20517 replies to this topic

[Dawnstealer]

I want my Hatchetman LAM.

[Odanan]

Dawnstealer, on 15 June 2016 - 05:31 AM, said:

I want my Hatchetman LAM.

Hatchetman quad-LAM colossal mech.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I want my Axman: Adam Steiner Hero Mech

[Metus regem]

Odanan, on 15 June 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

They are too good at scouting, steeping over Aerotechs/VTOLs' role.

And oh boy, they can do hit-and-run combat like nothing else.

Really, depending on the terrain, a LAM can beat any mech with impunity.

That's the point of them, to be the pinnacle of that, I mean there was a reason why in Lore, the great houses would sacrifice entire companies of regular Battle Mechs to capture spare parts for LAMs.... That being said, the price that a LAM will pay for the ability to be that good in it's ideal role, a role most players do not understand and implement them correctly in, is a heavy one, a dedicated combat Aerofighter/VTOL of similar speed, will pack much more firepower and armour, as will a dedicated Battle Mech of the same weight.

LAMs suffer from not being able to use bulky equipment, no XL engines, no FF, no Endo and no split crit weapons, at least in the current rules for them. It's sad that FASA and Catalyst can't seem to make up their minds about them, or rather have problems seeing how to be able to implement them into TT correctly.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 15 June 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

They are too good at scouting, steeping over Aerotechs/VTOLs' role.

And oh boy, they can do hit-and-run combat like nothing else.

Really, depending on the terrain, a LAM can beat any mech with impunity.

Especially with Dark Age tech. Add in Clan Target Comps and Pulse lasers?

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 June 2016 - 06:56 AM, said:

Especially with Dark Age tech. Add in Clan Target Comps and Pulse lasers?

It looks like Targeting Computer actually doesn't work with Pulse Lasers... but I confess I ruined some friedships by using some 10x Small Pulse Lasers + Target Comp build.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 15 June 2016 - 08:27 AM, said:

It looks like Targeting Computer actually doesn't work with Pulse Lasers... but I confess I ruined some friedships by using some 10x Small Pulse Lasers + Target Comp build.

when did they change that? I mean...there is a Warhawk built around that? (The Charlie)

I swear I'm getting sick of retcons and rule changes.

[Bishop Steiner]

also, thoughts on this thread/Idea, Odanan (and if Strum can tear my hero idea apart liek he usually does, well, welcome to, also)
http://mwomercs.com/...-we-need-it-20/


Mind you Sandstrom died in 3033, probably at the Bounty Hunter's hands... so it would be more his "Heir/Mech" if it were ato be the Dark Death... which I think would just add flavor.

[Nathan Foxbane]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 June 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

when did they change that? I mean...there is a Warhawk built around that? (The Charlie)

I swear I'm getting sick of retcons and rule changes.

I think it has changed a couple times back an forth. On one hand, TCs and pulse lasers (particularly Clan pulse lasers) are a pretty overwhelming combo, on the other hand removing that interaction would make some older designs illegal. Not quite sure what the current stance is. I know LB-X using TCs are dependent on what type of ammo they are currently firing.

[Bishop Steiner]

Nathan Foxbane, on 15 June 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

I think it has changed a couple times back an forth. On one hand, TCs and pulse lasers (particularly Clan pulse lasers) are a pretty overwhelming combo, on the other hand removing that interaction would make some older designs illegal. Not quite sure what the current stance is. I know LB-X using TCs are dependent on what type of ammo they are currently firing.

yeah, always felt that the added weight of pulse lasers and TCs...and ballistics in general largely compensated. I mean I get them not linking RACs because that was stupid powerful. SMH.

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 June 2016 - 12:18 PM, said:

yeah, always felt that the added weight of pulse lasers and TCs...and ballistics in general largely compensated. I mean I get them not linking RACs because that was stupid powerful. SMH.

a TC in a AC/2 boat with AP ammo part of a C3 network is stupidly nasty too....

[Alex Morgaine]

Looks like there are rules in tac ops or total warfare that limit the aim option but Allow the normal -1 bonus for regular attacks with pulse weapons, rapid fire weapons, and cluster munitions.

[wanderer]

Quote

I swear I'm getting sick of retcons and rule changes.

Hasn't changed in ages, actually.

The whole "aimed shots with pulse/tarcomp" got it's teeth pulled over a decade ago, but the to-hit bonuses still stack for unaimed shots, giving you -3 to hit with the combination. Add a Clan pilot's normal base 3 to-hit and you're firing at long range like most IS pilots do at short.

[Bishop Steiner]

wanderer, on 15 June 2016 - 02:38 PM, said:

Hasn't changed in ages, actually.

The whole "aimed shots with pulse/tarcomp" got it's teeth pulled over a decade ago, but the to-hit bonuses still stack for unaimed shots, giving you -3 to hit with the combination. Add a Clan pilot's normal base 3 to-hit and you're firing at long range like most IS pilots do at short.

anything post 2000 I probably missed with FanPro and CGLs initial push to just resell retreaded books.

[wanderer]

It was one of the first rules fixes (along with partial cover becoming more commonsense and not just "+3 to hit and a 1 in 6 headshot" post-Clan release. So yeah. Loooooong time ago.

[CK16]

So I got to thinking the other night on some possible quirks for the Miffkitty MK II, here is something of what I had in mind.

Spoiler

-All variants a slight JJ quirk, if one exists either duration or more thrust.

-MCMkII-1: Gauss Rifle Cool down by -10% Missile cool down -10% (give it the long range suppression fire title it is told to have) agility quirks.

-MCMkII-2: LBX spread by -5% Missile spread by -10% (for better brawling)agility quriks

-MCMkII-4: Energy range by +5% (helping energy boat a bit since only 4 slots in the arms) agility quirks

-MCMkII-6: Energy cool down by -10% and additional structure/armor by %5 overall (replicating Harjel units)

What do you think?

Also sorry a work also got to thinking here, Phil really enjoys the TBR with 1 Gauss and 2 x C-ER PPC's it got me thinking on this.....could the Mad Cat Mk II pull off twin PPC Twin Gauss effectively? I mean the thing will go 70+KPH and have decent JJ's (hopefully PGI fixes assault JJ's by the time this comes around). Idk what do you guys for see as the best build options on your own opinions here?or what you would run.

Also hard point inflation, what would be a good idea here for this? Something with quad Ballistics is something I would love.

[MeiSooHaityu]

CK16, on 16 June 2016 - 06:53 AM, said:

Also sorry a work also got to thinking here, Phil really enjoys the TBR with 1 Gauss and 2 x C-ER PPC's it got me thinking on this.....could the Mad Cat Mk II pull off twin PPC Twin Gauss effectively? I mean the thing will go 70+KPH and have decent JJ's (hopefully PGI fixes assault JJ's by the time this comes around). Idk what do you guys for see as the best build options on your own opinions here?or what you would run.

Phil's Timber Wolf build bugs me for some reason. There is nothing wrong with it, and his does well with it, but for some reason it bugs me. I just can't put my finger on it. Maybe its a combo of empty arm, cool shot reliance, and a bit min/max-ish. Who knows. I min/Max too sometimes, but idk. I just can't pinpoint my dislike for the build.

At least with the Hunch IIC, I knew his ultra build bugged me because he min/maxed and put both ultras in one torso. Feels like a waste...like...just use a regular Hunchback! Lol.

Anyway, doesn't matter one bit if I don't like it, he has to like it.

As for the MKII, it might be able to run that setup. It would probably be fun.

[CK16]

Yea, personally I would probably prefer the PPC in the arms and Gauss in the right torso (call me crazy but I rarely have it go boom there in my TBR's....like never have had it go off there....) but anyway, I don't follow the meta to a T usually I always prefer asymmetric builds, do not like lopsided ones or shield arms ect. Just bugs me as well.

Something the MK II is perfect for

I really wonder though, with its potential to be a 90 ton Poptart PGI would not be kind to it, looks at previous Poptart kings and how they are stil treated unfairly by the quirk fairy....Maybe with the MKII guessing it will be release fairly on the decent side of things, meaning above average to sell more (yes small tin hat is on) maybe though with it performing well and balanced and to prevent massive power creep other jumping assualts get a buff to help. Also new power draw system might help as well considering an alpha of 2 GR's and 2 PPC's would be fairly above 30 points

[Bishop Steiner]

MeiSooHaityu, on 16 June 2016 - 07:09 AM, said:

Phil's Timber Wolf build bugs me for some reason. There is nothing wrong with it, and his does well with it, but for some reason it bugs me. I just can't put my finger on it. Maybe its a combo of empty arm, cool shot reliance, and a bit min/max-ish. Who knows. I min/Max too sometimes, but idk. I just can't pinpoint my dislike for the build.

At least with the Hunch IIC, I knew his ultra build bugged me because he min/maxed and put both ultras in one torso. Feels like a waste...like...just use a regular Hunchback! Lol.

Anyway, doesn't matter one bit if I don't like it, he has to like it.

As for the MKII, it might be able to run that setup. It would probably be fun.

sword and board builds on iconic symmetrical mechs really jsut bug me.

[CK16]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 June 2016 - 07:28 AM, said:

sword and board builds on iconic symmetrical mechs really jsut bug me.

Mostly only on you outdated IS designs