624 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

P.S. Space availability is also an issue in a Brawler Atlas build - my own AC/20 Brawler literally cannot downgrade from its 350 to a 340 STD engine - it does not have the critical space to use the tonnage saved.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Void Angel, on 15 May 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

P.S. Space availability is also an issue in a Brawler Atlas build - my own AC/20 Brawler literally cannot downgrade from its 350 to a 340 STD engine - it does not have the critical space to use the tonnage saved.

Yeah - but that is an issue for a different set of issues.

[Void Angel]

They're all interlinked - it all comes back to limiting factors on your build. Lights are most often weight-limited before anything else, while the Atlas generally has the tonnage to fill out its hardpoints how it wants, and runs into space limitations. There are exceptions, of course - using weight intensive weapons like LRM launchers or the Gauss Rifle, for example, but it all flows from the same set of design dynamics.

[Alaskan Nobody]

True - I remember being so irritated back playing MW2 when I realized I couldn't stuff the Assaults full of all the "good" stuff like Endo and Ferro (and that was CLAN Endo and Ferro! )

[ReXspec]

Void Angel, on 15 May 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

P.S. Space availability is also an issue in a Brawler Atlas build - my own AC/20 Brawler literally cannot downgrade from its 350 to a 340 STD engine - it does not have the critical space to use the tonnage saved.

Here are the issues I find with that Brawler:

Pros: Speed - You could definitely move faster then my Atlas, and get in better positioning, but I could still keep a good sight picture on you.

Cons: Armor distribution - Your back on the left and right torso's are fine, but having greater then 25 armor on the back of the CT is... unnecessary in my opinion. With 20 - 25 armor on the back, you can already survive multiple shots from some of the more powerful weapon systems. By lowering your armor quotient down to around 80 on your front, however, all it takes to expose your guts (if not completely murder you) are two or three alpha strikes from both "Reacher" and "Brawler."

Ammo distribution - Putting ammo in your legs is a bad idea--regardless of how much armor you have to protect that stockpile. Especially in the case of AC/20 rounds. I could tell you that if I saw this build, and if your leg armor was more vulnerable then your chest, I would take out your legs and cook off your ammo with my machine gun. Explosion in legs + adjacent CT = dead (or severely wounded) atlas.

Armament - Your atlas seems somewhat underarmed (or not as heavily armed as it could be). The AC/20 is a nice touch, but the SRM 6's are... questionable (to say the least) because the hit detection on dumb-fired SRMs is shotty. Streak SRMs suffer the same issue, but to a lesser degree. The purpose of the LRM 20 on my brawler is to soften opponents up at range, then, once I've closed the distance, to slam them with my 50+ damage alpha. The purpose of the streaks are to act as a "kicker" weapon to that alpha and scare off any lights that attempt to get close.

If you suffer from the problem of excess critical space, put in weapons that have a higher crit-to-weight ratio. That is why I have the Large Pulse Laser in my Atlases (Atlai?) because they are relatively light weapons, but they take a comfortable amount of crit space.

Edited by ReXspec, 15 May 2014 - 02:44 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

You realize, armor and ammo distributions are not usually shared exactly through Smurfy?

Gotta keep some stuff from spreading too much.

(that or we get lazy rebuilding it too share )


Edit: two/to/too of DOOM

Edited by Shar Wolf, 15 May 2014 - 02:15 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

Here are the issues I find with that Brawler:

Pros: Speed - You could definitely move faster then my Atlas, and get in better positioning, but I could still keep a good sight picture on you.

Cons: Armor distribution - Your back on the left and right torso's are fine, but having greater then 25 armor on the back of the CT is... unnecessary in my opinion. With 20 - 25 armor on the back, you can already survive multiple shots from some of the more powerful weapon systems. By lowering your armor quotient down to around 80 on your front, however, all it takes to expose your guts (if not completely murder you) are two or three alpha strikes from both "Reacher" and "Brawler."

Ammo distribution - Putting ammo in your legs is a bad idea--regardless of how much armor you have to protect that stockpile. Especially in the case of AC/20 rounds. I could tell you that if I saw this build, and if your leg armor was more vulnerable then your chest, I would take out your legs and cook off your ammo with my machine gun. Explosion in legs + adjacent CT = dead (or severely wounded) atlas.

Armament - Your atlas seems somewhat underarmed (or not as heavily armed as it could be). The AC/20 is a nice touch, but the SRM 6's are... questionable (to say the least) because the hit detection on dumb-fired SRMs is shotty. Streak SRMs suffer the same issue, but to a lesser degree. The purpose of the LRM 20 on my brawler is to soften opponents up at range, then, once I've closed the distance, to slam them with my 50+ damage alpha. The purpose of the streaks are to act as a "kicker" weapon to that alpha and scare off any lights that attempt to get close.

If your suffer from the problem of excess critical space, put in weapons that have a higher crit-to-weight ratio. That is why I have the Large Pulse Laser in my Atlases (Atlai?) because they are relatively light weapons, but they take a comfortable amount of crit space.

Gotta point out a couple things you're mistaken on here.

Ammo explosions in the legs chain through the side torsos and then into the center. Despite the fact that you don't lose the leg if you lose the side torso. Also, pretty much all ammo is about the same degree of destructive to the 'mech. One full tonne of AC/20 ammo going up deals AC/20*7shots=140 damage. One full tonne of LRMs is 180 missles for 180 damage, a full tonne of SRMs is 100 missiles *2 damage per missile = 200 damage, and so on. If a tonne of ammo explodes, all remaining shots in that entire location explode for the full damage of all remaining shots- even if they're for different weapon systems.

SRM hit detection wooblieness is dependent entirely (at current) on the number of missiles hitting the target simultaneously. If he's chain-firing those SRM racks, he's not likely to 'lose' more than one missile per volley, and even one missile is extremely unusual on a single SRM-6 volley. (Why this doesn't affect LB 10-X and LRM shots, I'm not sure, I imagine it has to do with the fact that SRMs are treated as a 'splash' weapon with a 'splash' radius of 0, since that's the distinguishing factor between an SRM projectile and any other projectile).

Finally, I'd just like to mention that firepower rating is next to useless. The firepower number is the total of all damage you would deal if you fired every weapon once at optimal range and all of them hit for full damage (except for LRMs for some reason though I'm not sure the exact proportion there, and machine guns + flamers which I don't even know what value they're being assigned). It also doesn't take into account weapon firing rates. Thus, particularly with a 'mech like your 'Reacher', where the LRMs are very difficult to use within the medium laser's optimal range and impossible to use at machine gun range, your 'Firepower' is not representative of the capabilities of your 'mech.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 15 May 2014 - 02:24 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

(Why this doesn't affect LB 10-X and LRM shots, I'm not sure, I imagine it has to do with the fact that SRMs are treated as a 'splash' weapon with a 'splash' radius of 0, since that's the distinguishing factor between an SRM projectile and any other projectile).

LRM are also splash weapons - which was part of the cause of the true LRMaggeddon.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

LRM are also splash weapons - which was part of the cause of the true LRMaggeddon.

Can you point me at the info detailing this? I haven't seen anything official or pulled from data anywhere that actually indicates there is a splash weapon other than SRMs. Not saying you're wrong, mind, but I'm kind of surprised it hadn't been previously brought up somewhere I would have seen it.

[ReXspec]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

Gotta point out a couple things you're mistaken on here.

Ammo explosions in the legs chain through the side torsos and then into the center. Despite the fact that you don't lose the leg if you lose the side torso. Also, pretty much all ammo is about the same degree of destructive to the 'mech. One full tonne of AC/20 ammo going up deals AC/20*7shots=140 damage. One full tonne of LRMs is 180 missles for 180 damage, a full tonne of SRMs is 100 missiles *2 damage per missile = 200 damage, and so on. If a tonne of ammo explodes, all remaining shots in that entire location explode for the full damage of all remaining shots- even if they're for different weapon systems.

That's news to me. I was under the impression the legs were chained to the CT. Not the side torso.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

SRM hit detection wooblieness is dependent entirely (at current) on the number of missiles hitting the target simultaneously. If he's chain-firing those SRM racks, he's not likely to 'lose' more than one missile per volley, and even one missile is extremely unusual on a single SRM-6 volley. (Why this doesn't affect LB 10-X and LRM shots, I'm not sure, I imagine it has to do with the fact that SRMs are treated as a 'splash' weapon with a 'splash' radius of 0, since that's the distinguishing factor between an SRM projectile and any other projectile).

Right. I was making the point that SRMs are NOT as consistent as some of the other weapon systems for those very reasons.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

Finally, I'd just like to mention that firepower rating is next to useless. The firepower number is the total of all damage you would deal if you fired every weapon once at optimal range and all of them hit for full damage (except for LRMs for some reason though I'm not sure the exact proportion there, and machine guns + flamers which I don't even know what value they're being assigned). It also doesn't take into account weapon firing rates. Thus, particularly with a 'mech like your 'Reacher', where the LRMs are very difficult to use within the medium laser's optimal range and impossible to use at machine gun range, your 'Firepower' is not representative of the capabilities of your 'mech.

Considering the weapons I choose for my mech have overlapping damage tables at a wide variety range, this argument has a point, but it is only valid for those who use weapons that are completely outside of their effective range (which I don't) all of the weapons I use on Reacher have uniform effective ranges because their effective ranges overlap. The closer somebody is, the more this rule applies, and the more firepower I can put on my target. An exception to this rule are the streaks, but they are really used as more of a counter to lights that come within range.

Not to mention I'm not lazy and use variety range weapons, and group my weapons according to range.

Edited by ReXspec, 15 May 2014 - 02:42 PM.

[ReXspec]

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:

You realize, armor and ammo distributions are not usually shared exactly through Smurfy?

Gotta keep some stuff from spreading too much.

(that or we get lazy rebuilding it too share )


Edit: two/to/too of DOOM

Sure, I'm open to the probability that smurfy was just acting wonky.

I don't know why someone would store all their ammo in such a spot though. Nor do I understand would you would need more then 20 - 25 armor on the rear torso of an atlas. O.o

[ReXspec]

Void Angel, on 15 May 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

Positioning is not the reason you want all the speed you can afford without sacrificing firepower - bigger engines give you faster torso twist speeds, which is always better because it enhances the firepower and toughness that the Atlas provides. Even if you don't need the extra aim against other big, slow-moving targets, it's still useful against fast-movers - such as the Firestarter - and faster torso twist speed means better damage spreading.

While the cost of an Engine is certainly not linear, the benefit from increasing engine rating is. Therefore, it's best if you add weapons until you hit a certain heat threshold, add enough ammunition to sustain combat, and then buy the biggest engine you can afford. Because of the Atlas' limited hardpoints, I find that most of my builds are naturally heat limited, which lets me put a large engine into it naturally.

Finally, while the extra few kph may only make a second or two's difference in combat positioning, there are certain emergent effects that arise from the Atlas being behind the group instead of at the front. For example, players will be aware that the toughest 'mech on their team is behind, not in front of them, which can make a huge difference in a game environment that already encourages an overabundance of... caution.

My analysis of the above build, however, was that the 1.5 tons of weight to support one machine gun would have been better used just about anywhere else, particularly on an Atlas brawler, and that the medium laser is rather mismatched. At 270 v. 350 effective range, the weapons aren't really in the same range category, making the pair inefficient. More importantly, getting the most out of that machine gun requires that you do the Care Bear Stare at your target, leaving your side torsos open to specific targeting.

I've found that 'mech/pilot levels are give an optimal level of torso twist/turn speed for my Atlases (Atlai?) Sure, you can add an engine of a bigger size, but I think it is logical to experiment with engines within the 280 - 320 ranges. Anything bigger then a 320 or smaller then a 280 and you're suffering some pretty big diminishing returns as far as your speed/firepower/armor ratio's go.

As for the problem of ranges, considering the weapons have similar overlapping effective ranges, I haven't run into the problem of a weapon in a fire-group being trumped by the another weapon in that same fire group, because I'm actually quite familiar with these overlapping ranges. And if the range of a target trumps the range of the weapons in that particular group, I simply use another group with weapons that can engage targets effectively at that range.

-edit-

Atlas

Atlas'

Atlases

Atlai(?)

I don't f*cking know. You'd think after years of being steeped in the Battletech universe I'd know.

Edited by ReXspec, 15 May 2014 - 03:00 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

Considering the weapons I choose for my mech have overlapping damage tables at a wide variety range, this argument has a point, but it is only valid for those who use weapons that are completely outside of their effective range (which I don't) all of the weapons I use on Reacher have uniform effective ranges because their effective ranges overlap. The closer somebody is, the more this rule applies, and the more firepower I can put on my target. An exception to this rule are the streaks, but they are really used as more of a counter to lights that come within range.

Except that, as I said in the post you quoted, firepower does not take firing rates into account either. One AC/20 gets you 20 Firepower, just like two AC/10s, despite the fact that the two AC/10s is a damage per second of 8 total, where the AC/20 dishes out only 5 damage per second itself. If, for whatever reason, you only fire your weapons in a single range bracket simultaneously and never utilize their varying fire rates, then firepower remains relevant, but if you do this, you're limiting yourself by your slowest-firing weapon.

[ReXspec]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

Except that, as I said in the post you quoted, firepower does not take firing rates into account either. One AC/20 gets you 20 Firepower, just like two AC/10s, despite the fact that the two AC/10s is a damage per second of 8 total, where the AC/20 dishes out only 5 damage per second itself. If, for whatever reason, you only fire your weapons in a single range bracket simultaneously and never utilize their varying fire rates, then firepower remains relevant, but if you do this, you're limiting yourself by your slowest-firing weapon.

I don't limit my weapons group by firing rates. I limit them by overlapping ranges and targeting method (arms vs. torso weapons). If I limited each volley to my slowest firing weapon (which in the case of "Reacher" it would be my Gauss Rifle) then I would be screwing myself.

[Alaskan Nobody]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

Sure, I'm open to the probability that smurfy was just acting wonky.

I don't know why someone would store all their ammo in such a spot though. Nor do I understand would you would need more then 20 - 25 armor on the rear torso of an atlas. O.o

Not quite the point I was making.

Lets see if I can phrase it differently - Koniving, as an easy example, frequently deliberately puts the ammo/armor in wrong places.
He will even point that out, and tell the people he is directing to think for themselves on the matter.

IE: I tend to get hit in different places than he does - so I keep my ammo in places he thinks are nuts (those conversations are fun )
Most people when shown a guide like that will mimic what they are shown exactly - even if that would be a bad idea for them.
Thus - one of the growing trends has been to deliberately put what is technically mis-information in the Smurfy builds.

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

-edit-

Atlas

Atlas'

Atlases

Atlai(?)

I don't f*cking know. You'd think after years of being steeped in the Battletech universe I'd know.

I have been developing the theory that the names work both singular and plural (there are a few examples out there, but I cannot remember them at the moment)

IE the plural of Hunchback would be Hunchback. (feels awkward - but for some names takes a lot of the worry out of it - in part thanks to the "horror" of the internet's infamous bad grammar )

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

Can you point me at the info detailing this? I haven't seen anything official or pulled from data anywhere that actually indicates there is a splash weapon other than SRMs. Not saying you're wrong, mind, but I'm kind of surprised it hadn't been previously brought up somewhere I would have seen it.

I cannot remember all the details - but the same patch that dropped the SRM's splash to 0 also dropped the LRM (providing I am remembering right >.< )

LRM had a much much smaller splash radius though - so it was less obvious.

[ReXspec]

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 03:10 PM, said:

Not quite the point I was making.

Lets see if I can phrase it differently - Koniving, as an easy example, frequently deliberately puts the ammo/armor in wrong places.
He will even point that out, and tell the people he is directing to think for themselves on the matter.

IE: I tend to get hit in different places than he does - so I keep my ammo in places he thinks are nuts (those conversations are fun )
Most people when shown a guide like that will mimic what they are shown exactly - even if that would be a bad idea for them.
Thus - one of the growing trends has been to deliberately put what is technically mis-information in the Smurfy builds.

Winning with misinformation on a forum. That is interesting. lol Well, I guess I'll have to remember to aim at a completely random place in Void Angel's torso... or eyeball (assuming his torso is less venerable then those areas) and pray his ammo cooks off. lol

[Alaskan Nobody]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Winning with misinformation on a forum. That is interesting.

It feels really awkward to think of it that way, but that is technically true.

Feels awkward because I haven't really done it yet (most of my builds are not really "share" worthy)- and Koniving openly advertises that the info is not complete, with a paragraph detailing how they should figure it out.

Edit: that and a lot of the meta players would look at those places as a big "shoot me" sign.

Yes it is technically more ideal to put the ammo in X or Y location, but if everyone knows where that is....

Edited by Shar Wolf, 15 May 2014 - 03:16 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

I don't limit my weapons group by firing rates. I limit them by overlapping ranges and targeting method (arms vs. torso weapons). If I limited each volley to my slowest firing weapon (which in the case of "Reacher" it would be my Gauss Rifle) then I would be screwing myself.

Therefore, for you (yes, even you!) Firepower is a basically useless stat.

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

It feels really awkward to think of it that way, but that is technically true.

Feels awkward because I haven't really done it yet (most of my builds are not really "share" worthy)- and Koniving openly advertises that the info is not complete, with a paragraph detailing how they should figure it out.

Edit: that and a lot of the meta players would look at those places as a big "shoot me" sign.

Yes it is technically more ideal to put the ammo in X or Y location, but if everyone knows where that is....

Or you could metagame and show the ammo being in the places you put it, thereby encouraging people to think you put your ammo elsewhere and then it's actually there so they shoot the wrong spot.

Of course, if they thought that you were doing that, then they'd shoot at those locations anyway, so you should move the ammo to other locations which they won't shoot because they know that you were expecting them to shoot at the locations you wouldn't have expected them to shoot at if they were going to shoot at the locations you weren't displaying your ammo as being in!

But then, if-

-cough-

Anyways. It's worth noting that with that atlas build with the 3 SRM-6s, it would possibly be a good idea to downrate one of those SRM racks to a 4 and use the freed up ton, crit slot, and the existing free crit-slot to double-CASE that thing, thereby further enhancing durability.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 15 May 2014 - 03:35 PM.

[ReXspec]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

Therefore, for you (yes, even you!) Firepower is a basically useless stat.

As rough as the firepower quotient is, it does it's job in conveying a one piece of simple data: How much damage your alpha does. Granted, when you have weapons that fire slower or faster then other weapons, it becomes difficult to calculate damage when fire rates are staggered like that, but it does at least give you a rough guideline for how much damage you put on a 'mech if you landed a single alpha on that 'mech.

With that, you can at least gain a rough idea of how much damage your 'mech does.

[Void Angel]

ReXspec, on 15 May 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

I've found that 'mech/pilot levels are give an optimal level of torso twist/turn speed for my Atlases (Atlai?) Sure, you can add an engine of a bigger size, but I think it is logical to experiment with engines within the 280 - 320 ranges. Anything bigger then a 320 or smaller then a 280 and you're suffering some pretty big diminishing returns as far as your speed/firepower/armor ratio's go.

As for the problem of ranges, considering the weapons have similar overlapping effective ranges, I haven't run into the problem of a weapon in a fire-group being trumped by the another weapon in that same fire group, because I'm actually quite familiar with these overlapping ranges. And if the range of a target trumps the range of the weapons in that particular group, I simply use another group with weapons that can engage targets effectively at that range.

-edit-

Atlas

Atlas'

Atlases

Atlai(?)

I don't f*cking know. You'd think after years of being steeped in the Battletech universe I'd know.

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

I have been developing the theory that the names work both singular and plural (there are a few examples out there, but I cannot remember them at the moment)

IE the plural of Hunchback would be Hunchback. (feels awkward - but for some names takes a lot of the worry out of it - in part thanks to the "horror" of the internet's infamous bad grammar )

...

Shar Wolf, on 15 May 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

I cannot remember all the details - but the same patch that dropped the SRM's splash to 0 also dropped the LRM (providing I am remembering right >.< )

LRM had a much much smaller splash radius though - so it was less obvious.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 15 May 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

Can you point me at the info detailing this? I haven't seen anything official or pulled from data anywhere that actually indicates there is a splash weapon other than SRMs. Not saying you're wrong, mind, but I'm kind of surprised it hadn't been previously brought up somewhere I would have seen it.

This all happened a good long while ago - basically a change to something regarding splash damage (I never did find out what that was) caused huge, unintended damage increases for all missile launchers. Without going into the details too much, the game had a base splash damage value for LRMs that was something like 40% of the missile's damage. So the game would find the point of impact and draw a sphere around that point, then determine what proportion of each secondary component was included in the sphere - that was the proportion of that 40% splash damage (e.g. if half your arm was caught in the blast, it'd take 20% missile damage.) So, if you take a missile to the dead center of your Atlas, you're going to take full missile damage to the CT, plus a little bit to each side torso.

So far, so good - but if that missile hit on the edge near several components, you could get hit for more damage than was intended for the splash system. A lot more. And that's for an Atlas; Heaven help you if you were in a Catapult, or a Medium - or a spider. The splash system wasn't bad at first glance on paper, which was probably why it was missed in design - but 'Mechs were literally disintegrating in one volley when caught by a dedicated LRM platform. I actually was taking a break from the game and missed all this - I had to play catchup a week or two later, so my recollection is probably incomplete and possibly incorrect on some details, but that's the gist of it.

Edited by Void Angel, 15 May 2014 - 05:18 PM.