36 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Fut, on 12 March 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

C'mon, MWDA wasn't that bad. A little simplistic in the rules, but they released all sorts of support units for the Mechs; infantry, powersuits,tanks, hovercraft...etc. It made for some pretty interesting games.

Really didn't like how the Heat worked in that game though - but at least it had more of a robust heatscale than MWO currently has.

Sorry but the idea that a Tank touching my Mechs Base paralyzed my vehicles legs... Yeah... it was that bad!

I won't argue about the heat though.

[Khobai]

Definitely sounds like a bad rule for a game.

But in reality if a tank crashed into a mech, I doubt very much the mech could walk anywhere.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 12 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Definitely sounds like a bad rule for a game.

But in reality if a tank crashed into a mech, I doubt very much the mech could walk anywhere.

Agreed, but this was more like, "Ok my Tank is touching your Mech." Not, "I rammed you." also Infantry could do the same. You could not fire at enemy forces if you were swarmed. I follow the logic to a point but... NO!

[Trauglodyte]

MustrumRidcully, on 12 March 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

Checks and balances are agreat concept, but it's not executed in MW:O

The check and balance for increased firing arcs would be the price of that crit for the lower arm actuator.

But instead, it is punishing you, because you don't neccessarily get a firing arc advantage compared to mechs without it, and you definitely will have low slung weapons that force you to expose yourself.

The only advantage that you can hope for with arms is that they can move a bit faster, making it theoretically easier to track a close, fast moving target. Except that the mechanics of the arm-torso lock mean that you can bypass some of that speed advantage, too.

Bobzilla, on 12 March 2014 - 06:07 AM, said:

Slots being used in your arms for the same arc is a negative, there is no balance, if there was an increased arc for arms it would be equal.

Being able to turn your torso slightly away from an enemy while shooting just puts your weapons at risk and then your left with no weapons, or weapons that have less of an arc. Also if you can twist your torso further, you can mitiage damage better.

So without the slots they are equal. But taking up slots for the same performance is a negative.

This is both true and not true.

If you're arguing that you can put all of your weapons in a greater arc without arms than you can with, then you are correct. And, in that case, you are penalized for having actuators. That is, assuming of course, you're running a mech with arms where most of your weapons are NOT in your arms.

On the flip side, though, if you're running something like a Victor (non-Dragon Slayer or 9S), then you're actually working at an advantage. I'll put it all below:

Jenner/Raven
120 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
144 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Firestarter
100 degree torso twist w/ 25 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
120 degree torso twist w/ 32.5 degree arm angle (double efficiences)

Catapult
120 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
144 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Jaeger
90/100/110 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
108/120/132 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Thunderbolt
90 degree torso twist w/ 20 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
108 degree torso twist w/ 26 degree arm angle (double efficiences)

Stalker
85/60 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
102/72 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Battlemaster
80/60 degree torso twist w/ 30 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
96/72 degree torso twist w/ 39 degree arm angle (double effiences)

Again, you can argue that the lack of arm actuators gives these mechs the advantage because they can put all of their weapons on the target at a wider angle from center to side. But, they're also extremely exposed in doing so. Depending on hit boxes for specific mechs (some have torsos that are just larger than others), using Free Look can allow you to put damage on target without putting your torsos at risk. And, as I've already said, you can put shots under arms when there aren't actuators where as you can't really do that without extreme marksmanship on mechs that do have actuators. The funny thing is that the see what you shoot nature of the Jenner, Raven, Catapult, Jager, and Stalker isn't really that much of an advantage over the Thunderbolt SS or the various Battlmaster builds as both have extremely high weapon hardpoints which allows them to do the same in limited fashion.

There are pros and cons to both and a lot of it is based on the situation at hand at that moment in time. The Stalker will always be better than the Battlemaster at ridge humping but it is just as susceptable to getting hammered on open ground (its CT is crazy thin and hasn't been redone, to my knowledge). And the Jenner, Raven, and Catapult have some of the easiest to hit Center Torsos, even from the side, which puts them at a disadvantage all of the time.

As with everything, this is an arguement with no real truth because it is all about perspective.

[Bobzilla]

Trauglodyte, on 12 March 2014 - 09:52 AM, said:

This is both true and not true.

If you're arguing that you can put all of your weapons in a greater arc without arms than you can with, then you are correct. And, in that case, you are penalized for having actuators. That is, assuming of course, you're running a mech with arms where most of your weapons are NOT in your arms.

On the flip side, though, if you're running something like a Victor (non-Dragon Slayer or 9S), then you're actually working at an advantage. I'll put it all below:

Jenner/Raven
120 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
144 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Firestarter
100 degree torso twist w/ 25 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
120 degree torso twist w/ 32.5 degree arm angle (double efficiences)

Catapult
120 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
144 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Jaeger
90/100/110 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
108/120/132 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Thunderbolt
90 degree torso twist w/ 20 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
108 degree torso twist w/ 26 degree arm angle (double efficiences)

Stalker
85/60 degree torso twist (no efficiences)
102/72 degree torso twist (double efficiences)

Battlemaster
80/60 degree torso twist w/ 30 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
96/72 degree torso twist w/ 39 degree arm angle (double effiences)

Again, you can argue that the lack of arm actuators gives these mechs the advantage because they can put all of their weapons on the target at a wider angle from center to side. But, they're also extremely exposed in doing so. Depending on hit boxes for specific mechs (some have torsos that are just larger than others), using Free Look can allow you to put damage on target without putting your torsos at risk. And, as I've already said, you can put shots under arms when there aren't actuators where as you can't really do that without extreme marksmanship on mechs that do have actuators. The funny thing is that the see what you shoot nature of the Jenner, Raven, Catapult, Jager, and Stalker isn't really that much of an advantage over the Thunderbolt SS or the various Battlmaster builds as both have extremely high weapon hardpoints which allows them to do the same in limited fashion.

There are pros and cons to both and a lot of it is based on the situation at hand at that moment in time. The Stalker will always be better than the Battlemaster at ridge humping but it is just as susceptable to getting hammered on open ground (its CT is crazy thin and hasn't been redone, to my knowledge). And the Jenner, Raven, and Catapult have some of the easiest to hit Center Torsos, even from the side, which puts them at a disadvantage all of the time.

As with everything, this is an arguement with no real truth because it is all about perspective.

My point was, having arms with your weapons that can mitigate damage from your CT because you can expose it less, is not a benifit given your weapons are in there. On top of that, being able to twist your CT farther is better for damage mitigations as you can just twist and move better, i.e. not changing leg direction to where you don't want to head so you can put your side in the enemy line of fire.

[Trauglodyte]

Bobzilla, on 12 March 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

My point was, having arms with your weapons that can mitigate damage from your CT because you can expose it less, is not a benifit given your weapons are in there. On top of that, being able to twist your CT farther is better for damage mitigations as you can just twist and move better, i.e. not changing leg direction to where you don't want to head so you can put your side in the enemy line of fire.

I'm with you. I was just pointing out that the benefits and restrictions of actuators largely come in when they're used and which mech you're using it. There is no amount of arm angle that is ever going to save the Dragon from having that CT get hit.

[Joseph Mallan]

This just hit me!

Arms
vs
Arms

Big difference!

[OneEyed Jack]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 March 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

You actually admit to playing that travesty?

Once, to my shame. In my defense, I had just picked up the game.

[Khobai]

Quote

Again, you can argue that the lack of arm actuators gives these mechs the advantage

Not really. Because streak srms use the arm reticle to lock-on regardless of whether theyre located in your arm or torso. So if you dont have arm actuators its harder to lock-on with streaks. Doesnt quite make sense. Youd think that arm actuators would have absolutely no effect on locking on with streaks. But assaults with arm actuators have a much easier time getting locks.

The best configuration for an assault is arm energy, torso missile, and either arm or torso ballistics. Because then you get lasers and streaks which both use your arm reticle, which is ideal for killing lights, and then you get either arm or torso ballistics which are both fine. Highlander/Victor both have configs like that, so does the Atlas-D-DC, consequently the three best assaults.

Edited by Khobai, 12 March 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[Suko]

Khobai, on 10 March 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

Whats there to fix? The Catapult is already a terrible mech. And you want to nerf it more? lol.

The only problem I have with arms is the fact hand actuators do absolutely nothing. They take up crit slots but give you nothing in return.

I remember when the Catapult was good. It was my favorite mech. T_T

note: my issue is due to its stupidly large CT, not the twist rate/range.

[Deathlike]

Trauglodyte, on 12 March 2014 - 09:52 AM, said:

Thunderbolt
90 degree torso twist w/ 20 degree arm angle (no efficiences)
108 degree torso twist w/ 26 degree arm angle (double efficiences)

Before I even mention why I quote it, arm reflex only increases the speed of the arm movement, not it's actual range (like Twist X does for Torso Twisting - Twist Speed upgrade is the closest thing to Arm Reflex).

The Thunderbolt's high mounted energy hardpoints are only effective IF you can shoot over the hill with JJs. The cockpit location is kind of part of the problem, but it matters a lot if you can't shoot when your firing location can't be cleared effectively (which is the Ember's natural problem, except that has to do with having a lower firing point).

Quote

Again, you can argue that the lack of arm actuators gives these mechs the advantage because they can put all of their weapons on the target at a wider angle from center to side. But, they're also extremely exposed in doing so. Depending on hit boxes for specific mechs (some have torsos that are just larger than others), using Free Look can allow you to put damage on target without putting your torsos at risk. And, as I've already said, you can put shots under arms when there aren't actuators where as you can't really do that without extreme marksmanship on mechs that do have actuators. The funny thing is that the see what you shoot nature of the Jenner, Raven, Catapult, Jager, and Stalker isn't really that much of an advantage over the Thunderbolt SS or the various Battlmaster builds as both have extremely high weapon hardpoints which allows them to do the same in limited fashion.

Torso pitch (or was it yaw) does have an effect on this, so it's not entirely as simple, as explained in my Tbolt example.

A special case that would need to be looked at is the Trebuchet.

It is the only mech that has the BEST torso pitch in the game (35 degrees worth), but the WORST arm yaw as well... assuming you are willing to exclude the AC20 arms of the Victor and Highlander-733C. I don't think the mech needs that much torso pitch (the 7K and the 3C are the only mechs that really benefit, probably the 7K more because of the high side torso weapon place) but the arms are strangely limited compared to the standard fare (20 degrees standard). Having played with mechs that have exceptional arm extensions and agility (Quickdraw-4G), you would be amazed how "inflexible" to some degree that the Trebuchet's arms happen to be.

Quote

There are pros and cons to both and a lot of it is based on the situation at hand at that moment in time. The Stalker will always be better than the Battlemaster at ridge humping but it is just as susceptable to getting hammered on open ground (its CT is crazy thin and hasn't been redone, to my knowledge). And the Jenner, Raven, and Catapult have some of the easiest to hit Center Torsos, even from the side, which puts them at a disadvantage all of the time.

As with everything, this is an arguement with no real truth because it is all about perspective.

It kinda really depends on loadout and usage, which changes the entire perspective of the use of a mech...

Khobai, on 12 March 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

Not really. Because streak srms use the arm reticle to lock-on regardless of whether theyre located in your arm or torso. So if you dont have arm actuators its harder to lock-on with streaks. Doesnt quite make sense. Youd think that arm actuators would have absolutely no effect on locking on with streaks. But assaults with arm actuators have a much easier time getting locks.

The best configuration for an assault is arm energy, torso missile, and either arm or torso ballistics. Because then you get lasers and streaks which both use your arm reticle, which is ideal for killing lights, and then you get either arm or torso ballistics which are both fine. Highlander/Victor both have configs like that, so does the Atlas-D-DC, consequently the three best assaults.

Streaks are the probably the best use of the arm actuators, so they are worth their weight in that sense (well, technically that and LRMs, but then again LRMs are a different story). However, the 2nd actuator (which fills up the another crit in the arm) is probably the most useless/meaningless crit usage as currently constituted.

It used to be back when Streaks were stupidly OP, that the Commando-2D had a few things going for it, because of arm articulation allowing it to be competitive to Raven-3Ls for one aspect (in terms of not having to face the target, so the damage can be spread elsewhere). It didn't always happen, but I sadly have lost said battles before because of that very minute difference. 3Ls were the meta, but the Commando-2D definitely raised some hell.

Edited by Deathlike, 12 March 2014 - 05:45 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Deathlike, on 12 March 2014 - 05:42 PM, said:

It didn't always happen, but I sadly have lost said battles before because of that very minute difference. 3Ls were the meta, but the Commando-2D definitely raised some hell.

Personally, I considered my 2D to be a Raven-Hunter. They were my primary target and generally easy kills. Of course, the perception was probably a bit skewed by the number of no-nothing, skill-less noobs running 3Ls because even they could get kills with them.

[Trauglodyte]

Quote

Before I even mention why I quote it, arm reflex only increases the speed of the arm movement, not it's actual range (like Twist X does for Torso Twisting - Twist Speed upgrade is the closest thing to Arm Reflex).

I'm not going to be able to find the quote from the Dev responsable for it but one of them did come out and say that Arm Reflex also increases the angles for for the arms. I've tried digging for it and can't find it. But, I was certain that one of the efficiencies, even though the text doesn't indicate as such, does increase arm angles. Bleh, I hate when I can't find stuff and/or that I'm wrong. I hate it more that Death is the one that might be proving me wrong.

[Joseph Mallan]

OneEyed Jack, on 12 March 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

Once, to my shame. In my defense, I had just picked up the game.

I remember when the MW:DA forums began... Talk about a Hostile environment!

[Deathlike]

Trauglodyte, on 14 March 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

I'm not going to be able to find the quote from the Dev responsable for it but one of them did come out and say that Arm Reflex also increases the angles for for the arms. I've tried digging for it and can't find it. But, I was certain that one of the efficiencies, even though the text doesn't indicate as such, does increase arm angles. Bleh, I hate when I can't find stuff and/or that I'm wrong. I hate it more that Death is the one that might be proving me wrong.

I like to put you in your place... out of the underhive. Otherwise, I can't shoot you.

I'm looking for what you're saying, but good key info is lost on these boards (heck, some of them have been asked in the AtDs, and go unanswered).

[Trauglodyte]

Deathlike, on 14 March 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

I like to put you in your place... out of the underhive. Otherwise, I can't shoot you.

I'm looking for what you're saying, but good key info is lost on these boards (heck, some of them have been asked in the AtDs, and go unanswered).

I'm never sure if I want to be in the underhive or not. I mean, it does have cute cat face but I'm unsure if that is enough incentive.

And yes, it is extremely annoying that vital information is unavailable. We don't have a dev post tracker and, even if we did, some of it would have changed through different patches. I often wonder how many people know that Pin Point (tier 2 efficiency) is nothing more than an XP sink as it doesn't do anything thanks to the Beta change (see: removal) to convergence.

[Deathlike]

Trauglodyte, on 14 March 2014 - 10:39 AM, said:

I'm never sure if I want to be in the underhive or not. I mean, it does have cute cat face but I'm unsure if that is enough incentive.

I SUMMON CAT DRIVING UNDERHIVE NAAAAOOOO!

Quote

And yes, it is extremely annoying that vital information is unavailable. We don't have a dev post tracker and, even if we did, some of it would have changed through different patches. I often wonder how many people know that Pin Point (tier 2 efficiency) is nothing more than an XP sink as it doesn't do anything thanks to the Beta change (see: removal) to convergence.

At this point, misinformation or just no information is the norm for arguments being made these days. Gee... a proper AtD would solve this right? Oh wait...