20517 replies to this topic

[TheArisen]

Odanan, on 30 April 2017 - 12:56 PM, said:

9 Rocket Launchers/20? that's just 13.5 tons.

B33F might do some crazy stuff with MRMs instead...

Bishop was saying pgi should make it so you can put two RLs per HP, that'd be 18 RLs...

[Pariah Devalis]

Virlutris, on 30 April 2017 - 02:05 PM, said:

So, RL spam on a Linebacker, then?

He'd probably go with an MRM180 stalker or something nutzo like that.

[FLG 01]

Odanan, on 30 April 2017 - 12:56 PM, said:

9 Rocket Launchers/20? that's just 13.5 tons.

B33F might do some crazy stuff with MRMs instead...

Use both. The huge MRM launchers providing lots of firepower with very few hardpoints might just go well together with a number of RL.

Fill two hardpoints with MRM40 and the other seven with RL. With XL, LFF, and a bit shoving you can do RL15, providing a 185 alpha in total. Not a good build, but could be fun.
Go a bit lower in damage, like 2x MRM30 and 7x RL10 you still have a 130 alpha but a LFE and greater speed. This could be even viable, although a lot depends on the actual implementation of MRM and RL.

Edited by FLG 01, 30 April 2017 - 04:03 PM.

[Odanan]

And so tomorrow ends the Early Rewards. In the next few days we will probably know something about the next mech(s).

[Imperius]

Odanan, on 30 April 2017 - 05:15 PM, said:

And so tomorrow ends the Early Rewards. In the next few days we will probably know something about the next mech(s).

I kinda think it might be a bit longer. Just because the Civil War Update requires retro fitting mechs too. I hope I'm wrong cause Blood Asp, Stone Rhino, and Fafnir will be welcomed additions in my over filled mechlab!

[FLG 01]

The engine desync made me realize again that we lack IS cavalry Mechs, especially in the range of 70 to 75 tons. All of our 65, 70 and 75 tonners have the same speed profile (4/6; 65 kph).
I think we could need some faster units (5/8; 86 kph), even if the engine would be downgraded a bit by most players. In the FCCW-era there is no shortage of such Mechs: Falconer, Lao Hu, Maelstrom, Excalibur...
Of course, if PGI really gave them the same mobility as a standard 4/6-Mech, they would make less sense. But those cavalry Mechs deserve their higher mobility and it sets them apart from the rest. Consider it an extra quirk (even if at the expense of other quirks).

[Virlutris]

Juodas Varnas, on 30 April 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

Rocket Launchers are IS tech.

Pariah Devalis, on 30 April 2017 - 02:28 PM, said:

He'd probably go with an MRM180 stalker or something nutzo like that.

Being a tabletop neophyte, I'd completely forgotten they were IS only. A lot of this stuff is hypothetical for me still.

MRMs could be cool too.

[Zergling]

FLG 01, on 01 May 2017 - 07:15 PM, said:

The engine desync made me realize again that we lack IS cavalry Mechs, especially in the range of 70 to 75 tons. All of our 65, 70 and 75 tonners have the same speed profile (4/6; 65 kph).
I think we could need some faster units (5/8; 86 kph), even if the engine would be downgraded a bit by most players. In the FCCW-era there is no shortage of such Mechs: Falconer, Lao Hu, Maelstrom, Excalibur...
Of course, if PGI really gave them the same mobility as a standard 4/6-Mech, they would make less sense. But those cavalry Mechs deserve their higher mobility and it sets them apart from the rest. Consider it an extra quirk (even if at the expense of other quirks).

Other IS mechs with 80 kph+ speed in the 65-75 ton range, that fit the timeline up to 3067: Bombadier, Exterminator, Daikyu, Flashman, Hercules, Jinggau, Ninja-To, Rakshasa, Thanatos, Thunder, Verfolger.

And there's plenty of variants of other 65-75 tonners that have 80 kph+ speed, like the Warhammer 9D.

[TheArisen]

FLG 01, on 01 May 2017 - 07:15 PM, said:

The engine desync made me realize again that we lack IS cavalry Mechs, especially in the range of 70 to 75 tons. All of our 65, 70 and 75 tonners have the same speed profile (4/6; 65 kph).
I think we could need some faster units (5/8; 86 kph), even if the engine would be downgraded a bit by most players. In the FCCW-era there is no shortage of such Mechs: Falconer, Lao Hu, Maelstrom, Excalibur...
Of course, if PGI really gave them the same mobility as a standard 4/6-Mech, they would make less sense. But those cavalry Mechs deserve their higher mobility and it sets them apart from the rest. Consider it an extra quirk (even if at the expense of other quirks).

Hmm maybe the desync doesn't need to be a complete desync? Like maybe just a hard nerf but not killing it. I'm a little worried about mechs that depend on twisting to work (Wubshee, etc)

Edited by TheArisen, 01 May 2017 - 09:33 PM.

[Requiemking]

TheArisen, on 01 May 2017 - 09:32 PM, said:

Hmm maybe the desync doesn't need to be a complete desync? Like maybe just a hard nerf but not killing it. I'm a little worried about mechs that depend on twisting to work (Wubshee, etc)

Unfortunately, it has to be a complete desync. A major part of the current imbalance between the weightclasses stems from the fact that heavier weightclasses can gain additional agility to negate the speed advantage of Lighter ones, thus creating a "bigger is better" meta where one should not have existed.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Zergling, on 01 May 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

Other IS mechs with 80 kph+ speed in the 65-75 ton range, that fit the timeline up to 3067: Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu, Daikyu.

And there's plenty of variants of other 65-75 tonners that have 80 kph+ speed, like the Daikyu.

Fixed it for you.

[Karl Streiger]

Requiemking, on 01 May 2017 - 09:47 PM, said:

Unfortunately, it has to be a complete desync. A major part of the current imbalance between the weightclasses stems from the fact that heavier weightclasses can gain additional agility to negate the speed advantage of Lighter ones, thus creating a "bigger is better" meta where one should not have existed.

I need to disagree.
The only problem for this argument I don't have the numbers - yet.
The engine weight increases almost exponential - it is already so that an 80t Mech with the same top speed as a 75t Mech (300 Rating )doesn't gain anything for his additional 5tons.

this becomes more and more an issue the higher the rating comes - in the end, the only reason for a Banshee run a 380 STD in tt was its ability to wreck havoc in close combat by punching and kicking enemy mechs in seconds to death.

In MWO the whole concept of physical combat is missing - so an important part of the huge engine weight is missing, the same goes for the "defensive" modifications of TT combat.
A to hit roll of 10 rather than 9 or 11 rather than 10 is good armor.
The same is missing in MWO either - 15m/s or 20m/s doesn't matter much not when the target is bigger as a barn.

Ok I admit those XL engines are an issue - so MWO finally need to start to drop TT construction rules for good.
Options:

• weightier engines generate more speed STD Light > ISXL > ClanXL
  
• survivability is taken into account STD > Light > Clan XL > XL
  
• other stuff

Last not least what would you think might happen when a Kodiak gets the same mobility doesn't matter if 300 or 400 rated engine?
Would it not be stupid to sacrifice firepower for a bigger engine?
With Light Engines in reach - most of my Atlas will drop weight back to 300 or 325 (for the heatsink) and put more weapons and heatsinks in the chassis.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 02 May 2017 - 02:29 AM.

[CK16]

Well one could assume, possibly a mech any day now at around 2:30pm PGI time

[Karl Streiger]

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 05:50 AM, said:

Well one could assume, possibly a mech any day now at around 2:30pm PGI time

I don't give a ....
unless its comes with Broadsword decals

Edited by Karl Streiger, 02 May 2017 - 05:54 AM.

[CK16]

Karl Streiger, on 02 May 2017 - 05:53 AM, said:

I don't give a ....
unless its comes with Broadsword decals

Nova Cat would be a win in my book. (And good.chance imo of it!) I am predicting a Clan sprint here after the past 3/4 IS announced

[Karl Streiger]

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:

Nova Cat would be a win in my book. (And good.chance imo of it!) I am predicting a Clan sprint here after the past 3/4 IS announced

you mean you want another real clan mech after i don't know how many mediocre IS releases?

since the Marauder the only real IS Mech seem to be the Warhammer Bounty Hunter and the Cyclops Sleipnir

[CK16]

Not my fault the Spheroids choose poorly!

Not my fault Clans design better stuff >.>

[Karl Streiger]

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 06:03 AM, said:

Not my fault the Spheroids choose poorly!

Not my fault Clans design better stuff >.>

That's the reason for the Broadsword decal or a angel with a flaming sword

heck for a Legacy, Shootist or Thug I will drop my whole hangar (minus Centurion, Thunderbolt; Zeus, Stalker, Banshee and Atlas)

Edited by Karl Streiger, 02 May 2017 - 06:19 AM.

[FLG 01]

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 06:03 AM, said:

Not my fault the Spheroids choose poorly!

Don't be too quick to judge. IS votes are overwhelmingly in favour of the Fafnir, which would be a good choice in every conceivable way (lore, nostalgia, performance). And if it had not been arbitrarily excluded in that other poll, results might have been a little different.

Some poll results are idiotic (as are some poll options for that matter), of course, but then it is PGI's job to sort those out and include sensible Mechs instead.

[Metus regem]

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 06:03 AM, said:

Not my fault the Spheroids choose poorly!

Not my fault Clans design better stuff >.>

Really? So what is the reason why the Viper was such a top choice or the Cougar for that matter....

Edited by Metus regem, 02 May 2017 - 06:27 AM.