20517 replies to this topic

[CDLord HHGD]

@ the Archer discussion.

If they can get three different, yet the same, variants out of the Black Knight, the Archer will be just fine.

[xVLFBERHxT]

Nice to see some Archer fans here :-)

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 04 October 2015 - 10:16 PM, said:

Alas, another "non-meta" 'Mech - I'm sure we'd both be lamenting that point.

So... Archer variant speculation!

• The ARC-2R (x1 MLas in each arm, x2 MLas in the CT, and x1 LRM-20 in each side-torso) is a given, with it being the "standard" variant.
  
• The ARC-5W (x1 SRM-4 in each arm, x1 LRM-20 in each side-torso, x1 Narc beacon launcher in the CT) is unique as the variant that drops any energy weapons for "all missiles, all the time".

The ARC-5S would just render the 2R redundant (x1 MPLas in each arm, x2 MPLas in the CT, and x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, plus a SSRM-2 in each arm & a Narc beacon launcher in the LT).

Much the same can be said of the ARC-2S (x1 MLas in each arm, x2 MLas in the CT, and x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, plus an additional SRM-4 in each side-torso).
The ARC-2K (x1 LLas in each arm, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso) and the ARC-5R (x1 ERLL in each arm, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso) are redundant to one another.
The ARC-4M (x1 MLas in each arm, x2 MLas in the CT, and x1 LRM-20 in each side-torso) is redundant to the 2R.
The ARC-2W (x1 MLas in each arm, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, and x1 SRM-4 in each side-torso) is essentially just the 2S minus both the CT-mounted lasers.
The ARC-2Rb, the SLDF Royals variant, is just the 2R minus one of the CT lasers, plus Artemis and CASE.

All of the ARCs have the same base movement profile (4/6/0), and none natively carry ECM or MASC.
Most Heavy 'Mechs have 6-8 hardpoints, so the ARCs probably shouldn't exceed that (which would mean a limit of 8 or so hardpoints per variant).

IMO, the 2R and the 5W are strong contenders for two of the three variants, but the 5S just feels like too much (even though it is, on some level, the logical choice, the number and distribution of hardpoints puts everything else to shame) & none of the other variants feels particularly inspiring.

Thoughts?

Likely you will have a "redundant" version, and so it will come down to one version getting missiles hardpoint inflation, and one getting laser hardpoint inflation. Since they all are pretty much variations of the same theme. I'm thinking the 2R ends up with 2x E Hardpoint per arm, for a total of 6.

The real question would be, will they gimp it, with all it's other lackluster facets to 8 Hardpoints total, and give it 2 LRM, or will it at least be one of the hardpoint heavier mechs and maybe get 10? I'd say considering how uninspiring it is, give it 10, as with some variant you need 9ish, anyhow. And 10 allows symmetry. But I think all 3 could get away with 9, if needed.
so:

ARC-2R:
-CT: 2 E
-RT: 2 M
-LT: 2 M
-RA: 2 E
-LA: 2E
It would keep the general basic and boring profile the Archer is famous for. And give it some possible life by being able to lightly laservomit.

ARC-5W
-CT: 1 (or 2, for fun) M
-RT: 3M
-LT: 3M
-RA: 1M
-LA: 1M
Which could make it a nasty "wave fire" mech in the underhive. I'd probably run it with 3xLRM5 per ST, and SRM4s in the arms. CT I would have to flip a coin between LRM or SRM.

so, for the 3rd, either PGI makes up a variant, which at first blush seems silly, given the number of available models, but not as silly when you consider the homogenous nature of the hardpoints, or we see shades of the King Crab and Black Knight and it's a matter of musical Energy/Missile slots.

I'd say, go with the ARC-5S.
-CT: 2 E
-RT: 2 M
-LT: 2M
-RA: 1E, 1 M
-LA: 1E, 1M

Doing so, would allow for relatively distinct weapon weights, the 2R more energy biased, the 5S more missile biased and the 5W well, yeah.

The Archer is famed as the vanilla, plodding workhorse of the Inner Sphere. Is it really a shock that the hardpoints would be so meh?

That said, that 5W might be FUN, IMO.

Also, in thoughts of quirks:
The Archer really is not noted for it's sensors, targeting gear, etc. It's noted for it's reliability, numbers in action, and it's stolid, workmanlike nature. I would say on the 2R and 5S, almost everything should be Armor and Structure quirks. Would fit their reputation for reliability. If we want to change it up, maybe give the the 5W less Armor and Structure, and give it a boost to Sensor Range and lock times, which befits it's 1) being built by people with access to better tech than the rest of the IS, and 2) It is commonly used as a command mech within the Dragoons (according to Wolves on the Border), though I don't recall the TO&E really reflecting that. It is bloody common , though.

That's my take.

Thoughts?

[Odanan]

I think 10 hardpoints would be too much, Bishop.

[Bishop Steiner]

Steinar Bergstol, on 05 October 2015 - 04:30 AM, said:

Well, it's 70 tons, so give us melee attacks and it _will_ be a nasty bare-knuckle fighter. If you were next to another mech as an Archer in TT you said "screw the medium arm lasers! I'm punching you for 7 points per fist and a 1 in 6 chance of hitting you in the face!"

Well, you _could_ kick for 14 Points, but punching faces is more satisfying, unless the target is a light mech. Then making them limp is hillarious.

need more than Melee. Need solid hitboxes for any sort of CQB. Look at ANY depiction of the archer, and 4 things stand out:
1) Dragon like CT
2) Center of Mass Cockpit
3) Skinny upper arms, providing no protection for
4) Prominent STs.

not a recipe for close range success.

Odanan, on 05 October 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

I think 10 hardpoints would be too much, Bishop.

Why?

Elucidate.

Several actually have 7-9 to begin with. MAny mech in the game have more, already. As I said, I could go with 9, 10 is simply more symmetrical.


Also, the Archer will have no special gear. Nothing impressive for speed. Almost certain that hitboxes will be ...mediocre, if we are being generous. And since it has no ballistics, and no real ridgehumping ability, nor the ability to effectively Meta, a boost in hardpoints would hardly OP it. (I'm sure there are some bad light pilots who would cry about 10 ssrm2 archers, but let's be honest.... if you are getting your light hunted down by a what...maximum of 80ish KPH Heavy with streaks, you are bad, and TBH, if you devote a 70 ton mech to such a pathetic armament, you are also bad)

I'm not saying it should be set in stone, I simply prefer a good counter argument.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 05 October 2015 - 06:35 AM.

[xVLFBERHxT]

Bishop, I like your post and agree, 10 Hardpoints are interesting (i.e. for an srm build).
Did you ever take your thoughts for a new archer design to the paper? Would like to see it:-).

Edited by TrapJaw80, 05 October 2015 - 06:45 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

TrapJaw80, on 05 October 2015 - 06:38 AM, said:

Bishop, I like your post and agree, 10 Hardpoints are interesting (i.e. for an srm build).
Did you ever take your thoughts for a new archer design to the paper? Would like to see it:-).

only one I ever did was during the Project Phoenix Reseen era, so it's based off that, and was one of my earlier attempts. I think my stuff has improved a lot from 4 years ago, but


I actually feel a little embarrassed looking at some of these.

Upper torso and arms are probably salvageable, upper legs and waist, not so much.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 05 October 2015 - 06:57 AM.

[KuroNyra]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 October 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

Why?

Elucidate.

[SgtMagor]

Hmm, did Alex make a concept of the Archer. anyway Bishops concept would be something I would like in the game, it has a hulking menacing look to it cheers!

[xVLFBERHxT]

Hulking is a good description and it's an archer for sure. I like it. Thx for the post. Like the fist's most ;-)

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 October 2015 - 06:19 AM, said:

Likely you will have a "redundant" version, and so it will come down to one version getting missiles hardpoint inflation, and one getting laser hardpoint inflation. Since they all are pretty much variations of the same theme. I'm thinking the 2R ends up with 2x E Hardpoint per arm, for a total of 6.

The real question would be, will they gimp it, with all it's other lackluster facets to 8 Hardpoints total, and give it 2 LRM, or will it at least be one of the hardpoint heavier mechs and maybe get 10? I'd say considering how uninspiring it is, give it 10, as with some variant you need 9ish, anyhow. And 10 allows symmetry. But I think all 3 could get away with 9, if needed.
so:

ARC-2R:
-CT: 2 E
-RT: 2 M
-LT: 2 M
-RA: 2 E
-LA: 2E
It would keep the general basic and boring profile the Archer is famous for. And give it some possible life by being able to lightly laservomit.

ARC-5W
-CT: 1 (or 2, for fun) M
-RT: 3M
-LT: 3M
-RA: 1M
-LA: 1M
Which could make it a nasty "wave fire" mech in the underhive. I'd probably run it with 3xLRM5 per ST, and SRM4s in the arms. CT I would have to flip a coin between LRM or SRM.

so, for the 3rd, either PGI makes up a variant, which at first blush seems silly, given the number of available models, but not as silly when you consider the homogenous nature of the hardpoints, or we see shades of the King Crab and Black Knight and it's a matter of musical Energy/Missile slots.

I'd say, go with the ARC-5S.
-CT: 2 E
-RT: 2 M
-LT: 2M
-RA: 1E, 1 M
-LA: 1E, 1M

Doing so, would allow for relatively distinct weapon weights, the 2R more energy biased, the 5S more missile biased and the 5W well, yeah.

The Archer is famed as the vanilla, plodding workhorse of the Inner Sphere. Is it really a shock that the hardpoints would be so meh?

That said, that 5W might be FUN, IMO.

Also, in thoughts of quirks:
The Archer really is not noted for it's sensors, targeting gear, etc. It's noted for it's reliability, numbers in action, and it's stolid, workmanlike nature. I would say on the 2R and 5S, almost everything should be Armor and Structure quirks. Would fit their reputation for reliability. If we want to change it up, maybe give the the 5W less Armor and Structure, and give it a boost to Sensor Range and lock times, which befits it's 1) being built by people with access to better tech than the rest of the IS, and 2) It is commonly used as a command mech within the Dragoons (according to Wolves on the Border), though I don't recall the TO&E really reflecting that. It is bloody common , though.

That's my take.

Thoughts?

I largely agree with your proposals and rationale.

However, as a counter-proposal, I would have biased the 2R more toward the energy side of things (say, x3 energy hardpoints in each arm (one each mounted on the top, bottom, and outside-side of the forearm, in the same 'laser gauntlet' style as the "Boar's Head"), x2 energy hardpoints in the CT, and a single missile hardpoint in each side-torso; a total of 8E/2M), and then played up the 5S (with no hardpoint inflation - x1 MPLas + x1 SSRM-2 in each arm, x2 MPLas in the CT, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, plus a Narc beacon launcher in the LT; a total of 4E/5M) more as the balance between the energy-heavy 2R and the all-missile 5W (where I would have gone for 2 missile hardpoints in each arm & each torso section, for a total of 10M).

Thoughts?

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 05 October 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

I largely agree with your proposals and rationale.

However, as a counter-proposal, I would have biased the 2R more toward the energy side of things (say, x3 energy hardpoints in each arm (one each mounted on the top, bottom, and outside-side of the forearm, in the same 'laser gauntlet' style as the "Boar's Head"), x2 energy hardpoints in the CT, and a single missile hardpoint in each side-torso; a total of 8E/2M), and then played up the 5S (with no hardpoint inflation - x1 MPLas + x1 SSRM-2 in each arm, x2 MPLas in the CT, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, plus a Narc beacon launcher in the LT; a total of 4E/5M) more as the balance between the energy-heavy 2R and the all-missile 5W (where I would have gone for 2 missile hardpoints in each arm & each torso section, for a total of 10M).

Thoughts?

possible. Though I think playing away from the missile in any variant is a mistake, since that is it's role and fame, as LRM support. Also, since the 2R is going to without a doubt be the "special" one too, I must admit, part of this is self serving... but it won't be a good laser vomit mech, even with 12 laser hardpoints, I think giving it triple laser stinkfists will pull people into playing it in a manner it's hitboxes wont support.

For the 5W, I went heavy in the torso more for launch consistency. 6xLRM5 is pretty ideal for wave fire, and having them all on the same arc is desirable, especially if you want to pack some short range missiles for defense. I think it's more a matter of preference though than a game breaker, either way.

[CDLord HHGD]

Strum Wealh, on 05 October 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

I largely agree with your proposals and rationale.

However, as a counter-proposal, I would have biased the 2R more toward the energy side of things (say, x3 energy hardpoints in each arm (one each mounted on the top, bottom, and outside-side of the forearm, in the same 'laser gauntlet' style as the "Boar's Head"), x2 energy hardpoints in the CT, and a single missile hardpoint in each side-torso; a total of 8E/2M), and then played up the 5S (with no hardpoint inflation - x1 MPLas + x1 SSRM-2 in each arm, x2 MPLas in the CT, x1 LRM-15 in each side-torso, plus a Narc beacon launcher in the LT; a total of 4E/5M) more as the balance between the energy-heavy 2R and the all-missile 5W (where I would have gone for 2 missile hardpoints in each arm & each torso section, for a total of 10M).

Thoughts?

Aesthetically, I'm finding I am not such a fan of the "energy gauntlet" look and prefer them in a row on the outside of the arm... Might be just me though.

[Bishop Steiner]

cdlord, on 05 October 2015 - 08:54 AM, said:

Aesthetically, I'm finding I am not such a fan of the "energy gauntlet" look and prefer them in a row on the outside of the arm... Might be just me though.

sounds like my old unit variant. This is the non compressed original version of the sketch, so it's taller and skinnier. Posted for the lazorgauntlet.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 October 2015 - 08:57 AM, said:

sounds like my old unit variant. This is the non compressed original version of the sketch, so it's taller and skinnier. Posted for the lazorgauntlet.

The legs look much better (proportionate) in this one.

Why 7-8-9 hardpoints insteado of 10? Because it is already more than most other heavy mechs. Look at the Catapult: 6 hardpoints. Dragon: 6. Quickdraw: 6. Cataphract: 6. Orion: 7. No need for power creep!

OK, the JagerMech has 8 hardpoints and the Thunderbolt has 8-10 hardpoints, but these are exceptions (Thunderbolt was always know for having A LOT of guns, an JagerMech was always a glass cannon)
Grasshopper and the Black Knight have 8, but they are originally laser boats, with lots of small weapons.

8 hardpoints for the Archer are fine because it is built around the dual big missile launchers (the other weapons are just a complement). 10 would be too much inflation and changes the focus of the mech from large launchers to a swarm of small launchers. From backup lasers to a death-star mech. Forget the meta: you can make a good mech that preserves its original role.

And let the 10 hardpoints for the Crusader: this one is a mech that really packs a punch for its size.

Edited by Odanan, 13 October 2015 - 08:42 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 05 October 2015 - 11:43 AM, said:

The legs look more better (proportionate) in this one.

Why 7-8-9 hardpoints insteado of 10? Because it is already more than most other heavy mechs. Look at the Catapult: 6 hardpoints. Dragon: 6. Quickdraw: 6. Cataphract: 6. Orion: 7. No need for power creep!

OK, the JagerMech has 8 hardpoints and the Thunderbolt has 8-10 hardpoints, but these are exceptions (Thunderbolt was always know for having A LOT of guns, an JagerMech was always a glass cannon)
Grasshopper and the Black Knight have 8, but they are originally laser boats, with lots of small weapons.

8 hardpoints for the Archer are fine because it is built around the dual big missile launchers (the other weapons are just a complement). 10 would be too much inflation and changes the focus of the mech from large launchers to a swarm of small launchers. From backup lasers to a death-star mech. Forget the meta: you can make a good mech that preserves its original role.

And let the 10 hardpoints for the Crusader: this one is a mech that really packs a punch for its size.

as noted, 5S already has 9 hardpoints. Stock. And again, yeah, power creep. More an issue with PGI needing to update the old mechs, than a reason to intermittently nerf new ones.

Missiles, and low hardpoints for lasers (aside from ct), along with non XL freindly hitboxes and probably bad hitboxes period? Give it limited hardpoints too,and it does have no appeal other than "cuz I used to play on ein TT".

Not sure how you can justify 10 hardpoint for the Crusader and not the Archer.

[r4plez]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 October 2015 - 11:50 AM, said:

as noted, 5S already has 9 hardpoints. Stock. And again, yeah, power creep. More an issue with PGI needing to update the old mechs, than a reason to intermittently nerf new ones.

Missiles, and low hardpoints for lasers (aside from ct), along with non XL freindly hitboxes and probably bad hitboxes period? Give it limited hardpoints too,and it does have no appeal other than "cuz I used to play on ein TT".

Not sure how you can justify 10 hardpoint for the Crusader and not the Archer.

Said a men who prays to Warhammer - damn that's a lot of hypocrisy!

Archer preorderd.

Edited by r4plez, 05 October 2015 - 12:56 PM.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 October 2015 - 11:50 AM, said:

as noted, 5S already has 9 hardpoints. Stock. And again, yeah, power creep. More an issue with PGI needing to update the old mechs, than a reason to intermittently nerf new ones.

Missiles, and low hardpoints for lasers (aside from ct), along with non XL freindly hitboxes and probably bad hitboxes period? Give it limited hardpoints too,and it does have no appeal other than "cuz I used to play on ein TT".

Not sure how you can justify 10 hardpoint for the Crusader and not the Archer.

You make baby Urbie cry when you talk like that.

[CDLord HHGD]

So.....
Archer or Phoenix Hawk?

or crusader or valkyrie or stinger or wasp.....

[Nathan Foxbane]

Phoenix Hawk