78 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

Deathlike, on 29 March 2015 - 04:13 PM, said:

TBH, the error in the OP's post is focusing on sheer DPS, instead of sustainable DPS through better build usage.

Even just the removal of 1 CERMED is enough to improve the cooling of a Clan Mech.

Sounds silly, but it's true.

It's true and it's directly to what I've been bringing up all the time.

Set your build to run similar damage output to a standard IS mech, and you will generally end up with more range and better cooling.

Set your build to run max firepower for a clan mech, and you will have massive alphas but also run extremely hot.


What a lot of players want, either through greed or simply not recognizing it, is the best of both.

The ability to just stuff your mech with as many lasers as you have hardpoints hit some huge alpha score like 50+ and expect it to run cool.

[Star Wolves Admin Account]

Ultimatum X, on 29 March 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

It's true and it's directly to what I've been bringing up all the time.

Set your build to run similar damage output to a standard IS mech, and you will generally end up with more range and better cooling.

Set your build to run max firepower for a clan mech, and you will have massive alphas but also run extremely hot.


What a lot of players want, either through greed or simply not recognizing it, is the best of both.

The ability to just stuff your mech with as many lasers as you have hardpoints hit some huge alpha score like 50+ and expect it to run cool.

You can cut down on the weapons. Probably the best example of this is a 4 er large laser timberwolf. He still does not compete with the large laser stalker in terms of sustained fire.

It really is an issue of the perks allowing for a sustained laser barrage.

All I am saying is it would be nice to perk out the warhawk as an example so you have a roughly equivalent 85 tonner capable of doing continual volleys like the stalker or tbolt can.

[Metus regem]

WM Quicksilver, on 29 March 2015 - 01:48 PM, said:

The only reason the Wubhawk can't compete is because of bad hitboxes, otherwise 4 C-LPL is the better build.

Heat, ghost heat tresh hold, low mounted hard points, and a shorter engagement range....

[El Bandito]

Unless you are firing PPCs non-stop like that of the 8Q, no energy mech can do suppression role due to lack of shake. Leave suppression to LRMs and ACs.

Edited by El Bandito, 29 March 2015 - 05:51 PM.

[Carpenocturn]

For
Metus regem


Warhawk
Heat = check
ghost heat tresh hold = check
low mounted hard points = Check
shorter engagement range = Nope, but then how many fights do you see an Assualt standing at 1200+ for the duration of the batle firing on stationary targets?
It actually makes more sense for the enemy to close the range and take advantage of the big target, terribad cornering and uncertain hit reg of Clan PPCs even if their own firepower is diminished

Edited by Carpenocturn, 29 March 2015 - 06:25 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 29 March 2015 - 05:49 PM, said:

Heat, ghost heat tresh hold, low mounted hard points, and a shorter engagement range....

Ghost heat threshold is meaningless when 2 C-LPLs does only 1 less point of damage than 3 I-LLs. The engagement range of C-LPLs is also longer (600 vs 540). Heat is another misconception considering the 4 C-LPLs is able to mount 28 DHS vs the 20 the 4N mounts, keeping in mind that the Stalker generates less heat per alpha (40 vs 33.6) but also has a faster cooldown meaning you can do more in the short term but in a sustained engagement it has to hold back a little bit more.

The only thing stopping the Warhawk is bad hitboxes/weapon mounts, that is it.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 29 March 2015 - 06:26 PM.

[Carpenocturn]

http://mwomercs.com/...s/page__st__100

Go here, have a look at this interesting comparrison

[FupDup]

The Legendary Wubhawk(TM) said:

So you want a high-endurance energy boat?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 29 March 2015 - 06:41 PM, said:

The Legendary Wubhawk™ said:

So you want a high-endurance energy boat?

I even come in a sword and board version!

[Leeroy Mechkins]

The counter to Stalkers is Timberwolves.
I played clan a lot before and had no problems whatsoever dealing with Stalkers.

There are so many ways, including ERML/AC, ERML/LBX, ERML/SRM, ERML/LRM Timberwolf builds.
All of them were so effective and fun, I couldn't choose which one was better.
Just add another type of weapon to your ERML laser vomit.

Edited by Leeroy Mechkins, 29 March 2015 - 07:27 PM.

[Kuritaclan]

Blueduck, on 29 March 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

Warhawk: PPC/Laser Heat Quirk: Note I did not say range quirk as that would break the system. Give the warhawk something so he can fight the stalker in a ranged suppressive fire war.

Nova: Better heat perks: Make it so he is something of a thunderwub light but with less survivability.

Gargy: Give him so ammo and ac perks so he can function like a dragon might as a mid/long range suppressive dakka mech. The clans could really use an autocannon mech that is as scary as the dragon.

Anyone agree/disagree? Please be nice in your comment.

For the reason of range suppressive fire you need a mech with at least 4+ Hardpoints idealy energy that does not be much exposed while supressing. Since non of the Mechs beside the HBR have such favorable siluets it will not be that way.

[Ultimax]

Blueduck, on 29 March 2015 - 04:56 PM, said:

You can cut down on the weapons. Probably the best example of this is a 4 er large laser timberwolf. He still does not compete with the large laser stalker in terms of sustained fire.

It really is an issue of the perks allowing for a sustained laser barrage.

All I am saying is it would be nice to perk out the warhawk as an example so you have a roughly equivalent 85 tonner capable of doing continual volleys like the stalker or tbolt can.

If you want to compare an 85 tonner to an 85 tonner why are you choosing the Timber Wolf?

Why are you choosing a different weapon from the one the STK-4N is specialized in?


The closest analog for LLAS in "big weapons" clan side are CLPLs.

Generally you need 2x CLPLs to match 3x (un-quirked) 3x LLAS.

Here, this is one of my Warhawk builds.

Take a look at the Alpha, the Cooling Rate, the Range, the damage if you one > two punch with 2 then 2 CLPLs.

F2P Version
WHK-C Asymmetric Version


Give it a try, it's very simple but effective.

660m optimal range with T5 mod.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 29 March 2015 - 09:20 PM.

[anonymous161]

It's the clan nerfing of their most useful trait...lasers why I decided to refund the wave 3 besides the point that we wont get them for a good while anyways to make a difference in cw. Right now cw is nearly no fun to play so many noob clan pilots using trail mechs. Once in a while we get a nice battle and a win but so many quirked out more useful IS mechs on the mercs side no point in continue playing it.

If they upgrade the lasers to be more closer to the way they were before I'll probably buy wave 3 again only this time not the entire package more likely get the 90 dollar one.

I dont remember the last time I've seen a clan mech take out an IS mech from range using lasers.

Edited by Darth Bane001, 29 March 2015 - 09:26 PM.

[The Flying Gecko]

Tractor Joe, on 29 March 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

Have you played CW, its nothing but clan laser spam? You want to make that worse? Must be a clanner.

Have you played CW? It's nothing but Laser Stalker Spam.

[Jazzbandit1313]

Already in the game:

SCR
-3mls
-2lls

[Taemien]

Darth Bane001, on 29 March 2015 - 09:25 PM, said:

It's the clan nerfing of their most useful trait...lasers why I decided to refund the wave 3 besides the point that we wont get them for a good while anyways to make a difference in cw. Right now cw is nearly no fun to play so many noob clan pilots using trail mechs. Once in a while we get a nice battle and a win but so many quirked out more useful IS mechs on the mercs side no point in continue playing it.

If they upgrade the lasers to be more closer to the way they were before I'll probably buy wave 3 again only this time not the entire package more likely get the 90 dollar one.

I dont remember the last time I've seen a clan mech take out an IS mech from range using lasers.

You make this post as if the Federated Suns has a foothold in the Pentagon Worlds. Take a look at the map. If its all Clan pilots in trials.. then they must not be doing terrible in them. Quite the opposite in fact. Something must be working.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 29 March 2015 - 06:24 PM, said:

The only thing stopping the Warhawk is bad hitboxes/weapon mounts, that is it.

It's more the location of the mounts.

Stalkers are erroneously thought of as "tanky", but they are only tanky if they are asymmetric.

Symmetric Stalkers easily lose half their firepower when you focus an arm or a ST - the hitoxes are actually very bad for symmetric builds.

Two factors lead people to think that Stalkers are " tanky".

1) High mounts allow for less exposure.
2) Builds like the Misery that are asymmetric.

Soon the Warhawk will have one of those attributes more generally available.


If they had given the WHK the kind of higher mounts they gave to the DWF-S, I'd probably never stop playing it.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 30 March 2015 - 06:34 AM.

[Gyrok]

Leeroy Mechkins, on 29 March 2015 - 07:22 PM, said:

The counter to Stalkers is Timberwolves.
I played clan a lot before and had no problems whatsoever dealing with Stalkers.

There are so many ways, including ERML/AC, ERML/LBX, ERML/SRM, ERML/LRM Timberwolf builds.
All of them were so effective and fun, I couldn't choose which one was better.
Just add another type of weapon to your ERML laser vomit.

LOL @ STK counter TWs.

No...just flat out no.

If you put a stalker in a position where the TW has to cover open ground to reach him...game over for the TW before it even started....

You must be trolling.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 30 March 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

It's more the location of the mounts.

Stalkers are erroneously thought of as "tanky", but they are only tanky if they are asymmetric.

Symmetric Stalkers easily lose half their firepower when you focus an arm or a ST - the hitoxes are actually very bad for symmetric builds.

Two factors lead people to think that Stalkers are " tanky".

1) High mounts allow for less exposure.
2) Builds like the Misery that are asymmetric.

Soon the Warhawk will have one of those attributes more generally available.


If they had given the WHK the kind of higher mounts they gave to the DWF-S, I'd probably never stop playing it.

While I would agree, the small/slim profile helps continue the feeling of "tanky" because it isn't as easy to hit as some of the other designs. It also benefits greatly from being able to abuse the 40% damage reduction on transfer from a destroyed section as good as any humanoid can. Both the Stalker and King Crab have large side torsos, but only the Stalker can minimize damage to the CT and use it to sponge damage effectively with that dead torso.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 30 March 2015 - 10:17 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Theres a thread in the CW forum that backs up everything I said here, and puts some scientific data on the table.