556 replies to this topic

[Adiuvo]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

A stalker will have that same problem, but with less change on his efficienty, shorter beam duration.

ho, and by your argument:
I have no problem dealing with a Timber Wolf on my hunchback, so the timber wolf isn't OP. Period.

That's basicly the thing you say on your side.

You're right, it is a benefit of the Stalker. I'm not saying that somehow having a longer beam duration is a benefit to the Warhawk or anything, just that it's a fair tradeoff compared to the other benefits you get.

In a long range sniping ERLL boat, the Warhawk is superior to the Stalker for the following reasons:

• Much longer range.
  
• 20 points of higher damage.
  
• Higher DPS.
  
• Same heat efficiency.
  
• Faster speed.

For these benefits, it has basically 1 con.

• .5sec higher burn time.

Rager Beater, on 19 July 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

LOL the game IS balanced, actually no, clan mechs are underpowered. if yu can kill clan mechs with IS mechs then why do you bother playing? i sure as hell have zero problems.

Thank you for your detailed analysis. It has been noted.

[KuroNyra]

Adiuvo, on 19 July 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

You're right, it is a benefit of the Stalker. I'm not saying that somehow having a longer beam duration is a benefit to the Warhawk or anything, just that it's a fair tradeoff compared to the other benefits you get.

In a long range sniping ERLL boat, the Warhawk is superior to the Stalker for the following reasons:

• Much longer range.
  
• 20 points of higher damage.
  
• Higher DPS.
  
• Same heat efficiency.
  
• Faster speed.

For these benefits, it has basically 13 con.

• .5sec higher burn time.
  
• Larger profil easier to see and attack (the Warhawk is much larger than the stalker.
  
• Positions of the Arms who are not optimal for attacking, even at long rang. "Peek-a-boo" are often used.

Fixed some stuff.

[Mystere]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

What make me laught is that the guy your quoting is talking about cherry picking.
While he's doing that since the very beginning.

And which is why I reminded him of some requirements for a proper IS vs. Clans analysis.

[Mcgral18]

Adiuvo, on 19 July 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

You're right, it is a benefit of the Stalker. I'm not saying that somehow having a longer beam duration is a benefit to the Warhawk or anything, just that it's a fair tradeoff compared to the other benefits you get.

In a long range sniping ERLL boat, the Warhawk is superior to the Stalker for the following reasons:

• Much longer range.
  
• 20 points of higher damage.
  
• Higher DPS.
  
• Same heat efficiency.
  
• Faster speed.

For these benefits, it has basically 1 con.

• .5sec higher burn time.

You could even shorten it to a 1.2 second burn time for the isLL equivalent. 9 damage at that point in the burn time.

[Hobgoblin I]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

The Awesome is an Energy Boat, yet I don't see you complaining about the inferiority of the Awesome against a Stalker.
The clan heatsink are more advanced one, what. You tought PGI were not gonna at least respect some stuff? The Clans Mech have some advantage on some point, but the othery way is also true.

Are you mental? The topic is about clantech being overpowered or not. Or in your desperation to make a point did you just acknowledge that the warhawk is superior?
I expected PGI would make clantech superior, but in the context of community warfare and at a numbers disadvantage. In mixed matches without the numbers disadvantage they are overpowered without any mechanism to balance them out.

[GunnyKintaro 01]

INKBALL, on 18 June 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:

Hi guys,

first, i did pay to play, just to not have to grind 12 mechs to get started (i bought phœnix after a month in mwo or so), and now i have 6-7 mechs +30% c-bills. I then felt that i did spend enough on the game, at least for now (and at least enough for a freegame).

Since the "invasion" , i saw that 75%+ did buy the 240$ package, great for you. But, not a second the game is even kinda close to have a tiny chance of being balanced. C-Mechs are faster/stonger/and have more weps/range/ ammo per ton.

All this to say that i'm taking a break, i've had enough with PGI, the masters of mech designs who are using +/- 1% of their time balancing the game or improving the game play... At least, you guys have gold mechs...

I see few ways to fix the problem:
-Cross techs (clan weps on IS (like mw4)).
-Nerfing clans (2 secs beam lasting laser, slower stream of missiles, x3heat on all weps balistic weps, xl mech dies when a side dies).
-F*ck table top and change all the balance system.
-Playing/balancing with ''points'' like on tabletop. So you could fight 4ISand8Cmech against 1IS and 10clans, reaching a certain balance (in tons/weps/ect).
-or simplier, IS teams =12members, Clan teams=8members. so, we could have 12v12,8v12,8v8.


Until some big ChangeLogs, you wont see me much. And yes, im kinda mad.

Bye!

[Adiuvo]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 10:48 AM, said:

Fixed some stuff.

A Warhawk isn't that much bigger than a Stalker...

As for the arm placement:

Quote

Hillhumping is still a bit dead if you don't have JJs. Hill climb is just too limiting, and you're liable to slide around everywhere. Corner peeking is more relevant.
The higher hardpoints on the Stalker are nice, but when corner peeking it doesn't matter all too much.

[KuroNyra]

Adiuvo, on 19 July 2014 - 10:54 AM, said:

A Warhawk isn't that much bigger than a Stalker...

As for the arm placement:

A warhawk is much larger.

And the arm placement also matter. The stalker have a tighter profil, and it help even on corner's.

[Adiuvo]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

A warhawk is much larger.

And the arm placement also matter. The stalker have a tighter profil, and it help even on corner's.

I really don't want to go take screenshots of both of them in the mechlab, so I'll just ask that you look yourself. The size difference isn't that much.

A tighter profile is actually a disadvantage for corner peeking, since you have to expose more than just your arm to do it if your profile is narrow.

[KuroNyra]

Adiuvo, on 19 July 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

I really don't want to go take screenshots of both of them in the mechlab, so I'll just ask that you look yourself. The size difference isn't that much.

A tighter profile is actually a disadvantage for corner peeking, since you have to expose more than just your arm to do it if your profile is narrow.

to actually see where your are shooting, you need to show yoursleft. Stalker because of his tighter profil will have less exposition.
The shorter beam duration also help.

[Hobgoblin I]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

to actually see where your are shooting, you need to show yoursleft. Stalker because of his tighter profil will have less exposition.
The shorter beam duration also help, but the range disadvantage will be brutal.

fixed some stuff

[bluepiglet]

Mcgral18, on 19 July 2014 - 10:56 AM, said:

Seeing as my Banshee can take down any Clan assault, it's not quite the same thing. Dire Whales are good at one thing, which is carrying 50.5 tons of weaponry. Warhawk...I'm not too sure about. Is it a lurm boat? ERLL boat?

There is one good clan mech, 2 which are acceptable, 2 that are worse than their IS equivalent, and 3 that are bad?

Banshee, along with Highlander currently is the best IS can offer to take on Dire, mostly because they can both bring some fairly high alpha damage. 45 unsustainable burst damage is still behind Dire's constant 50+10(splash), but that's what you get for nothing paying 55 bucks while your opponent does.

[Mcgral18]

bluepiglet, on 19 July 2014 - 11:22 AM, said:

Banshee, along with Highlander currently is the best IS can offer to take on Dire, mostly because they can both bring some fairly high alpha damage. 45 unsustainable burst damage is still behind Dire's constant 50+10(splash), but that's what you get for nothing paying 55 bucks while your opponent does.

I've never actually used that build. I'm currently a fan of 4 ERLLs and 4 MLs. It's still a tad hot, but STD engine.

WubShee is a favourite of mine, 8 pulse lasers, 52.6 damage with a .6 burn time. Over 100 damage within 5 seconds, but this one is very hot. Fairly fast at 75, for a 95 tonner.

AC20, SRM6 and 6 MLs for 60 damage is a not so great, very short range build, but it hurts.

[KuroNyra]

Hobgoblin I, on 19 July 2014 - 11:22 AM, said:

fixed some stuff

range disadvantage at short distance on brawl on corner?
Seriously? o_o'

[Hobgoblin I]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

range disadvantage at short distance on brawl on corner?
Seriously? o_o'

who said short distance brawl?? we have specifically refered to them as long range energy boats.

[KuroNyra]

Hobgoblin I, on 19 July 2014 - 12:55 PM, said:

who said short distance brawl?? we have specifically refered to them as long range energy boats.

brawl = short distance

[Hobgoblin I]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

brawl = short distance

umm....who said we were only talking brawl?

[KuroNyra]

Hobgoblin I, on 19 July 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

umm....who said we were only talking brawl?

Adiuvo, on 19 July 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

I really don't want to go take screenshots of both of them in the mechlab, so I'll just ask that you look yourself. The size difference isn't that much.

A tighter profile is actually a disadvantage for corner peeking, since you have to expose more than just your arm to do it if your profile is narrow.

we also talk about it last page

[Adiuvo]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

we also talk about it last page

I was talking about corner peeking at long range which is done as an alternative to ridge peeking since that is rarely possible nowadays without JJs.

[Hobgoblin I]

KuroNyra, on 19 July 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

we also talk about it last page

again, nothing in the post you quoted denotes range at all. As for the previous page, you specifically were talking about holding beams at long range.