Edited by GreyGriffin, 31 July 2014 - 08:44 PM.
The "new, Improved" Awesome: Is It Enough?
#61
Posted 31 July 2014 - 08:43 PM
#62
Posted 31 July 2014 - 08:51 PM
Edited by ManDaisy, 31 July 2014 - 08:52 PM.
#63
Posted 31 July 2014 - 09:52 PM
GreyGriffin, on 31 July 2014 - 08:43 PM, said:
#64
Posted 31 July 2014 - 10:04 PM
Wintersdark, on 31 July 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:
So, yeah, pinpoint is a major issue, but it doesn't belong in this thread.
all roads lead to pinpoint
#65
Posted 31 July 2014 - 10:07 PM
ManDaisy, on 31 July 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:
True. Watching an Awesome trying to protect itself with it's arms is like watching a fat man pole dancing and trying to deflect incoming beer bottles with the pole.
Making the arms bigger would help, but the issue is that the sheer width of the Awesome means that the arms take a lot longer to swing into position to defend the chest. It would get to the point where the Awesome could use it's arms for advertising space.
I don't know, maybe I just need to accept the fact that the Awesome will never be a (competitive) brawler. Support is ok, if you're not the center of attention. Or anyone's attention, really.
#66
Posted 01 August 2014 - 09:52 AM
Two, the mech is too tall in my opinion. And too wide. Extend the arm hit boxes to about 1/2 of where the STs are now, and up the shoulder plates width so that it can actually shield it's CT and STs with it's arms.
#67
Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:00 PM
#68
Posted 01 August 2014 - 08:11 PM
#69
Posted 01 August 2014 - 08:50 PM
Kiiyor, on 31 July 2014 - 10:07 PM, said:
True. Watching an Awesome trying to protect itself with it's arms is like watching a fat man pole dancing and trying to deflect incoming beer bottles with the pole.
Making the arms bigger would help, but the issue is that the sheer width of the Awesome means that the arms take a lot longer to swing into position to defend the chest. It would get to the point where the Awesome could use it's arms for advertising space.
I don't know, maybe I just need to accept the fact that the Awesome will never be a (competitive) brawler. Support is ok, if you're not the center of attention. Or anyone's attention, really.
New sponsor paintjob. Advertises any ongoing sale on the arm. 100,000 bonus C-bill reward for every round you run with it.
That should balance it alright.
#70
Posted 02 August 2014 - 10:17 AM
I think it may be a matter of builds and mastery level though. Once mastered the Awesome is very nimble for its size.
With the exception of the 9M and PB, you don't suffer a tonnage tax putting in the biggest possible engine. The 300 STD really is a nice size for an 80-ton mech. It sits on the balance point where you're not losing payload tonnage in engine vs a smaller mech and the inefficiency of trying to make it go as fast as a heavy. (Weight difference between 250 and 275 = 3 tons. Weight difference between 275 and 300 = 3.5 tons. Weight difference between 300 and 325 = 5.5 tons). It's also a bit counter-intuitive, but energy-intensive Awesome builds are good candidates for endo steel. Most variants have a total of 8 crits you can't fill with DHS (2 CT, 2 LL/RL, 2 LA), so if you sacrifice two external DHS you can gain another 4 tons. That is conveniently enough to go from a 275 to a 300 and grant space for another heat sink in the engine.
Awesomes will suffer if you stick with the stock engines. In MWO 48 kph is too slow for 80 tons and the lower twist rate makes it harder to use your arms. However I think it's under-rated in a brawl. With these changes now, it may just make a superior pulse laser boat.
#72
Posted 02 August 2014 - 12:41 PM
#73
Posted 02 August 2014 - 12:53 PM
#74
Posted 02 August 2014 - 01:27 PM
i wish they hadn't buffed anything - it opened the floodgates for a lot of noobs asking for quirks for the atlas in the stupidest possible way
besides, it was extremely short sighted to give the boost to the armor on the CT.
the problem with the awesome was always the sidetorso, not the center torso!
it seems like paul has played this mech about once!
right now for what it is, the firepower is a little bit better but you will get disarmed in no time by shooting your side torso
and people have stopped ignoring my mech too so it is even harder to pilot now !
the only ride that has been made better is the zombie 9m because of the buff to ct armor, but not as much as you'd think
this would have been A LOT better
and it's not like we haven't been telling em - this is what was needed.
what they did as usual, just makes you scratch your head
#75
Posted 02 August 2014 - 01:42 PM
Bishop Steiner, on 31 July 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:
But only, if they change the hitboxes back to the old one. With the new hitboxes, the side torsos are much more of a problem. They are so easy to hit and go down so quickly, especially with splash damage from Clan PPC.
#76
Posted 02 August 2014 - 02:25 PM
Bromineberry, on 02 August 2014 - 01:42 PM, said:
But only, if they change the hitboxes back to the old one. With the new hitboxes, the side torsos are much more of a problem. They are so easy to hit and go down so quickly, especially with splash damage from Clan PPC.
That would be a LOT of spash to blow the sides of an 80 tonner.
#77
Posted 02 August 2014 - 04:11 PM
Awesomes do not make good front line fighters, too easy to concentrate damage anywhere.
They fixed the center torso by making it a bit tougher, just before no one went for the side torso because the center was an easy target. Guess what? Now the side torso being an easy target is getting more attention.
Edited by ManDaisy, 02 August 2014 - 04:17 PM.
#78
Posted 02 August 2014 - 04:52 PM
I've been tinkering with the 9M, XL375, 2 ERPPC and 1 ERLL. It can actually alpha strike 2-4 times depending on the map without a meltdown.
Awesome is starting to be awesome PUG fun again. Stay mobile, stay near friendlies. DO NOT run off and try to take on the enemy alone. Even a locust. I believe it's well know the AWS is a med-long range fire support chassis. It can pack an assault punch at range but can't take it in return at any distance.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users