31 replies to this topic

[Bleary]

Goodbye wubstep. Goodbye AC/5s. Goodnight moon.

. . .alright, PGI: you did this. You're committed to this idea. I'm willing to play ball. I can deal with stock loadout quirks. But if you're going to take one of the worst collections of weight, engine cap, and hitboxes in the game and saddle half its variants with AC/2s, then I expect you to buff those guns halfway back to the terrifying cockpit-shaking sniper machine gun they once were. If you want to reward us for using stock weapons then you have to make those weapons playable.

Edited by Bleary, 17 February 2015 - 05:58 PM.

[Brizna]

Blackjack 3, the only Blackjack worth mentioning nowadays, also an underrated mech.

[Deathlike]

Oh AC2s... how ghost heat was the beginning of its fall.

The quirks certainly don't help that either.

[Kiiyor]

I'll miss you WubJack. I now join the hallowed halls of fallen WubMechs.

*sad fistbump to wubshee*

[El Bandito]

If I had a BJ-1DC, I would gladly put 2 LPLs on it, backed by some medium lasers. 12.5% heat reduction, 15% less laser duration, and 15% more range is all I could ask for a good wubbing, considering its good arm height.

BJ-1X with 10% heat reduction, 10% less laser duration, 10% more range, and 12.5% cooldown is also good, if not more so due to hardpoint location. I'd run this and kick ass since LPL GH number increased. BJ-1X LPL

Maybe I am just not as pampered with quirks in the first place.

Edited by El Bandito, 17 February 2015 - 07:50 PM.

[Bleary]

Well . . .you can do that. But you're better off either running mlasers (1X) or a different 'Mech (1DC).

It's not a matter of "I only have a Blackjack and I must wub". I can play other 'Mechs if I want large pulse lasers. I can play other configurations if I want Blackjacks. And after the new quirks, I'm better off not putting the two together.

The Blackjack by itself is, frankly speaking, pretty terrible. Its only advantage is two high arms. To be worth it, the 'Mech needs quirks that buff a particular weapon/role as high or higher than any other 'Mech in its class. The old 1DC fired AC/5s over hills better than any other 'Mech in the game. The old 1X had some situational advantages over the Wolverine 6K thanks to its hardpoints, and both 'Mechs were the closest you could get to a FLD sniper short of a Gauss Jager.

The new 1X still gets to do cool things, but it's a different thing (and one that a lot of other 'Mechs in the game already do). The new 1DC sits in the garage until they fix AC/2s.

Edited by Bleary, 18 February 2015 - 01:31 AM.

[MERC Mournblade]

Yeah, was a real shame. I was thinking of buying a Blackjack, but I'll pass now

[Shadow Magnet]

Bleary, on 18 February 2015 - 01:24 AM, said:

Well . . .you can do that. But you're better off either running mlasers (1X) or a different 'Mech (1DC).

It's not a matter of "I only have a Blackjack and I must wub". I can play other 'Mechs if I want large pulse lasers. I can play other configurations if I want Blackjacks. And after the new quirks, I'm better off not putting the two together.

The Blackjack by itself is, frankly speaking, pretty terrible. Its only advantage is two high arms. To be worth it, the 'Mech needs quirks that buff a particular weapon/role as high or higher than any other 'Mech in its class. The old 1DC fired AC/5s over hills better than any other 'Mech in the game. The old 1X had some situational advantages over the Wolverine 6K thanks to its hardpoints, and both 'Mechs were the closest you could get to a FLD sniper short of a Gauss Jager.

The new 1X still gets to do cool things, but it's a different thing (and one that a lot of other 'Mechs in the game already do). The new 1DC sits in the garage until they fix AC/2s.

I fully agree. There are plenty of mechs / mech variants now that got some quirks, some boosts but that are still under-performing compared against the top mechs.

I am not talking about that every mech should be insane quirked as the previous Thunderbolt 9S. But I would love if every mech variant would be powerful on it's own, that you can choose any of them for a match. Of course there are mechs variants that have very specific uses where they do excell. That is ok.

But this new approach of PGI, quirk everything towards stock layout, make everything mediorce will just mean that we return to the same situation before quirks were introduced. We are not getting more varation in the played builds, but again people will focus on the very few top mechs/builds again.

[zagibu]

I think it got good quirks, but since the AC/2 is a terrible weapon if not boating 4+, the mech is simply obsolete at the moment.

That said, I still run my BJ-1 with 2xAC/5 and 2xML, and it works okay.

[Athalus]

The BJ-1X losing it's LPL quirks was predictable, the Arrow now has them. the AC-2 quirks? Rather meh.

[Lead Sponge]

Bleary, on 17 February 2015 - 05:57 PM, said:

Goodbye wubstep. Goodbye AC/5s. Goodnight moon.

. . .alright, PGI: you did this. You're committed to this idea. I'm willing to play ball. I can deal with stock loadout quirks. But if you're going to take one of the worst collections of weight, engine cap, and hitboxes in the game and saddle half its variants with AC/2s, then I expect you to buff those guns halfway back to the terrifying cockpit-shaking sniper machine gun they once were. If you want to reward us for using stock weapons then you have to make those weapons playable.

The stock loadout quirks are a good thing in my opinion, but I tend to pilot my mechs practically stock. I am a bit grumbly about the Firebrand changes, but I was piloting my Firebrand in a non-stock loadout. It doesn't really effect my tactics with the Firebrand.

I guess I don't understand what you were using the Blackjack for in the past. The AC/2 Blackjack was always a long range critical hunter. I do suppressive fire and hang back until some holes had been punched in the enemy armor. Then I find the guys with holes and start hammering on those locations hunting for critical hits.

It always felt like that's what the Blackjack's job was. It's a support mech.

[Bigbacon]

AC2 quirks are like PPC quirks, they do nothing to help a weapon that has really no use because it is flawed and they usually give these quirks to mechs that can't back up these pathetic weapons with better ones.

[MeiSooHaityu]

From what I have been seeing, this last quirk pass was an IS mech nerf pass.

I'm kind of glad none of my mechs were included in this pass now. I kind of feel like I dodged a bullet.

I do find it odd that the Firestarter wasn't in this pass though.

[Shadow Magnet]

Bigbacon, on 18 February 2015 - 05:30 AM, said:

AC2 quirks are like PPC quirks, they do nothing to help a weapon that has really no use because it is flawed and they usually give these quirks to mechs that can't back up these pathetic weapons with better ones.

You forgot LBX10 - and to some degree UAC5. At least for me, the jamming rate of UAC5 is so high that I stopped using it entirely. Even on a King Crab with 4x UAC5, they keep jamming in the worst possible moment all the time. Switched to 4xAC5+2xAC2 and voila - I am a happy Crab now.
E.G. the Dragon 5N with 3 ballistic HP in the arm - got UAC5 quirks - seriously?!? What was so wrong about the AC2 quirk, running 3x AC2 + 1 ERLL? It was not as powerful as the 1N with 2xAC5 - but that one did not get changed at all. At least so far.
I had long discussions here in the forum where several people kept repeating that the new Dragon 1C and 5N quirks make perfect sense and these variants are still viable. Well, several weeks later: do you ever see people using these variants? No, they became extinct basically. Congratulation, PGI!

[Curccu]

I tried MG Arrow Yesterday... I charged against some puny enemy that didn't look dangerous and went full ****** dakka and 10-15 seconds later I died... his health was still ok.

[Shadow Magnet]

MeiSooHaityu, on 18 February 2015 - 05:46 AM, said:

From what I have been seeing, this last quirk pass was an IS mech nerf pass.

I'm kind of glad none of my mechs were included in this pass now. I kind of feel like I dodged a bullet.

I do find it odd that the Firestarter wasn't in this pass though.

Just wait for the next patch. If PGI really enforces the quirk alignment to the stock layout (such a completely idiotic approach!), then several mech owners will be in for a big bad surprise.

Firestarters? Check their stock layout, all ML. I predict a drop of 70-80% in usage of Firestarters if PGI changes their quirks to stock.

You run Thunderbolt 5SS with MPL? Well, after stock quirking it, no longer...

Thunderbolt 9SE? Phew, we are lucky, it actually got LPL on stock.

Suuure, if you accept nerfs like 15% more heat gen, 15% less range, 15% slower cooldown (or worse), you still can run anything on every mech, not caring for quirks. Your friendly Stormcrow, Timberwolf, Hellbringer and Direwolf pilots on Team Red will thank you for being a more easy prey.

Thank you again, who ever convinced PGI to do stock layout quirks! That was sarcasm, in case you missed it.

I still call it a quirk massacre. Because it is one.

Edited by Shadow Magnet, 18 February 2015 - 06:12 AM.

[zagibu]

Curccu, on 18 February 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

I tried MG Arrow Yesterday... I charged against some puny enemy that didn't look dangerous and went full ****** dakka and 10-15 seconds later I died... his health was still ok.

MGs are useless against armor.

[MeiSooHaityu]

More stock based quirks are fine IMO, but still make the platforms perform descent.

If you need to sacrifice one load out for a more stock based role, make those stock based weapons perform on par or close to the outgoing setup.

I think that is reasonable anyway.

[Shadow Magnet]

MeiSooHaityu, on 18 February 2015 - 06:17 AM, said:

More stock based quirks are fine IMO, but still make the platforms perform descent.

If you need to sacrifice one load out for a more stock based role, make those stock based weapons perform on par or close to the outgoing setup.

I think that is reasonable anyway.

You are aware that aloooot of mechs have almost identical stock layout?

That if PGI continues to align the quirks to stock layout, we soon have lots of mechs that run most efficient with the basically the same weapon layout. Why own 5 variants of the Firestarter if all have generic heat + ML quirks?

I never understood why people are so obsessed with the stock layout. What is so friggin good about that?

If stock is so great then PGI should lock endo-steel, single heat sinks and ferro-fib armor for IS like they did for Clan. Hey, it is the holy stock layout, how you dare you to change that?

[Curccu]

zagibu, on 18 February 2015 - 06:16 AM, said:

MGs are useless against armor.

let me fix that for you...
MGs are useless because of the cone of fire.