166 replies to this topic

[xTrident]

Craig Steele, on 19 February 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

You were pugging solo right and in Alpha lance.

So quid pro your ELO was in the top of the tops for the match yeah? Rounding out an existing 3 man team in Alpha?

And you smashed em.

Mhm, nice job.

I'm not saying its right or wrong, but it's a bit rough to issue a blanket comparison like that if you don't know this guys scenario.

Maybe you could share with him your build and what you did that made your outcome so much better than his, that'd be helpful?

Maybe?

Not to mention the other D-DC on his team in bravo lance that only did 112 damage, no kills and three assists. His screen shot alone shows two very different Atlas scenarios.

[Craig Steele]

Damocles69, on 19 February 2014 - 07:23 AM, said:

Yes the atlas is a bottom tier assault mech. It is really only suppior to the awesome and battle master. The other 3 assault chassis are better than it

4th out of 6th is bottom tier?

I guess third is bronze and then its equal last right?

[Khobai]

I would actually rate them Highlander, Victor, Atlas-D-DC, Misery, Stalker, Battlemaster, other Atlases, Awesome

The high mounted energy weapons on the Stalker/Battlemaster make them better than the other Atlases. But ECM on the D-DC is still too good to ignore. The D-DC is a decent mech, at least until we get hit with tonnage limits. You could make a case for the Battlemaster being better than the Stalker as well but I think the Stalker is slightly better because of its smaller profile.

And yeah a screenshot doesnt prove anything. Look I got 6 kills in a Battlemaster-1S. Does that mean a Battlemaster-1S is better than other Assaults? No. It just means in ONE game I got 6 kills in one. It proves nothing.

Spoiler

Edited by Khobai, 19 February 2014 - 07:44 AM.

[Craig Steele]

xTrident, on 19 February 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Not to mention the other D-DC on his team in bravo lance that only did 112 damage, no kills and three assists. His screen shot alone shows two very different Atlas scenarios.

Mhm, but that doesn't suit the intent of the post. He was making the point that Atlas's were not in any way weak and that pilot skill (ie, being in Alpha lance solo pugging) or build has no bearing on the mechs performance.

It would be great if he could let us know his build / tactics so we can all post similar outcomes from our Atlas matches.

[Prezimonto]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 February 2014 - 03:56 AM, said:

Then you are the guy who misses the point.

Your opinion is that Atlases suck.

165 wins and 148 losses does not define sucking. I have killed every type of mech, using every style of play. So if you are getting bad results in an Atlas the fault is not the mech's.

I have a job running a CNC Machining station. It runs between 8 minutes an 2 hours. That give me lots of time to do... other things. So in a round about way, I do get paid to post, cause I rarely am on the forums after I get home.

I wouldn't say atlases suck. In the right hands they're mechs easily capable of being a focal point of a fight long enough for your team to win. Victors and Highlanders are huge weapon platforms, allowing them to dish and take great damage, but they still don't attract team focus the way an atlas can (at least in the level of play I'm at).

The atlas is more the center of a team, the Victor/Highlander are better used as the hammer on the back/sides/edges of the team that crushes the enemy.

It means bad atlas pilots or bad teams that don't rally around an atlas waste that tonnage, where the Victor/Highlander are much more able to affect good outcomes by a solo player.

At least that's the way I see it.

[3rdworld]

Khobai, on 19 February 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

I would actually rate them Highlander, Victor, Atlas-D-DC, Stalker, Battlemaster, other Atlases, Awesome

The high mounted energy weapons on the Stalker/Battlemaster make them better than the other Atlases. But ECM on the D-DC is still too good to ignore. The D-DC is a decent mech, at least until we get hit with tonnage limits. You could make a case for the Battlemaster being better than the Stalker as well but I think the Stalker is slightly better because of its smaller profile.

Decent rankings, the misery is superior to the D-DC though. Right behind the victor.

The misery is probably as close to P2W as this game has actually came.

[xTrident]

Craig Steele, on 19 February 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

Mhm, but that doesn't suit the intent of the post. He was making the point that Atlas's were not in any way weak and that pilot skill (ie, being in Alpha lance solo pugging) or build has no bearing on the mechs performance.

It would be great if he could let us know his build / tactics so we can all post similar outcomes from our Atlas matches.

Not his intent, but it does the OP's. I don't actually own an Atlas, nor have I played one. I know when I'm in my Victor I don't want to run across an Atlas myself, as if the Atlas pilot has half a clue he'll drop me. On the flip side, they are an easy target for all reasons already given. I just found it ironic he posts a screen of a great match from his D-DC that also contains a very poor one from another piloting the D-DC.

[Dawnstealer]

I would say that Victors and Highlanders win the "Pinpoint Damage" jump-snipe meta, for sure, and one-on-one with a ridge in between, either of those in the hands of a competent pilot will down an Atlas pretty quick. But as a part-time Atlas brawler? You get me within that 80m, when all they have are those two AC5s? Either (or both) will be smoking holes in the ground.

Nothing tanks damage like an Atlas.

Like most things in this game, it usually comes down to the player. If you know how to pilot an Atlas, what the strengths and weaknesses are, you'll win more than you lose.

It IS a gigantic target, however, and you have to keep that in mind while stomping around in them.

[Fut]

Steel your Life, on 19 February 2014 - 03:08 AM, said:

The atlas sucks compared to the victor and highlander. Its just really not that great of a mech at all.

why?

My simple answer lies in the nature of this game. This game was based off table top so what they did was double all the hitpoints and keep weapon damage the same. This is an aim based game.
Because when you can easily do 20-30 damage per cycle what good is 60 armor vs 30 if your an easy target? That's why highlanders do so much better than any other mech. It is their ability to distribute damage because they are hard to hit.

Simply its a sad truth armor does not scale with the Atlas to mitigate how easy it is to be hit. It is far better to have a more mobile mech that distributes damage or gets a high percentage of enemy misses then have an easy to hit mech with lots of weapons. If the Atlas had 100 armor in each part center and side torsos maybe just maybe that would make it viable.But it gets 100 center and 60 sides that's nothing 1 mech can easily put 30 damage per cycle where they want when they want on an atlas. Get 2 mechs shooting and an Atlas lasts a few seconds.


To noob scout players the atlas is good because noob scout players cant bring it down fast because they are moving so much they just randomly shoot the atlas. but to those in the know who have a grasp on diff mechs and can control their fire the Atlas is a joke.

Right. Because the Atlas, in it's current state, is a complete piece of shit incapable of doing well on the field.

Quote

vi·a·ble
ˈvīəbəl/
adjective

• 
  
  1. capable of working successfully; feasible.
  "the proposed investment was economically viable"

Is there something in the MWO Terms of Service dictating that people jump to extremes while trying to discuss/comment on Mechs/Weapons/Maps/Game Modes?

Edited by Fut, 19 February 2014 - 07:46 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

The atlas is more the center of a team, the Victor/Highlander are better used as the hammer on the back/sides/edges of the team that crushes the enemy.

I agree they are played differently. But the way Highlanders are played is more conducive to your team winning: doing damage while minimizing damage taken in return is the entire essence of MWO and its what Highlanders are built perfectly for.

The way the Atlas is played just isnt as effective. That might be different if we had role warfare. Because Atlases could function as command mechs and give their teams various command bonuses. And then Atlases and Highlanders *might* be in parity despite their differing playstyles.

Its just one more example of why we need role warfare.

Quote

Nothing tanks damage like an Atlas.

A Highlander with a standard engine can tank damage better than an Atlas because it can use its jumpjets to shield its torso and take damage to its legs instead. Conversely, leg armor doesnt ever really help an Atlas.

Quote

Decent rankings, the misery is superior to the D-DC though. Right behind the victor.

The misery is probably as close to P2W as this game has actually came.

True. Misery is up there too. I dont know if its better than the D-DC, but its definitely better than normal Stalkers.

Edited by Khobai, 19 February 2014 - 07:59 AM.

[El Bandito]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 February 2014 - 04:53 AM, said:

Funny the statistics are on my side as well, 128 wins and 116 losses, So not only does my Atlas live more often than die, it also is on a winning team more than a losing one. So my Statistics seem to trump your math.

Do you play Atlas currently, Joseph? I have 3:1 KDR with my D-DC, but that was back when Highlanders and Victors did not exist and poptarting was limited to the 3D, and the only good light was the 3L. Back then almost all mechs had very limited hardpoints. I am not sure if I can keep the KDR if I play with the D-DC now.

Edited by El Bandito, 19 February 2014 - 07:55 AM.

[Amsro]

Be or Worse then is far too harsh a concept, people will pilot the mech they like and may even make it viable due to their play style.

Mechs don't get bad scores, Pilots do.

[Fuggles]

the devs say that victors and highlanders are "over performing" so only time will tell how they change the chassis or game mechanics to "fix that". nothing however leads a brawl like a DDC atlas. play to the mechs strengths, not try to fit it into the current meta and you will do fine.

ATLAS AS7-D-DC G125 W86 L38 W/L2.26 K173 D55 K/D3.15 Dmg57,679 XP130,042 12:11:03 99% straight pugging

Edited by Fuggles, 19 February 2014 - 08:04 AM.

[Lagster]

Craig Steele, on 19 February 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

You were pugging solo right and in Alpha lance. So quid pro your ELO was in the top of the tops for the match yeah? Rounding out an existing 3 man team in Alpha? And you smashed em. Mhm, nice job. I'm not saying its right or wrong, but it's a bit rough to issue a blanket comparison like that if you don't know this guys scenario. Maybe you could share with him your build and what you did that made your outcome so much better than his, that'd be helpful? Maybe?

It's the standard 2xUAC/5, 2xLLas, 3xSSRM2 build. I wouldn't know if the other 3 dudes in my lance were a 3-man, but it wasn't one of those roflstomp matches and I didn't really make it a point to follow my lance anyway. I've had some success running 2xUAC5, 2xPPC on the D-DC too but I find that boring to play.

To be fair, only the D-DC is any good, but I don't think the Atlas as a whole is THAT bad. You know what's bad? Awesomes are bad. Atlases are okay imho.

[Deathlike]

The biggest change so far to the durability of the Atlas was Paul's hitbox change.

Seriously, I've never seen so many Atlases get their torsos removed at epic speeds (well, more like, faster than the pre-hitbox change) these days.

So, Paul needs to revert part of the change... otherwise the Atlas will continue to suffer.

Although, most bad Atlas deaths are related to poor piloting, but either my ELO is messed up but I keep seeing XL Atlai being fielded. People clearly have not gotten the memo.

[LiGhtningFF13]

... love my Atlas, you only have to know how to use it (correctly )! Never blame the mech, blame the indvidual in this thing.

[CygnusX7]

Sounds like another "I played bad and want a buff" thread.

Atlas is a beast.

[Joseph Mallan]

El Bandito, on 19 February 2014 - 07:53 AM, said:

Do you play Atlas currently, Joseph? I have 3:1 KDR with my D-DC, but that was back when Highlanders and Victors did not exist and poptarting was limited to the 3D, and the only good light was the 3L. Back then almost all mechs had very limited hardpoints. I am not sure if I can keep the KDR if I play with the D-DC now.

Either a (F)Atlas or my Shiny new, not as great as I remember it, ALL energy Battlemaster-1G!

Prezimonto, on 19 February 2014 - 07:33 AM, said:

I wouldn't say atlases suck. In the right hands they're mechs easily capable of being a focal point of a fight long enough for your team to win. Victors and Highlanders are huge weapon platforms, allowing them to dish and take great damage, but they still don't attract team focus the way an atlas can (at least in the level of play I'm at).

The atlas is more the center of a team, the Victor/Highlander are better used as the hammer on the back/sides/edges of the team that crushes the enemy.

It means bad atlas pilots or bad teams that don't rally around an atlas waste that tonnage, where the Victor/Highlander are much more able to affect good outcomes by a solo player.

At least that's the way I see it.

That actually sounds quite reasonable.

[nemesis271989]

NextGame, on 19 February 2014 - 05:01 AM, said:

Atlas is alright if you use it properly, but its more of a giant punching bag these days when compared with the current handful of popular ballistics heavies & jump assault variants.

It has certainly slipped down the food chain a bit.

ATLAS is NOT alright because 2 alpha hits or in some cases 1 with 2xPPC+2xAC combination simply disarms an Atlas.
No torso rotation no ECM helps against direct fire weapons.
And what can you do in an ATLAS when lost more than half of your weaponry?

[Joseph Mallan]

nemesis271989, on 19 February 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

ATLAS is NOT alright because 2 alpha hits or in some cases 1 with 2xPPC+2xAC combination simply disarms an Atlas.
No torso rotation no ECM helps against direct fire weapons.
And what can you do in an ATLAS when lost more than half of your weaponry?

30 points of armor out of 64 frontal on a side give or take. Its the convergence that make our Mechs seem fragile. On TT a 30 point alpha from a Warhawk was a scary thing thanks to the CTC. Here we don't need to give up that 5-7 tons to have pin point fire.

The Alas is fine convergence needs work though.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 19 February 2014 - 10:51 AM.