29 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

Widowmaker1981, on 21 July 2014 - 04:17 AM, said:

yeah, warhawks are terribad. buff them

(its the 592 average damage / match im talking about, the KDR isnt all that great due to quite a lot of losses)

Oogalook, on 21 July 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

I can't believe that somebody's complaining about the microscopic disadvantages of any of the disgusting new Clan cheesewagons. The nerve, the simple entitlement-minded gall of it turns my stomach.

Shredhead, on 21 July 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

This thing can pack more punch than an Atlas at 71 km/h, but yeah what a terrible mech.

PharmEcis, on 21 July 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

I've got no problem doing 1000+ damage in a Warhawk rather consistently. It's not the exception for me, rather it's almost the norm. So I don't know what you guys are bitching about.

This is how your posts read.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 21 July 2014 - 08:46 AM.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

The Warhawk feels pretty limited on hard points. The left arm is usually pretty weak and the fixed criticals pretty much ensure your right torso is the prime target. Looking through the other configuration the best we could hope for is a CT with 1 energy. Another has a right torso with 2 energy but that mech has ATMs though so it is unlikely, and we certainly wouldnt get the full mech, just the omnipod. A third has a ballistic in the right torso. Introducing some of those would allow the Warhawk to have a better mix of ballistic and energy hard points. Another possibility, PGI said they may create their own omnipods later. That may benefit the Warhawk.

The cooldown penalty for adding an extra hardpoint is pretty silly, but because of the limited hardpoints you're likely boating big weapons and have to wait on heat anyhow.

Currently, I find the Warhawk fits best as a long range weapons platform. I have one that is an LRM boat, another is a ER LL boat, and the third is ER PPC boat (I'm still a little suspicious of the last one, but every match in it has been on alpine peak and it performed adequately there). I have seen one brawling build I like with a UAC20, two ER LL, and three SRM6 but unless you are part of a push it feels too limited compared to the long range builds, at least in pug play.

[Ultimax]

Rouken, on 21 July 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

The cooldown penalty for adding an extra hardpoint is pretty silly, but because of the limited hardpoints you're likely boating big weapons and have to wait on heat anyhow.

It is silly.

The mech can perform, this isn't really the complaint as several posters have managed to miss entirely as the point.

It's an odd negative quirk that grants a CD reduction when adding a single energy hardpoint to a mech that already somewhat hardpoint starved.

There are two types of energy weapons:

1) Small to medium ones that boating 3 to 5 of (the WHKs maximum) is a non-issue.
2) Large ones that already hit ghost heat when boating 3 or more.

So the quirk just comes off as redundantly punitive on a mech that was already limited on hardpoints and build directions due to other factors (lack of usable crit space, average 33 usable tons).

[Tw1stedMonkey]

Ultimatum X, on 21 July 2014 - 09:01 AM, said:

It is silly.

The mech can perform, this isn't really the complaint as several posters have managed to miss entirely as the point.

It's an odd negative quirk that grants a CD reduction when adding a single energy hardpoint to a mech that already somewhat hardpoint starved.

There are two types of energy weapons:

1) Small to medium ones that boating 3 to 5 of (the WHKs maximum) is a non-issue.
2) Large ones that already hit ghost heat when boating 3 or more.

So the quirk just comes off as redundantly punitive on a mech that was already limited on hardpoints and build directions due to other factors (lack of usable crit space, average 33 usable tons).

This. I can make it work but I feel like it's overly and arbitrarily hampered in build flexibility especially in comparison to the timber wolf or dire wolf due to the excessive number of fixed DHS in the LT (and lack of LT hardpoints but that's another issue and not as surprising or unusual.) I mean it's obviously not wasted space but it still seems strange that the warhawk doesn't have a large number of hardpoints AND has fewer base free crit slots than pretty much any other clan mech if i am not mistaken.

[Zordicron]

this thread, I dont understand it. I guess remove the negative quirk for flexability..... but you know, they did use things like that to try to curb rediculous OP loadouts. i dunno, I am with others here, my Hawks are RAWKHAWKS, and if you want to buff them I wont complain. However, the idea seems to come out of left field, if the mech performs well, does it need a buff?

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Eldagore, on 21 July 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

flexability

Actually, you reminded me. It may have a 15% penalty because it also includes a lower arm actuator. Not sure if that really makes up for it, but there you have it.

Edited by Rouken, 21 July 2014 - 10:04 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yeah, the quirks seem irrelevant for the most part.

It woulda been nice to see some quirks that actually aided the mech in a way..

Warhawk: 8/8 Prime Pod bonus: +2.5% heat Dissipation, -10% heat to Clan ER PPC

3E Omni Pod: -5% Energy Weapon Cool down...NOT +15%...What the hell is this crap!? Thought Quirks were supposed to kinda help ur mech out....

LT Quirk(All Variants): +5% heat Dissipation, I mean the dang thing has a rack of DHS slapped in it, would think that should just make the mech run alot cooler overall...idk...

2M Quirk: -10% Missile CoF Spread(to missiles in this pod)
1M Quick: -10 Armor, +15% more ammo per ton(to ammo placed in this torso)

Heads Omnipods: Prime(Targeting Computer V) Somehow built in and takes up the 1 open crit slot.

Prime Arms 1E: -2.5% to PPC Cooldown
1E 1M: +5% to PPC Projectile Velocity

1B 1E: -5% to AC Shot spread

Anyway, stuff like that....

[Ultimax]

Eldagore, on 21 July 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

this thread, I dont understand it. I guess remove the negative quirk for flexability..... but you know, they did use things like that to try to curb rediculous OP loadouts.

The Warhawk is already limited in so many ways, it really didn't need this.

It's one of the more limited mechs in terms of build options.

Do you know the Warhawk has the least customizable crit space among all Clan mechs?

Eldagore, on 21 July 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

i dunno, I am with others here, my Hawks are RAWKHAWKS, and if you want to buff them I wont complain. However, the idea seems to come out of left field, if the mech performs well, does it need a buff?

Performing well has very little to do with enjoying more options. It performs well, but only in a few very limited build directions.

It's not like Warhawks are dominating the field, and they sit in between two mechs that are literally spoiled for options.

It's less about "buffing" directly and more about removing negative quirks that were a bit over zealous.



What's baffling about this particular quirk is that the Warhawk is heavily pushed towards energy builds (10 locked DHS) and yet the one arm that has 3 energy hardpoints comes with a negative quirk.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Ultimatum X, on 22 July 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

What's baffling about this particular quirk is that the Warhawk is heavily pushed towards energy builds (10 locked DHS) and yet the one arm that has 3 energy hardpoints comes with a negative quirk.

I gotta say, I am equally lost as to why the heck they did that.....Its not like if you put 3E in it you would have amazing enough heat scale to really fire them like mad...

[Quizzical Coconut]

This seems relevant.

http://mwomercs.com/...k-improvements/

The results have been negative though.