot of fun.

Plus it'll let her steal kills all the time even through luck just due to refire, which I'm sure would go over well.

PS: I bet she unironically is harder to kill than a lot of pugs if you set her up in something fast - faster more wild torso movements = a really good way to stay alive, and it's something I suspect kids are prone to doing. A lot of older lesser experienced pilots tend to hold their torsos in the direction they are moving all the time by contrast.

Edited by Victor Morson, 28 December 2013 - 01:51 PM.

[luxebo]

SnowdogJJJ, on 28 December 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

I meant to type "GREAT LIST". Damned auto correct
MavRCK runs with 2 ac5's and an erPPC so 2 weapons groups should work for most noobs that come to my house to play.

I know, yeah auto correct is sometimes stupid.

Maybe you can run that but I think you may want to link the groups together or something. Triple AC2s or Streaks only (no lasers) could be considered. Maybe AC20 only as well.

[mack sabbath]

MavRCK, in considering my build for a S Hawk, I watched (among many others), your video here: http://www.twitch.tv...rck/b/471731435

The closest I could approximate your builds, I came up with these. It worries me a bit, mostly pugging, only having one JJ and missing so much armor. If my builds are accurate, any preference & advice between the two chassis?

Thanks in advance.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0e2f9b55d1a85b2
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f73e4d3e4615a76


***edited, as usual for typos!

Edited by Die Primate Die, 28 December 2013 - 02:09 PM.

[Victor Morson]

You got the 2x AC/5 build pretty much right; I'd take a few more points out of the (worthless) arm to max the legs though.

Edited by Victor Morson, 28 December 2013 - 02:13 PM.

[MavRCK]

Die Primate Die, on 28 December 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

MavRCK, in considering my build for a S Hawk, I watched (among many others), your video here: http://www.twitch.tv...rck/b/471731435

The closest I could approximate your builds, I came up with these. It worries me a bit, mostly pugging, only having one JJ and missing so much armor. If my builds are accurate, any preference & advice between the two chassis?

Thanks in advance.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0e2f9b55d1a85b2
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f73e4d3e4615a76


***edited, as usual for typos!

Can you use a smaller XL engine? The difference in speed is negliable and then you can add JJs or an extra heatsink. If you only have 1 AC5 then 2 tons of AC5 ammo for pugging is enough. And definitely drop that arm down to 10 armor and use the weight for an extra JJ or engine etc!

[mack sabbath]

MavRCK, on 28 December 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

Can you use a smaller XL engine? The difference in speed is negliable and then you can add JJs or an extra heatsink. If you only have 1 AC5 then 2 tons of AC5 ammo for pugging is enough. And definitely drop that arm down to 10 armor and use the weight for an extra JJ or engine etc!

Thanks!

I had considered the 255, but was afraid, after eliting my 92kph Hunchbacks, I'd feel slow or clunky. Glad to hear it's not that noticable.

Thanks again!

*** This about right then?

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...01b0d1d0ce26cc7 or maybe:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...5edcfc8a27c9df6

Edited by Die Primate Die, 28 December 2013 - 08:05 PM.

[MavRCK]

Yup.. the first one is what I use -- something I drop the heatsink for pugging so i have more ammo!

[BLOOD WOLF]

for competitive and pugging i use any build i want and still can do exceptional. why? because of teamwork

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 December 2013 - 03:14 AM.

[MavRCK]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 December 2013 - 03:13 AM, said:

for competitive and pugging i use any build i want and still can do exceptional. why? because of teamwork

I say the same thing when I head to the bar with my buddies and hit on girls. They say my sequin leather pants are tier 3, but I disagree - they are god tier imo.

[Bront]

MavRCK, on 30 December 2013 - 05:59 PM, said:

I say the same thing when I head to the bar with my buddies and hit on girls. They say my sequin leather pants are tier 3, but I disagree - they are god tier imo.

They do complement the phoenix package nicely.

[MavRCK]

I hope PGI releases the cbill version of the Saber Package -- I'd like to play with them and add to the list with in-game experience instead of just theory-crafting for now.

[Bagheera]

MavRCK, on 10 January 2014 - 11:17 PM, said:

I hope PGI releases the cbill version of the Saber Package -- I'd like to play with them and add to the list with in-game experience instead of just theory-crafting for now.

Theoretically they should be the next releases after the BLR in Feb.



Theoretically.

[MavRCK]

Notes: Add Boar's Head (Tier 2) -- Griffin / Wolverine

[luxebo]

Griffin in Feb Wolverine in March iirc. If not, then it's the other way.

[MavRCK]

I'll have to theorycraft and add the Griffin / Wolverine... the Boar's Head was severely nerfed by the AC20 change.

I wished PGI had talked to me before they did the AC20 change.. I could have given them 2-3 alternatives to nerfing the AC20 and consequently all mechs with only 1 ballistic slot which are capable of using an AC20.



If PGI was doing 2 mech releases per month, we would have them sooner. xFingers.. I really want to try the non-phoenix versions and see if I can find some viable builds.

My videos already have multiple discussions of the Griffin / Wolverine. I'll have a new video and list up soon.

Edited by MavRCK, 17 January 2014 - 04:52 PM.

[SnowdogJJJ]

Communication is one of the keys to succes, in game, and in life. To bad so many companies seem to forget that in place of profit but either way the game (after 6 months) is still a lot of fun and balanced

[Bront]

MavRCK, on 17 January 2014 - 04:47 PM, said:

the Boar's Head was severely nerfed by the AC20 change.

I wished PGI had talked to me before they did the AC20 change.. I could have given them 2-3 alternatives to nerfing the AC20 and consequently all mechs with only 1 ballistic slot which are capable of using an AC20.

Nerfed so much it's not even listed on your charts!

The AC20 needed the nerf. It's not a huge impact till you get past 400 meters, after which the AC20 isn't supposed to be that effective anyway. It's still quite usable and quite deadly though.

SnowdogJJJ, on 18 January 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

either way the game (after 6 months) is still a lot of fun and balanced

Fun? yes.

Balanced? It's better than it's been, but it's hardly balanced. There is a huge disparity between several of the mechs on the tier 1 and tier 3 on this list. Some due to hitbox or size issues, some due to loadout issues, and tonnage balancing isn't the end all be all savior to make up for this.

Ballistics are still king, and will be until something is done about the heat system and/or that makes energy weapons better.

I still see an ROF nerf for AC5 and AC2s coming though, which will help a bit.

[luxebo]

Bront, on 18 January 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

The AC20 needed the nerf. It's not a huge impact till you get past 400 meters, after which the AC20 isn't supposed to be that effective anyway. It's still quite usable and quite deadly though.

Agreed by far. AC10 was nerfed slightly, though it's still viable mid-range. AC20 was nerfed pretty largely, but it still works perfect in brawls. It needed a nerf, but this one was sorta meh to counter mid-range firing of AC20 to desync with dual ppc single ac20 builds.

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 18 January 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

Agreed by far. AC10 was nerfed slightly, though it's still viable mid-range. AC20 was nerfed pretty largely, but it still works perfect in brawls. It needed a nerf, but this one was sorta meh to counter mid-range firing of AC20 to desync with dual ppc single ac20 builds.

I think the AC20 speed nerf to 650 wasn't a good choice -- an alternative would have been to made the speed 800 or 900 with an increased in AC20 projectile drop. Consequently, at long ranges the AC20 is desync'd from PPC shots and at short to medium ranges, the increase speed allows for more consistent hits. Furthermore, as the hit registry issues with the servers seems to affect disproportionately more the slower weapon projectile speeds ie SRMs and now AC20, we could avoid this issue at the same time.

FINALLY, by increasing projectile drop on the AC20 we would have a new functionality - skill to use: being able to aim over the top of boxes / buildings and "drop" the projectile onto mechs behind the obstacle.



I know what you're thinking.. it's true.

[The Unknown Pilot]

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!

Edited by The Unknown Pilot, 20 January 2014 - 03:39 PM.