176 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

Yeonne Greene, on 28 April 2015 - 07:36 PM, said:

This is true, though the asymmetrical DHS allocation does limit the potential of alternative builds while the Stalker doesn't have such a restriction (instead, it just has large equipment that takes up a bunch of tons and slots, netting a similar result anyway).

The Stalker doesn't have such a restriction, but unless you are playing a Misery you are going to probably end up with a symmetrical Stalker anyway.

The thing that separates what these two mechs can do is almost entirely hardpoint location.

If the Warhawk had 4 high energy hardpoints, like a TBR A style shoulder, it would be every bit the Stalker's rival and in some cases superior.

Yeonne Greene, on 28 April 2015 - 07:36 PM, said:

I think Wave III is really going to shake up Clan drop decks, with so many high-mount options to choose from. Still won't have a high-mount Assault, but I'm not entirely convinced the Clans really need one when the TBR is considered match for the STK (and BLR).

I think so too.

TBR-A for CBills will also shake things up.

A strong light mech might also open up options for the DWF on some maps/modes and the DWF-S STs have some decently high mounts.


They aren't perfect Stalker mounts, but the reality of CW is that it's beyond rare (and unrealistic) for all 12 guys to have perfect hull down position and clear line of sight (Boreal on defense might be the most optimal for this).


So a DWF with anywhere from 3 to 5 fairly high hardpoints could be a good option, if you were able to say round out the deck with lower tonnage mechs like Arctic Cheetahs.

[slide]

IMO the problem is not necessarily the mechs themselves. Whether it be a Stalker, TimberWolf, Thunderbolt or Stormcrow or what ever Meta mech of the month is.

The problem is taking 6, 8 or even 12 of a mech that has a slight advantage and leveraging that advantage into a big one and then playing to those strengths. Groups will do this as a matter of due coarse in the never ending quest to be better than the other guy.

Solve that problem and you will solve a lot of current and future issues with this game.

3/3/3/3 sort of achieved it in the group queue but I don't really see that as being a solution in CW. Lore suggests that units (even clans) were made up whatever mechs were available due to the general unavailability of mechs, spares and ammunition. Maybe a solution is force people to bring no more than 1 specific chassis/variant and limit the no. of like variants to no more than 2 in a drop. How you make this work in CW I have no idea but it would solve the problem of everyone stacking on meta mech of the month.

[Zordicron]

Warhawk needs some significant ST structure quirks. the thing turns into a 70KPH light mech once a ST goes, because most of the weapons and lots of the cooling went with it, plus the much loved clan XL penalty on top of it.

Once they do that, we can talk about stalkers again. I am with OP on this, the Warhawk could use some love, and it would indeed help diversify clan decks.

[FatYak]

Eldagore, on 28 April 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Warhawk needs some significant ST structure quirks. the thing turns into a 70KPH light mech once a ST goes, because most of the weapons and lots of the cooling went with it, plus the much loved clan XL penalty on top of it.

Once they do that, we can talk about stalkers again. I am with OP on this, the Warhawk could use some love, and it would indeed help diversify clan decks.

Id like to see the warhawk, maddog and hellbringer get some big armor buffs to the ST's and to a lesser extent maybe a touch to the Hellbie.

Speed buffs to the Lynx and Kitfox as well as a redesign of the Lynx's arms to reduce the hitbox size by changing the layout of the weapons

Last night i got my 4 ERLLAS timby out, i had forgotten how tough those lasers are to use with that burn time and heat. if the burn time and heat is going to stay like that, at least give it back a bit more range

Edited by FatYak, 28 April 2015 - 08:27 PM.

[jlawsl]

I think the problem with the Stalker-4N is its ability to mount 6 LLs while only generating ghost heat while firing 4 or more-so two groups of 3, no problem. Then throw in their heat bonus to an already medium heat weapon, and you get something that puts out 9 damage at an effective range just 15m-75m shy of a CERLPL(585m to 600m, 660m with module) for an astounding 5.6 heat.

So, two CERLPLs are 12 tons, take up four slots and do 26 damage for 20 heat, without ghost heat, in 1.12sec with a 2.86sec recharge(with module). 3 Stalker 5N LLs are 15 tons, take up 6 slots and do 27 damage for 16.8 heat, without ghost heat, in 1sec with a 2.21sec recharge(with module). Even the TDR-9S(broken quirk) was putting out 22.5 heat with 3 ERPPCs and ghost heat on top of that, with a weapon that easily misses.

I have said this in another post, but the only assault mech that beats those LL stats is an AWS-PB, but it can only mount two LLs and isn't as tough. I don't think its about the quirks really, its about the number of feasible weapons that the quirk effects. And I doubt anyone can say that isn't a little off. I am not a fan of having everything totally balanced, but when you are in the heat range of a single ERPPC(energy weapon wise) and putting out almost 3x the damage in nearly half the recharge time, at decent range to foot, something can get tweaked just a little when you can carry 6 of those weapons an a mech.

[Khobai]

The problem with the Stalker 4N is its range. The only way to counter the Stalker 4N is with equally long-range weapons.

Which is why we have this stupid long-range laser lightshow meta.

Solution = reduce max range of the offending weapons (CLPL, CERLL, and stalker/thunderbolt range quirks) to help restore the parity between long-range and brawling.

[Ultimax]

jlawsl, on 28 April 2015 - 08:56 PM, said:

I think the problem with the Stalker-4N is its ability to mount 6 LLs while only generating ghost heat while firing 4 or more-so two groups of 3, no problem. Then throw in their heat bonus to an already medium heat weapon, and you get something that puts out 9 damage at an effective range just 15m-75m shy of a CERLPL(585m to 600m, 660m with module) for an astounding 5.6 heat.

So, two CERLPLs are 12 tons, take up four slots and do 26 damage for 20 heat, without ghost heat, in 1.12sec with a 2.86sec recharge(with module). 3 Stalker 5N LLs are 15 tons, take up 6 slots and do 27 damage for 16.8 heat, without ghost heat, in 1sec with a 2.21sec recharge(with module). Even the TDR-9S(broken quirk) was putting out 22.5 heat with 3 ERPPCs and ghost heat on top of that, with a weapon that easily misses.

I have said this in another post, but the only assault mech that beats those LL stats is an AWS-PB, but it can only mount two LLs and isn't as tough. I don't think its about the quirks really, its about the number of feasible weapons that the quirk effects. And I doubt anyone can say that isn't a little off. I am not a fan of having everything totally balanced, but when you are in the heat range of a single ERPPC(energy weapon wise) and putting out almost 3x the damage in nearly half the recharge time, at decent range to foot, something can get tweaked just a little when you can carry 6 of those weapons an a mech.

You people are so mentally hung up on the number 6.

Here are some other numbers.

FOUR CLPLs is roughly equivalent to SIX LLAS in DAM/HEAT - superior in range, but with a longer burn time (small penalty for +150m normally, about +90m over STK-4N)

Except it weighs SIX TONS LESS, takes up FOUR LESS crit slots.



I'll just keep posting this, until people seem capable of processing it.








Believe me, I would love for 4 high energy mounts on a Warhawk. Right on my frikken head, then it could go toe to toe with STK-4Ns in CW on a teamwide build basis.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 28 April 2015 - 09:07 PM.

[jlawsl]

Ultimatum X, on 28 April 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

You people are so mentally hung up on the number 6.

Here are some other numbers.

FOUR CLPLs is roughly equivalent to SIX LLAS in DAM/HEAT - superior in range, but with a longer burn time (small penalty for +150m normally, only +20 vs. STK-4N)

Except it weighs SIX TONS LESS, takes up FOUR LESS crit slots.



I'll just keep posting this, until people seem capable of processing it.








Believe me, I would love for 4 high energy mounts on a Warhawk. Right on my frikken head, then it could go toe to toe with STK-4Ns in CW on a teamwide build basis.

Uh, just wondering how the heat is even close? That's 54 damage, for 33.6 heat in 1 second with ghost heat, or two volleys of 27 damage for 16.8 heat still in one second. Compare to 52 damage for 40 heat in 1.12 seconds with ghost heat, or two volleys of 26 damage with 20 heat in the same time.

It gets 2 more damage, in less time for 6.4 less heat. I am just saying, if it only had 4 large energy points, it wouldn't be too much of an issue. But the thing can easily carry 6 quirked LLs. I can see how it could be just a little too generously quirked on the heat generation for LLs/the amount it can carry. If it could only carry 3 or 4, no one would really have a problem with it.

[Shalune]

Kain Thul, on 28 April 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

The biggest problem is I have to see thread after thread about it every day for no reason whatsoever.

This.

It's a worse Timber Wolf in almost all respects, but is particularly strong in context because it fills a role (mid range heavy laser boat) that no other IS mech can.

[Paigan]

Poisoner, on 28 April 2015 - 05:18 PM, said:

[...]
Basically, the STK is so damn powerful because the Gargoyle and Warhawk are DOA.
[...]

The Warhawk is not a bad mech.
Wubhawk is very good.
Arms soak a lot of damage.
It's faster and more agile than the DWF.
And you can even make one of the best missile boats with it (4xLRM-15) if you have the proper team and terrain to make LRMs viable.

It could use Endo instead of FF and maybe a little more E slots in the torso.
Apart from that, why would it be a bad mech?
It has the same construction rules as any other mech, has a not-too-bad form and everyone fits at least as many DHS as it has fixed.

Everyting else is subjective, emotional babbling, just like with the adder.
I had many many exceptional games with the WHK and the ADD, >1000 damage, top scorer, most kills, you name it.



Gargoyle on the other hand is really a problem.
It is way to big, it's engine is oversized. The only fitting where it is better than the TBR is 6xERML with tons of DHS. That's about it.

Edited by Paigan, 28 April 2015 - 10:27 PM.

[Pjwned]

The energy heat quirks are un-necessary considering it's a huge energy boat and it shouldn't be running around with <20 heatsinks while boating 6 large lasers.

[Poisoner]

Eider, on 28 April 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

Hillarious.. anything is even slightly good and clanners cry to high heaven. Nothing is wrong with the mech and its quirks. You still have a huge range advantage over those large lasers and broken hitboxes on all but 1 of your trinity god mechs. Maybe as they old saying goes, just get guud. This is just a repeat of the thunderbolt at least then the erppcs did have range gallore.

This is why we can't have nice things. No one in this thread is crying, and as the OP, I am not certainly not crying about the Stalker being over powered. I have no problem killing Stormcrows and the other "godly" mechs when I use my IS mechs. So how about instead of telling me L2P, you L2P yourself.

Eider, on 28 April 2015 - 07:49 PM, said:

Funny.. dont clan players just field nothing but stormcrows? Derp.. and here you are complaining about a large laser. And as for complaints about brawl dying.. why do you think that really is? Answer, clan weapons have far greater range than is.. so is needs to field its long range just to hit back.

Again, you lack the basic ability to read a post and interpret what is being said. No one said anything about brawling.

[Curccu]

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

The Warhawk is not a bad mech.
Wubhawk is very good.

It is and no it isn't.

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

Arms soak a lot of damage.

Sure thing if your enemy chooses to shoot your arms also 90% of your weapons are in those arms so losing them isn't really optimal situation.

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

It's faster and more agile than the DWF.

Sure is, and then?

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

And you can even make one of the best missile boats with it (4xLRM-15) if you have the proper team and terrain to make LRMs viable.

LRMs are bad, so being good with LRMs doesn't make mech good

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

It could use Endo instead of FF and maybe a little more E slots in the torso.
Apart from that, why would it be a bad mech?

Because it doesn't have those ^ + too many fixed heatsinks

Paigan, on 28 April 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

It has the same construction rules as any other mech, has a not-too-bad form and everyone fits at least as many DHS as it has fixed.

Everyting else is subjective, emotional babbling, just like with the adder.
I had many many exceptional games with the WHK and the ADD, >1000 damage, top scorer, most kills, you name it.

There are people who have done all that with Locust/Awesome/Orion/You_name_it and yet those aren't very good mechs.

[TheCharlatan]

I think that the main problem of the 4N in CW is that the clans do not have a strong counter. You do not trade with an assault with strong hitboxes and high weapon placements: you out manouver it.
Right now, clans lack alternatives to trading (both for lack of good mechs and player flexibility).

Ice Ferrets and Myst Lynxes can do the job, but they are not very good mechs.

Once the Artic Cheetah is out and clans become able to run past or around those 4Ns, IS drop decks will have to adapt, or come to cry in the forums.

Meanwhile, stop trading with the 4Ns and try something different.

[Paigan]

Curccu, on 28 April 2015 - 11:10 PM, said:

It is and no it isn't.

Sure thing if your enemy chooses to shoot your arms also 90% of your weapons are in those arms so losing them isn't really optimal situation.

Sure is, and then?

LRMs are bad, so being good with LRMs doesn't make mech good

Because it doesn't have those ^ + too many fixed heatsinks


There are people who have done all that with Locust/Awesome/Orion/You_name_it and yet those aren't very good mechs.

Sorry but you are a very stupid person.
You bring NO arguments, you just say "no it isn't".
You say you are right just because you want to be right.

That is kindergarten level of discussion.

Please feel honored that I even took the time to respond.

[Widowmaker1981]

You only cry about stalkers because thats all you see.

The only reason you only see stalkers is because people are sheep who cant think for themselves.

There are other IS assaults that are just as good, if not better.

Stop crying. Stop being a sheep. Think for yourself, Metamechs.com is not the be all and end all of what is good.

[Ursh]

Biggest problem with the 4N is that it can't fit 9 large lasers.

[Elizander]

The biggest problem with the Stalker 4N is that 2 of the energy hard points are not as high mounted as the other 4.

[kapusta11]

Kain Thul, on 28 April 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

The biggest problem is I have to see thread after thread about it every day for no reason whatsoever.

[Molossian Dog]

The problem with the STK-4N is clam whiners and their power fantasies.

After clan release the got massively spoiled and started to think of them as the "more experienced players". Check the threads back then. You will see this tune again and again.

Any Mech that comes anywhere near clan performance will be marked as a forum war goal and whined into the ground. It is...well...natural you could say. How else to get rid of a Mech that summons this long buried, nagging feel of mediocrity?