171 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 06 April 2015 - 03:20 PM, said:

I suggested this not long ago, but considering it is one of the few top tier IS mechs, it is unlikely to happen. That is until it gets its dreaded dynamic geometry pass. The argument for keep it with the high hardpoints is that it keeps it in line with other mechs lacking LAA and Hands like the Jager, BJ, Catapult, Locust, etc. Only difference to me is that no assault has been quite as dominant throughout MWO like the Stalker has outside the Whale.

This would basically kill Stalkers for anything but LRM boating.

Really, its a horrible suggestion.


I think we have really lost sight that the best Stalkers are like T2.

T1 builds are dominated by clan mechs. SCR, HBR, TBR, DWF.

[Kuritaclan]

Praetor Knight, on 06 April 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

And some of the original artwork has what appears to have Lasers mounted below the missiles.

Spoiler

So I'd like to see them flipped to match the older artwork, from their current:


To this:

xD - http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4341067

However this nerf i guess would be to hard or at least the stalker than would need quirks in yaw speed etc to match the wubhawk

[Mcgral18]

Jonathan Paine, on 06 April 2015 - 03:14 PM, said:

In the "what if scenarios": what if the Warhawk gets to shoot the stalker at ranges where the stalker does little or no damage? Wow, warhawk so op because stalker did 0 damage. What if the Warhawk fires first and takes most of the CT armor from the Stalker? Before the stalker can fire twice, it is dead.

Not actually feasible, even Whales would have a hard time two shotting a completely stationary Assault. ~150 IS+A frontloaded.

Now, if the Stalker is actually moving, good luck getting even half the burn on the CT. ~2.5-3 seconds of burn time for both robots.

Stalker's LLs reach 540 to the WubDoves 600 without modules for either. At the 100M range where one can hurt the other without retaliation...you're doing ~2 damage per pair of lasers. If that.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Kuritaclan, on 06 April 2015 - 03:24 PM, said:

xD - http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4341067

However this nerf i guess would be to hard or at least the stalker than would need quirks in yaw speed etc to match the wubhawk

That works for me.

The 4N keeps its LL quirks and all Stalkers add what it needs to compensate for this change.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 06 April 2015 - 03:24 PM, said:

This would basically kill Stalkers for anything but LRM boating.

Really, its a horrible suggestion.


I think we have really lost sight that the best Stalkers are like T2.

T1 builds are dominated by clan mechs. SCR, HBR, TBR, DWF.

At the same time, I expect the clans to continue getting nerfs to reign in the necessity of quirks and the outlying powerhouses of clan tech. It is T2 when considering clan tech, but this mech has been one of the best IS assaults since its release, probably better than it should've been. I'm thinking more long term, where clans and IS are hopefully a little bit better balanced and quirks bring up the lesser off mechs and add flavor rather than mitigate the tech divide.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 06 April 2015 - 03:31 PM.

[Mikros04]

after these quirks, we're going to see some 4x cerppc Warhawks. I think we'll be needing to see how that works out, and then maybe revisit the Warhawk vs Stalker discussion.

EDIT:

these quirks:

http://mwomercs.com/...s-for-april-7th

Edited by Mikros04, 06 April 2015 - 03:31 PM.

[Kuritaclan]

Praetor Knight, on 06 April 2015 - 03:29 PM, said:

...
That works for me.

The 4N keeps its LL quirks and all Stalkers add what it needs to compensate for this change.

Nice pic, and i woul gieve you a hand, but to be honest, it is the difference in chassis that makes this game interessting. Going around and nerfbat everything with high mounts since pgi is not able to make sholder activators usefull is like slaping the real brain with a bat.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 06 April 2015 - 03:29 PM, said:

I'm thinking more long term,

You're thinking long term to make Stalkers irrelevant and unplayable?

[Sorbic]

Jman5, on 05 April 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

Before this gets out of hand with 6 pages of theorycraft, I would add that if anyone truly wants to compare the two mechs, 1v1 them a few times with a similarly skilled opponent. I did this a few nights ago and we did try stalker 4N vs Warhawk laser build. It essentially came down to 1 hit difference which tells me if there is imbalance, it's not that different.

And then keep in mind tha the WH's are getting pretty decent quirks tomorrow...

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Kuritaclan, on 06 April 2015 - 03:34 PM, said:

Nice pic, and i woul gieve you a hand, but to be honest, it is the difference in chassis that makes this game interessting. Going around and nerfbat everything with high mounts since pgi is not able to make sholder activators usefull is like slaping the real brain with a bat.

It was just a high five, didn't see you bring up the same thing in a different thread, until you linked.



And it would be nice for actuators to get tweaked some, but I can sorta understand why they were simplified early on. I'd like to see more utility out of them too.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 06 April 2015 - 03:36 PM, said:

You're thinking long term to make Stalkers irrelevant and unplayable?

Hyperbole.

I'm thinking that once the outlying holy trinity is reigned in as well as the clan tech on the whole (hopefully not at the cost of the lesser clan mechs) that the Stalker will still be one of the best assaults thanks to those awesome weapon mounts. In order to reign in that power, it could be given less or no quirks, or it could simply have its arm mounts reversed so you have to pop up out of cover like you do currently to fire your torso mounted lasers and maybe more significant quirks to help compensate for such a significant change depending on how it would land afterwards.

Even with the lower mounts, it is still better than most IS assaults thanks to its decent profile and significant firepower. The problem that currently exists is that many of the IS assaults have struggled even post quirks to keep up with the power creep that is the current meta.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 06 April 2015 - 03:47 PM.

[Kuritaclan]

Praetor Knight, on 06 April 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

It was just a high five, didn't see you bring up the same thing in a different thread, until you linked.



And it would be nice for actuators to get tweaked some, but I can sorta understand why they were simplified early on. I'd like to see more utility out of them too.

xD, yeah for sure.

Sorbic, on 06 April 2015 - 03:37 PM, said:

And then keep in mind tha the WH's are getting pretty decent quirks tomorrow...

The quirks are maybee overdone i guess. When i see that 20% cd quirk with both arms adding up togehter correctly it is to good in my eyes beside that the whk is pretty hard loadouttonnage limited so dualgauss isn't that good because you rather don't have the tonnage to fit in enough ammo and have backup weapons. The 15% PPC velocity is ok but not to high, Energy heat gen with -8% is rather wayne.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 06 April 2015 - 04:02 PM.

[Yokaiko]

Sorbic, on 06 April 2015 - 03:37 PM, said:

And then keep in mind tha the WH's are getting pretty decent quirks tomorrow...

The prime isn't 13.8 ER-PPC heat, still too hot, a mix of And B arms could be interesting, but meh overall from what I know (have it module mastered).

Warhawk quirks need to be god tier to take it over a TBR in CW, not that rank three crap.

[1453 R]

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.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 06 April 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

Hyperbole.

Even with the lower mounts, it is still better than most IS assaults thanks to its decent profile and significant firepower.

I'm sorry, but that isn't hyperbole.


It does not have a good profile.


People who think Stalkers are "tanky" don't actually understand why they think this.


1) Hull down firing - which you would take away.
2) Asymmetrical builds on the Misery, which is mostly unique to the Misery.



It has no arms to deflect damage, it is not a brawling mech.

It is a sniper and fire support mech, and you would take away those attributes.



There would really be no reason to play non-missile builds anymore, people would shift to Battlemasters and Banshees for high mount sniping.

[Yokaiko]

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

- 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'.

No even compared to IS offerings its only so so, I've rated the Warhawk useable, but not good since before the first major wave of clan nerfs.

Ultimatum X, on 06 April 2015 - 03:51 PM, said:

It has no arms to deflect damage, it is not a brawling mech.

It is a sniper and fire support mech, and you would take away those attributes.

Yeah and a fire support mech that has to expose its entire assault chassis to do y'know fire support is NEVER going to be great.

[Ultimax]

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

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.

Keep in mind the birth of this thread is primarily from clan players hounding Russ on twitter and posting daily about the Stalker.


They know their nerf threads work, they got the TDR-9S nerfed and they intend to complain about every viable IS mech that can actually put up a fight vs. clan mechs.



Then Russ lit a fire when he made some comments on twitter.


This thread was not born of "clan op" claims. It's the exact opposite.




I'm just hoping they do not do anything until the gift store clan mechs are more readily available.

NVA, SCR, GAR, TBR, WHK & DWF are all getting new options that increase their build potential with that wave, most people just don't own them yet.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 06 April 2015 - 03:57 PM.

[Brizna]

Stalker != Warhawk

The only thing they have in common is weight. Differences all go in favour of stalker since Warhawk is a fast limping mech that wishes to limp more in exchange of having better hitboxes and twice the weaponry.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 06 April 2015 - 03:51 PM, said:

1) Hull down firing - which you would take away.
2) Asymmetrical builds on the Misery, which is mostly unique to the Misery.

If hull down firing is absolutely a necessity for a good fire support or sniper mech then there is a problem with the system to begin with. While it is definitely a powerful tool to have access to, I don't think it is (nor should it be) an absolute necessity to be a viable fire support or sniper mech. Simply having firepower and range on top of a decent profile should be enough and the Stalker would still have that.

[Yokaiko]

Grisbane, on 06 April 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

the problem is nerfing the stalker as is pretty much kills the IS.. the stalker 4n needs to stay where it is or there would be little to no point for CWI at all.. it is one of only 3 mechs that slow down the stormcrowe/timberwolf/hellbringer horde.. without it there would be no competition in CWI.. if we are picking on this, then we need to find out why the timberwolf is better than... everything.. and nerf it until it is balanced.. same with the stormcrowe, etc, etc.. this thread was born of clan whiners mad because there is a mech standing between and farming practically free xp and c-bills.

Funny the IS was doing fine before the last quirk/GH tweeking pass.