141 replies to this topic

[Talz Romanov]

I've noticed this before, and more recently after the Inner Sphere News flash. Why the particular dislike for these mechs?

[Hardac]

Two Legs Good! Four Legs Bad!

[Stormeris]

They're just butthurt becasue quadrupedal mechs are superior master race,

[Karl Streiger]

Because they don't know anything.

And the Barghest will killi them all

Edited by Karl Streiger, 22 June 2012 - 02:41 AM.

[Stormeris]

But seriously, i have no idea, my favorite mechs are quads, dont see why they hate them so much (Especially Lord Death Strike)

[GHQCommander]

Four legs are the most popular robot at mech warfare competitions. Among the biggest mech fans, the ones with money, there are few with a biped.

Reality is they are far more stable. Could lasso an Atlas and pull it off its feet. Hell they would fall about on the terrain in this game. They would trip up over the big rocks.

[Stormeris]

Technically having 4 legs makes Quads less armed (hehehe) but they're more mobile, having the ability to move sideways and im pretty sure have faster turning speed and also are much more stable while shooting and etc.

[Sylow]

Advantages of a quad:

- More total armour. (Construction rules say so. ) -> Useful on the TT, but i think it's of limited use in a MW game. (Hind legs would be "covered" by front legs most of the time, so no real advantage there. )
- Higher stability. -> Might matter if falling down due to rough terrain or damage taken is implemented in MWO.

Disadvantages of a quad:
- No arm weapons, thus they only have the front firing zone. -> And in terms of MWO the disadvantage of the slower weapon alignment.
- No torso twisting! -> So whenever you attack an enemy, you go towards him in a straight line, making you rather easy to hit. And you have to turn your complete mech to counter movement, where he can twist his torso much faster.

To use them well, quads would require much better positioning and planing from the pilot than any bipedal mech, making them perform badly on the average and making most players disregard them.

In the TT they are a viable choice when used in group. (Very vulnerable when solo. ) In any MW game i have my doubts that they'd more than the occisional "white elephant" use.

[UnLimiTeD]

Edit: Post above explains this much better.

In TT, Quad mechs just have more disadvantages than advantages.
You sacrifice 12 crit slots you could theoretically fill with weapons or equipment (or armor/structure) and mostly have a rather limited torso twist.
You are more stable, but have a drastically higher chance of losing a leg thanks to different hit tables, denying that advantage.
Thus, it is relatively hard to configure a quad mech offensively, and that seems to be what most people like.
They are pretty sturdy, though.

Edited by UnLimiTeD, 22 June 2012 - 03:15 AM.

[Stormeris]

Sylow, on 22 June 2012 - 03:01 AM, said:

Advantages of a quad:

- More total armour. (Construction rules say so. ) -> Useful on the TT, but i think it's of limited use in a MW game. (Hind legs would be "covered" by front legs most of the time, so no real advantage there. )
- Higher stability. -> Might matter if falling down due to rough terrain or damage taken is implemented in MWO.

You didnt mention increased mobility
Faster turning speed, ability to move sideways, lateral movement, in the game they could probably even move diagonally, the ability to hull-down to make it even a smaller target which is with some mechs one of their +'s like Scorpion and the bipedal Bushwacker have very low profiles which in TT make them harder to shoot at, and in the game it would probably translate pretty well since its harder to hit somethig shorter than a huge *** atlas stomping nearby

[latdheretic]

In the table top,loss of arm crits (and weapon arcs) and torso twisting are traded for superior lateral mobility, higher durability and the ability to go hull down for more options to have cover. There are higher level rules that can add a turret to them, but they take up space and the rules are a little weird.

These make them decent for stand off style mechs, but rough for brawling. Adding JJ to a fast scout also helps cover for lack of torso twist, and the mech can still use the superior lateral mobility to advantage. So basically they are a lot harder to get to work properly. And the vastly different control mode would be extra work to implement in a computer game, so I don't expect to see one any time soon.

My view of a good Quad is a fast mech with good armor, and a direct fire arsenal focused on long range. (like Gauss rifles)

Edited by latdheretic, 22 June 2012 - 03:07 AM.

[Topsytervy]

I prefer Bipeds however back in the way back i did use Quads. In my med company i had one or 2 scorpions and a few Goliths in my assult company. The legs of a quad allows for more heat control in water if you put heat sinks in the legs. Bipeds get this abilty as well but only has a possible 4 heatsinks in the legs as opposed to the 8 in a quad. Legs also carry more armor than arms do. Plus in the board game quads could do a side step manuver without changing facing for 2mp. A biped had to do the manuver with changing facing for 3mp. The only drawback to quad is you lack the carring capacity of the arms. Legs only had 2 open slots for equipment. This forced you to put most if not all equipment in the torso.

[Stormeris]

UnLimiTeD, on 22 June 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

In TT, Quad mechs just have more disadvantages than advantages.
You sacrifice 12 crit slots you could theoretically fill with weapons or equipment (or armor/structure) and mostly have a rather limited torso twist.
You are more stable, but have a drastically higher chance of losing a leg thanks to different hit tables, denying that advantage.
Thus, it is relatively hard to configure a quad mech offensively, and that seems to be what most people like.
They are pretty sturdy, though.

Sure you have higher chance to lose a leg, but losing a leg for a quad isnt as bad as losing a leg for a biped
If a biped loses 1 leg it basicly crawls, quad loses 1 leg, it simply cant move sideways as minor decrease in speed, ALSO im pretty sure according to lore a quad could still more while having only 1 leg left

[Nikol Grall]

I don't hate them. In general however i find them lacking of firepower compared to a similar weight bipedal mech.


The Xanthos 5O is about the best of the breed. Jumpy + Pulsey = Nice
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Xanthos

[CCC Dober]

Nvm

Edited by CCC Dober, 22 June 2012 - 03:12 AM.

[Stormeris]

Nikol Grall, on 22 June 2012 - 03:09 AM, said:

I don't hate them. In general however i find them lacking of firepower compared to a similar weight bipedal mech.


The Xanthos 5O is about the best of the breed. Jumpy + Pulsey = Nice
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Xanthos

My second favorite mech, shame it's extict atm

[Nikol Grall]

Stormeris, on 22 June 2012 - 03:11 AM, said:

My second favorite mech, shame it's extict atm

More like as yet birthed.

[Remarius]

Well from table top quads are fairly pointless above certain weights - aka the manoeuvrability advantage was fairly useless in the heavier versions. Some of the lighter quads were quite useful - particularly the insane 8/12/8 versions but almost all quads were woefully armed compared to similar weight "normal" mechs.

[Stormeris]

Nikol Grall, on 22 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

More like as yet birthed.

According to lore Its the first Quadruped mech taht went extinct... >.>

[GodHammer13]

Quads are way to carnage heart, overly sluggish and pre-programmed feeling