171 replies to this topic

[Lord0fHats]

1v1 dueling is a rather pointless test for a game where 1v1 dueling shouldn't be happening.

Averen, on 05 April 2015 - 11:27 AM, said:

The CLPL-Warhawk is cooler and has more sustained DPS than our superquirked stalker 4n.

You missed the second part of the comment, namely that the Warhawk is either running too hot (and yes, 4-5 Large pulses is still hot for a mech that ends up with no remaining tonnage/podspace for the additional heat sinks it needs) or is outgunned by the Timber. You can try mixing a combination of Medium (pulse or no pulse) and Large pulse/cerll but the Warhawk is still libel to end up being equal to or less than the Timber Wolf, which weighs 10 tons less, is faster, doesn't look like a Direwolf even remotely, and could run JJ's if it wants to be a be fast and loose with heat management.

Bad hard point placement, and ferro instead of endo screwed the Hawk out of any hope of being good at its role.

Armorine, on 05 April 2015 - 11:41 AM, said:

I'll bite here. If y'all don't think the primes worth it what's the best war hawk model and why? I really want us to flesh out this thought processes behind the war hawk being seen as bad. Other then it's mistaken identity syndrome.

The C because it has a laser hard point in the CT (if you want an LRM/SRM build the B has a missile hard point CT). Until there are meaningul Clan quirks, hard points in the CT win everytime

Edited by Lord0fHats, 05 April 2015 - 11:48 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Lord0fHats, on 05 April 2015 - 11:42 AM, said:

1v1 dueling is a rather pointless test for a game where 1v1 dueling shouldn't be happening.



You missed the second part of the comment, namely that the Warhawk is either running too hot (and yes, 4-5 Large pulses is still hot for a mech that ends up with no remaining tonnage for the additional heat sinks it needs) or is outgunned by the Timber. You can try mixing a combination of Medium (pulse or no pulse) and Large pulse/cerll but the Warhawk is still libel to end up being equal to or less than the Timber Wolf.

Bad hard point placement, and ferro instead of endo screwed the Hawk out of any hope of being good at its role.

Naw, 1.4 DHS screwed the hawk out of it's role.....give it 2.0 DHS instead of 1.4s and you would see it almost endlessly firing its energy weapons. Its coolant should be, on a normal map, better then the coolant you get while stationary on a cold map.....and that is like 8coolant per second vs its current like 6. WHK should easily be at like 9 or 10 coolant per second. its current MWO translated TT Cooling power is like 36, it should be like 56 with 28 DHS...

[Jonathan Paine]

Warhawk has a range advantage of 102 meters. How is this a lesser mech at long range?

[Kuritaclan]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 April 2015 - 11:34 AM, said:

i think what might be more telling is 2 comp groups, in CW dropping 12 STK-4N vs 4 WHK (no Stromcrows or TWs) and battle it out a dozen times.

I think we would get a much more "real world" look at each chassis performance. Still not perfect, since one rarely sees 12 of anything vs 12 of anything, but also removes variables, as much as possible.

This would be a lot of fun to watch i guess. If it would be done show us the light show.

[Averen]

Lord0fHats, on 05 April 2015 - 11:42 AM, said:

You missed the second part of the comment, namely that the Warhawk is either running too hot (and yes, 4-5 Large pulses is still hot for a mech that ends up with no remaining tonnage for the additional heat sinks it needs) or is outgunned by the Timber. You can try mixing a combination of Medium (pulse or no pulse) and Large pulse/cerll but the Warhawk is still libel to end up being equal to or less than the Timber Wolf.

Bad hard point placement, and ferro instead of endo screwed the Hawk out of any hope of being good at its role.

You read:
The 6LL on the stalker build are hotter than the 4LPL on the warhawk. So if the Hawk is screwed by heat, then the stalker should be even more screwed. Endo or Ferro doesn't change anything about that result (talk about free xl's and lighter weaponry).

Hardpoints are better on the stalker and he is probably superior on CW, that's true.But in close? The terrible twist on a stalker is a serious issue in a battle, especially in a bigger battle where multiple players focus fire. The warhawk would be superior in close combat.
Provided the enemies know how to hit a stalkers CT, which seems to a bit of a mysterium to some.

edit: Also, on 700+m the Hawl will still win every single time.

Edited by Averen, 05 April 2015 - 11:48 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Armorine, on 05 April 2015 - 11:41 AM, said:

I'll bite here. If y'all don't think the primes worth it what's the best war hawk model and why? I really want us to flesh out this thought processes behind the war hawk being seen as bad. Other then it's mistaken identity syndrome.

Never have understood the WHK is "Ba" thing. It's not top tier, but it's always been solid. For me, it's issue has always been the locked LT and hardpoints really limit the number and variety of effective build,s so I always feel a little stifled trying to design them. But I personally prefer them to DWFs, any day of the week.

[Ultimax]

Lord0fHats, on 05 April 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

You missed the second part of the comment, namely that the Warhawk is either running too hot (and yes, 4-5 Large pulses is still hot for a mech that ends up with no remaining tonnage for the additional heat sinks it needs)

I'm sorry but I have already provided testing in this thread here: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4340581

That shows the Warhawk RUNS COOLER, not Hotter.



So, if you have some math or testing that shows otherwise I will take a look at it.


Otherwise you are either uninformed or worse being purposefully dishonest.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 05 April 2015 - 11:49 AM.

[Averen]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 April 2015 - 11:47 AM, said:

Never have understood the WHK is "Ba" thing. It's not top tier, but it's always been solid. For me, it's issue has always been the locked LT and hardpoints really limit the number and variety of effective build,s so I always feel a little stifled trying to design them. But I personally prefer them to DWFs, any day of the week.

Personally, I think it's just the unholy trinity. Nothing looks good between crow, timer and dire.

[CptGier]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 April 2015 - 11:47 AM, said:

Never have understood the WHK is "Ba" thing. It's not top tier, but it's always been solid. For me, it's issue has always been the locked LT and hardpoints really limit the number and variety of effective build,s so I always feel a little stifled trying to design them. But I personally prefer them to DWFs, any day of the week.

I stopped worrying about it's hardpoint limits and if PGI wants it to have 4 large energy guns and be a sniper, then just have it quirked to be really good at its job. Extra Heatsink dissipation, better beam duration, better damage and velocity on its PPCs, better range and stuff for lasers......

[Ultimax]

CptGier, on 05 April 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

I stopped worrying about it's hardpoint limits and if PGI wants it to have 4 large energy guns and be a sniper, then just have it quirked to be really good at its job. Extra Heatsink dissipation, better beam duration, better damage and velocity on its PPCs, better range and stuff for lasers......

None of those quirks make any sense if you look at my testing.

It already has better range, better cooling and a higher heat cap than the Stalker-4N, a heavily quirked mech.


Quirks that would make sense are quirks that would directly address it's geometry, hardpoint location and locked item issues.

+Armor & +Internal Structure on the STs for a start.

[Johnny Z]

With the speed and manuever advantage the Cheese Hawk has it can easily win in a close range fight with the STK-4N. With the speed it can even close distance to use that advantage. The Cheese Hawk even has the advantage in range so if it did want to kite the STK-4N it could have a chance at that even.

Conclusion CHeese Hawk is OP. Please nerf. Send Omni mech pilots to piloting school where easy mode isnt the norm. Thanks.

Fix for Warhawk? Put and Inner Sphere pilot in it.

[Jman5]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 April 2015 - 11:39 AM, said:

Don't get me wrong, it provides data. I think it tells part of the story,and can show strengths and weaknesses each chassis.

But you can't claim it's definitive, is what I'm saying, because it realistically can't emulate the actual game environment we play in. Same reasons what works in CW doesn't always work in casual, or what works in coordinated teams, may not work as a PUG. YMMV. So what you and Johansen did is undeniably useful. Just should not be taken as telling "the rest of the story".

I would say this is the equivalent of a lab study and what you're talking about would be a field study. However, if no one is willing to do the field study, then a 1v1 is about as definitive as we'll ever get.

Am I wrong? Maybe. But if Johan and I are the only ones getting off their butt to check this stuff out, it's the best evidence you're going to get.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jman5, on 05 April 2015 - 11:54 AM, said:

I would say this is the equivalent of a lab study and what you're talking about would be a field study. However, if no one is willing to do the field study, then a 1v1 is about as definitive as we'll ever get.

Am I wrong? Maybe. But if Johan and I are the only ones getting off their butt to check this stuff out, it's the best evidence you're going to get.

And I appreciate you did. I don't have the unit to do so anymore, and tbh, could not guarantee a consistent skill level across the board if I did. It would take SJR vs 228 or the like, IMO, unfortunately to tell one much.

[CptGier]

Ultimatum X, on 05 April 2015 - 11:52 AM, said:

None of those quirks make any sense if you look at my testing.

It already has better range, better cooling and a higher heat cap than the Stalker-4N, a heavily quirked mech.


Quirks that would make sense are quirks that would directly address it's geometry, hardpoint location and locked item issues.

+Armor & +Internal Structure on the STs for a start.

An entire remodel of it would work better then quirks. ANd yes, plus to it's ST armor and structure would be grand.

BUt PPC velocity and damage quirks would do amazing for it to.

[Averen]

I made something usefull!

Stalker-4N/Warhawk single salvo heat comparision.

- STK:
http://keikun17.gith...on=false[0][weapon_id]=1008&quirks[0][quirk_type]=heat&quirks[0][reduction_value]=20&
Without heatquirk:
http://keikun17.gith...00&gh_on=false

- WHK:
http://keikun17.gith...00&gh_on=false

Also lol at 28 DHS. Of course the Warhawk is cooler than 20 DHS with the theoretically insane 20% LL heat quirks.
edit: Weird, forum software destroys the first link.

Edited by Averen, 05 April 2015 - 12:02 PM.

[Lord0fHats]

Averen, on 05 April 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

The 6LL on the stalker build are hotter than the 4LPL on the warhawk.

You're really failing at reading comprehension here; 4 LPL Hawks is inferior to several Timber builds. So why would I ever use it? It's not even really about the Timber anymore but the Hellbringer as well, which is in every way a better fire support platform.

Quote

So if the Hawk is screwed by heat, then the stalker should be even more screwed

No. The Stalker is less screwed because shorter fire duration = less time exposed to enemy fire and harder for an enemy to roll armor. High hard points = less exposed to enemy fire when firing. Both put together = ideal fire support sniper mech set up. The Warhawk can't pop and alpha and easily shuffle back to cover solely by virtue of firing practically forces it to completely expose itself and it has a much bulkier frame than the Stalker.

Quote

Endo or Ferro doesn't change anything about that result (talk about free xl's and lighter weaponry).

Well, it changes a bit because Endo instead of Ferro would garner extra weight for the Hawk to use. Alone though it isn't enough to save it because it still has bad hard point placement for its intended role.

Quote

Hardpoints are better on the stalker and he is probably superior on CW, that's true.But in close?

Why the hell would a Warhawk ever be in close with a Stalker? Neither mech is built to brawl. No one should ever use either in close combat. MWO is a 12v12 game. 1v1 completely changes the entire meta (the Nova might as well be king of 1v1, provided you can manage heat effectively because 80+ damage alpha on 50 mech ).

Edited by Lord0fHats, 05 April 2015 - 12:02 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Lord0fHats, on 05 April 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

Well, it changes a bit because Endo instead of Ferro would garner extra weight for the Hawk to use. Alone though it isn't enough to save it because it still has bad hard point placement for its intended role.

What could a Warhawk do with 4 more tons? It runs out of critical slots...I have put 4LL and 2 ASRM6 with like 2t of ammo and have a ton or so left over, but no crits. Why would I want 4 more tons?

I have played with a 4x LL 1LRM15+Art and 1SRM6+art, 1t ammo each...

4x LPL+ all the DHS it runs out of tonnage and criticals.

[Lord0fHats]

I did say it wouldn't be enough to save it

[Averen]

@Lord0fHats:
Stop with that timber-stuff. Of course that mech is in comparision overpowered and makes everything else look bad, we know that already.
So, firing time for a full salvo, taking the 0.5s Ghost Heat Duration plus ~0.25s reaction time into account, is btw around 1.55 for a stalker and 1.87 for the warhawk. So it's pretty close and not the magnitude of difference you're claiming.
(Beam Duration+0.5s GH+0.25 safe waiting)

Also, the warhawk wins above 700m. That thing does 26 damage at above 900m. And why would it get up close? Maybe because that always happens in single queue and and CW is based around the idea of attacking? Laser vomit isn't that bad in close combat, and these are actually a lot more heat efficient than ERLL/CLPL/ERML mechs like the timber. Jep, it's more heat efficient than a timber. Should be good in close combat, and it's pretty damn fast for an 85T assault.

And that's in comparision to the most efficient IS mech on the field. Slightly worse in the 600 to 400m range (depending on the stalker having good cover), but a bit more versatile and efficient otherwise (especially with one sided layouts). And you're calling that thing bad and it has to be safed. Just tells about the issues with clans.

Edited by Averen, 05 April 2015 - 12:22 PM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Ultimatum X, on 05 April 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

Do you have the WHK-C?

If not, you should re-test then with a fully asymmetric build.




2 of those LLAS are ST mounted, and require you to expose most of the upper body to fire them.






EDIT: Added testing in this post: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4340581

I did not. I don't own a C yet, just my invasion Prime. My build is also not 4 CLPLs though. I rolled 2 CLPLs, 2 ERMLs, and a Gauss against his 5 ISLL 4N because I find that to be my strongest Warhawk build against his strongest 4N build. I think the discrepancies boiled down to Jman being better at the game as the tests showed all my clan builds I threw at him to be neck and neck with him and his 4N the entire time.