171 replies to this topic

[Mavairo]

LordKnightFandragon, on 06 April 2015 - 06:10 PM, said:

LOl, dont think Stalker needs a nerf......why would it get nerfed? It is a decent one, but needs no nerfs. Is that how PGI pushes people into other mechs? Dont make the other ones a bit more appealing, nerf the ones people likes....

PGI wants to reduce it's quirks. They feel it's "a touch out of line". We know PGI..they wouldn't know subtle nerfs if instructions came up and bit them on the... well you know the rest.

I'm pretty sure that's their strategy honestly at this point.

[AssaultPig]

4N is really good in the CW environment where 1) it doesn't have to move that much and 2) it knows pretty precisely where enemies will be coming from.

In games on regular maps they get chopped to pieces pretty easily by anything that can get out of their tiny frontal arc.

it doesn't really need nerfed

[1453 R]

Ultimatum X, on 06 April 2015 - 06:15 PM, said:

You don't understand.

WM Quicksilver wants the Stalker to be nerfed so that the arm lasers are all flipped and mounted on the bottom of the arms.


That is why the profile of the mech will no longer be good, the mech itself would be terrible.

Being honest, the modified screenshots I've seen would still put the Stalker's arm lasers higher than most humanoid 'Mechs doing the underhanded cannon grip on their low-slung gorilla arms. Obviously it would be an enormous hit to the Stalker, but I don't think it'd be as unsurvivable a hit as folks are claiming. The Stalker would still be narrow from the front and it'd still be better off than a lot of assault 'mechs in terms of hardpoint placement, and frankly it'd still be the size of a heavy 'Mech.

Would it drop a tier, maybe two? Probably. Would it fall all the way to T5? No, don't think so. It's not that awful even if it gets ST'd out. It can still shield-side reasonably well, and any such geometry meganerf would (sigh...) likely be accompanied by a profusion of (ludicrously) increased quirks.

Do I think it'll happen? Not in a million years. If, I say if, PGI was going to fix geometry on anything? It'd be the Quickdraw first, maybe the Warhawk second if we're lucky, and the Stalker somewhere down on the list after 11 or 12, especially since those high-up beam hardpoints are an integral part of the chassis' MWO identity now. And we all know the odds of Piranha fixing their geometry or scaling issues even on 'Mechs in desperate, soul-crushing need of them (QUICK. DRAWS) are basically zero. So...hey. Heh, no need to even defend your position because those hardpoints are not movin' any time soon.

[TwentyOne]

Thank you for making this. Im tired of clan cheaters trying to get more buffs to their already good enough mechs. They already have the cheat godTimber and Scrow, and they want more EZ mode mechs.

[QuantumButler]

1453 R, on 06 April 2015 - 03:48 PM, said:

Please stop trying to make this a Clanz vs. Spheroids fight, folks. The intent is to take a look at these two 'Mechs and see why one is considered a top-tier CW facewrecker and the other is considered garbage.

In my honest opinion, the Warhawk suffers a bit from the same thing the Summoner does - it's a decent 'Mech which ends up earning an awful rap due to the existence of one (or more) members of the Clan 'Unholy Trinity'. An objective analysis of the Summoner, disregarding the existence of the Timber Wolf, shows that it's actually a perfectly serviceable 'Mech that competes well with other SPheroid machines of its weight class (it's not awful, it's not amazing - it competes well, as in it's roughly on par with Cataphracts, Grasshoppers, and similar units for battlefield effectiveness).

The Warhawk is similar - it's a reasonably effective 'Mech if one discounts the existence of the Timber Wolf (and the Dire Whale, to an extent). It's got all the firepower it needs, it moves well enough to keep up with the team. It has unfortunately weak hitboxes which means it has to be careful of its positioning and it can't stand up to focus fire the way tankier assaults can, but it does have 85-tonner armor which counts for something. It's not phenomenal, as its geometry and hardpoint issues are serious drawbacks, but it's also not Garfayle Awful.

The Stalker, on the other hand, benefits from superb geometry which allows it to fade into the background in a team fight - something the initial 1v1 duel testing did not account for, unfortunately - and which perfectly compliments its role as a second-line fire support 'Mech. It is better than the Warhawk at the job both 'Mechs try to do - second-line fire support - but this is for reasons of geometry and ruggedness more than anything else, things the Stalker has been known to excel at for many moons now.

I just wish people would get the hell over the whole CLAMZ OP nonsense long enough to take a proper look at this crap and figure it out themselves.

Eh, I think the biggest thing that kills the Warhawk is those locked DHSes in the side torso, so it suffers from Hunchback syndrome where there is one side you have to kill to remove 70% of the Warhawk's firepower, and it is the same side every time, and with so many locked heatsinks you lack the flexibility to run some builds because of tonnage being wasted on heat you don't otherwise need [such as on ballistic builds, where extra space for more ammo would help a lot]

If it had at least one omnipod with some hardpoints in the other side [like a pod with a couple more M so it could surmvomit or lrmboat all the missiles, one with a E or 2, maybe even a B], or at least make it so the side torso omnipod DHSes aren't hardwired and can be removed, I think the WHK would instantly go from mediocre to pretty okay.

Edited by QuantumButler, 07 April 2015 - 04:19 AM.