50 replies to this topic

[Impavid]

Before I ditch my Jenner and invest the time and money into mastering the Firestarter, I thought I'd take the forum temperature. I've done my share of searching and while there are a few early opinions here and there it seems there isn't really a consensus yet. So, for those who have piloted both, is the Firestarter superior to the Jenner?

NOTE: I'm excluding the Ember and Oxide from this comparison. C-bill mechs only.

The pros and cons have been listed up elsewhere but I'll summarize here:

Jenner

Pros:
-Runs the 6ML build cooler than the FS
-SLIGHTLY faster.
-SLIGHTLY better acceleration
-Good pitch for aiming along the y axis.
-Arms usually don't take much damage so armor can be stripped.

Cons:
-Pretty much the whole thing is a center torso. Unable to roll damage well. If you get hit, it's probably in the CT.


Firestarter (Note that I haven't piloted it myself. This is what I've collected from searching the forums)

Pros:
-Rolls damage much better than the Jenner. More durable with arms that can shield.
-Arm motion on the x axis is nice for drive bys
-Can run a solid 5xMLAS, 2xAMS build. (Streaks? What streaks?)

Cons:
-XL295 means one less engine heat sink as well as the obvious slightly slower speed.
-Using the arms to roll damage has its drawbacks. Lose your arms, lose your firepower. (Many people list this as a con, so I have it here. However, I would argue that when the FS loses an arm, the Jenner gets it to the CT. Makes it a benefit more than a drawback IMO.
-Poor pitch. You wont be making many fancy jump shots on enemies below you.


What it seems to come down to is this:

Does the added durability and AMS of the Firestarter outweigh the slightly poorer heat efficiency and poor pitch to make it a better option for the 6MLAS Jenner's role?

Thoughts? Did I miss anything?

[luxebo]

The firestarter is really hard to make use of more medium lasers than the Jenner's 6. Likely going for SL are better for the firestarter. Also, if you have the XL 295 or XL 280 then you can use those engines. Also, it depends on how much you like energy and ballistics vs energy and missiles, plus module slots and convenience with XL 300. You did cover the differences correctly however, so it just comes down to preference.

Edited by luxebo, 26 April 2014 - 08:59 PM.

[Osric Lancaster]

Impavid, on 26 April 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

Thoughts? Did I miss anything?

1 - The hand and arm actuators on the Firestarter actually rob it of space that is very valuable for lights running endo+ferro+jumpjets+anything else.
2 - The Jenner gets a missiles variant, the Firestarter doesn't.
3 - Really Poor pitch. Underline this. Put it in bold. Really, let it sink in.

[Wintersdark]

Osric Lancaster, on 26 April 2014 - 09:11 PM, said:

1 - The hand and arm actuators on the Firestarter actually rob it of space that is very valuable for lights running endo+ferro+jumpjets+anything else.
2 - The Jenner gets a missiles variant, the Firestarter doesn't.
3 - Really Poor pitch. Underline this. Put it in bold. Really, let it sink in.

#3 particularly. It drives me batty in my Ember, that it's so damn hard to get those torso weapons on target for anyone at a higher/lower elevation. And being a short mech to begin with, that means your torso weapons basically only shoot legs.

It's probably the biggest balancing point.

[Tahribator]

You've pretty much nailed it. I would add that the Firestarters also have a slight hitbox problem and it's the legs. They are not as terrible as Raven leg hitboxes, but still easy to hit and it's the easiest way to take down a FS. The shots to the upper torso are spead pretty evenly.

For me, the biggest advantage Jenners have is the ability to mount XL300 and the ability do ferro while still having critical slots to utilize the tonnage.

[xe N on]

Jenner and Firestarter have different strenght and different weaknesses. Ever tried to fight anyone in hilly terrain with a Firestarter?

[Appogee]

I've Mastered both.

Firestarter is the champ.

It has the strengths of the Jenner - speed, JJs - with smaller profile, superior hardpoints, and superior chassis variations.

Sad, but true.

[Modo44]

For pure firepower, both mechs can take 15 DHS with 6 MLs. The Firestarter's arm reach is evened out by its size, and the ease with which those arms go. Neither feels clearly better to me. You can listen to skilled players discuss the merits of different builds.

[xe N on]

Appogee, on 27 April 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

I've Mastered both.

Firestarter is the champ.

It has the strengths of the Jenner - speed, JJs - with smaller profile, superior hardpoints, and superior chassis variations.

Sad, but true.

I would say the opposite. Jenner is much more mobile and needs to reveal much lesser profile because of high mounted hardpoints. The jenner is broader but the Firestarter is much taller than the Jenner.

[Motroid]

Appogee, on 27 April 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

I've Mastered both.

Firestarter is the champ.

It has the strengths of the Jenner - speed, JJs - with smaller profile, superior hardpoints, and superior chassis variations.

Sad, but true.

Jenner profile is MUCH smaller than Firestarters. Firestarters are nearly as big as CDAs.
Jenners are the non-plus-ultra light striker battlemechs in MW:O. Firestarters are doing well but Jenners do better.
Jenners have been OP since CB. Anyway just my 2 c-bills.

[Windsaw]

My concern wasn't so much that it would replace the Jenner but the Commando.
You know, I was mainly a Commando pilot for most of the time and I thought that the Firestarter would have almost everything that the Command has and more.
By now I have finally mastered the Firestarters and have to say that it is much easier to get kills and damage in it. However, I don't thing it has obsoleted the Commando yet. I went back to my Death's Knell and still like playing in it. Because you have to play it differently to play it effectively.
As long as there you can play both effectively and both require different Playstyles I don't think any mech can be called obsolete.

[Clownwarlord]

Answer, yes. It is because the firestarter can survive longer that makes it better. The AMS help prevent lrm damage as well as other missile damage, then you have the ability to roll damage away from your CT, and lastly more armour (not much but more). So with the livability higher then yes it replaces the jenner. As for which on is more competitive in the hands of a pro though it would be the Jenner, because great pilots can make master pieces out of carving up enemy mechs more so then the firestarter.

I hope my opinion helped answer the question.

[Wintersdark]

The commando is faster, and thus is a different animal.

[Arctourus]

I love both, but am leaning towards firestarter. I've always had problems with other lights when running either my jenner or locust variants....no arm movement is what I'm thinking. For some reason I just couldn't aim the dang things right - always spraying fire all over the place when trying to fight an enemy light. The situation has reversed some with the firestarter. There are just few differences in philosophy with them. I have two firestarters...one runs six mlas and a flamer, the other eight slas. Both are incredibly fun. Each is bit slower, but I haven't found that to be a liability. I run xl 255 in each.

[ThatBum42]

I've found that Firestarters lose their arms much more often than Jenners. And yeah, 295 engine cap is important, as is the hand actuators, so you can't build it exactly like the 6xML Jenner.

[ExplodedZombie]

My opinion:

The Jenner is a much more maneuverable run-and-gunner. The Firestarter is a better brawler on equal footing.

I love both. A lot.

Ember > Jenners > Firestarters if I had to choose.

[IraqiWalker]

I've mastered both, and I can safely say that the Jenner is a fun mech to use, however the inability to use the arms sideways, and the fact that you are just one big CT has always been detrimental for it. I can count on one hand the number of deaths I've had where it was because both legs were gone, and fewer still are the deaths where it was my side torso.

The most frustrating thing is that I usually die with all my armor intact on 90% of my mech, except for the front or rear CT.

The firestarter is capable of spreading damage better and has arm movement that is superior to the Jenner. It will be slower if you want to go hardcore builds. (try running 8xML FS9-A, or K). The mech truly shines when using XL275-285, which allows more equipment in it.

Another thing of note, is that the firestarter doesn't need to go 150+Kph to be survivable. I've seen some players strap 2AC5s on them, and still do well while going very slow for a light. The mech can spread damage, and can torso twist rather well.

I'm more biased towards the FS9 over the JR7. Yes, the JR7 is shorter, but the FS9 is just as scary, if not more when you consider the 2xAMS, and the ballistics on the H (since we're not counting the Ember). The JR7 has the ability to use streaks, which immediately improves their potential against lights, however, the FS9 compensates for that with just as much if not more direct firepower and AMS.

Now if we had gotten the FS9-S1, which can mount ECM, I would immediately recommend the Firestarter. As it stands, the FS9 chassis is the ******* child of the JR7 and COM lines put together. It pilots like a commando, but hits like a jenner.

[JonahGrimm]

Both are mastered, and I'll stick with the jenners. Mind you, I'm one of those warped people that runs the Jenner-k instead of the F, and find I like it far more (even owning two chassis, both kitted to different roles).

The key, for me, is that lonely missile hardpoint and the speed - I just can't get the same effectiveness out of a build that's slower, taller, less agile, and with less pitch.

However, I'm going on record as saying neither one is empirically 'better' - the Jenner-K suits me and my playstyle, netting me lots of kills and letting me abuse module slots. I can't do what I do (and enjoy doing) in the firestarter, so it's not for me... and that pretty much seems to sum up the argument either way.

[IraqiWalker]

JonahGrimm, on 10 May 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

Cookies

Well put. That's pretty much the best way to describe it. On both sides.

[Zordicron]

For run and gun, jenner wins. Agility, well if you can manage to shoot while you jump, shoot while you turn, etc etc, jenner is going to allow for more hits. Yes, you can do it on FS9, but the torso weapons, you pretty much cant use during the maneuvers.

The ember, though I realise it isnt in the OP, the 4 mg have their own type of use. I set up my other FS9 with the 2 MG, and a flamer and spl for also situational use, flamer to blind, mg for crit seek, spl just for quick hitting dps.

FS9 is more durable, but because of its hitbox, not because of agility. I find I do more dmg with basics unlocked on jenners in general then FS9, though I tend to pull more shinanigans on FS9 when my team is struggling, like squirrel time or the ever popular "hey guys, watch this" where I pull a pre HSR raven impersonation and blitz through 9 enemy mechs.

on the subject of heros, the ember is a more well rounded light vs the oxide. Ember, play like most the other FS9, whatever works for you. Oxide? Streaks. Look for smaller foes, or use them as team focus fire and distraction on bigger ones, or target big mechs with weak componants to try to disarm. Oxide is the murder train.




Thats the song I sing to myself in my head as I massacre lights and mediums in my Oxide, once the chase begins, and the chainfired streaks start to hit home.

Overall, I prefer jenner, but I learned the ways of crazy acrobat stupid **** playing my 12 jumpjet spider with 2 ML. if you can do 500+ dmg games in one of those things, jenner is like cake mode dmg wise.