244 replies to this topic

[Sarlic]

Because the reason you already named, Bishop, is that other Assaults can do the same job better.

Lore-wise the Atlas should be a tank. (Or atleast balance wise if you compare) Currently it's a soft lemon. I agree.

Edited by Sarlic, 11 July 2015 - 11:27 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sarlic, on 11 July 2015 - 11:02 AM, said:

Because the reason you already named, Bishop, is that other Assaults can do the same jon better.

Lore-wise the Atlas should be a tank. (Or atleast balance wise if you compare) Currently it's a soft lemon. I agree.

and tis the point, for me.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Dayum, took 5million to refit my AS7S that was handed out awhile ago and took it into 1 game. Unimpressive hunk of crap.

ITs arms are mounted apparently even lower and further then the warhawk. So I couldnt even fire unless I stood like an idiot on top of a hill, got damn near cored out in just a few shots from some Stalker.

Ouch, it was a bad game. 119 dmg....we won and I survived...but I felt like i was in a light that needed to avoid combat, over being in a 100t assault that strives to get into it. That really is the problem with assaults, they are so soft they gotta kinda avoid combat over getting in it...

Dat Atlas.....yikes.

[Bishop Steiner]

LordKnightFandragon, on 11 July 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

Dayum, took 5million to refit my AS7S that was handed out awhile ago and took it into 1 game. Unimpressive hunk of crap.

ITs arms are mounted apparently even lower and further then the warhawk. So I couldnt even fire unless I stood like an idiot on top of a hill, got damn near cored out in just a few shots from some Stalker.

Ouch, it was a bad game. 119 dmg....we won and I survived...but I felt like i was in a light that needed to avoid combat, over being in a 100t assault that strives to get into it. That really is the problem with assaults, they are so soft they gotta kinda avoid combat over getting in it...

Dat Atlas.....yikes.

Atlas, really only works as a CQB brawler, preferably using cover to close and crush. Then the arms and waist guns are not a HUGE disservice. My RS works OK at mid range.... as long as the other guy is not too good.

[Boulangerie]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Doubtful. I'm willing to bet some guys your level or lower wreck you regularly in SCRs, TBRs and DWFs, because those mechs are all that much better. What it means, is when you wreck those, those pilots were simply THAT MUCH WORSE than you.

The pilot is important, but simple truth is, there are mechs that are better than others.


a really easy way to determine is a mech is good or not? How often do you see it featured in High Elo tournaments like RHoD? You can claim pilot all you want, or meta, but simple fact is, if the Atlas was effective, it would be represented. Outside of the increasingly rare ECM carrier, it doesn't exist in serious play. (in part because since LRMs are a laughable waste at that level, the ECM is not near the value it is in Scrub-to-average tiers).

Well, I think we agree them. I wasn't claiming pilot error or meta trends are the reason people don't ride atlas in general, just that we do need to account for them when viewing small sample sizes like anecdotal evidences, outlier great game/bad game, etc.

I understand high ELO is a good indication as well, but with this many mechs, we are bound to have some wit higher skill ceilings or lower skill floors (therefore being more suited to high/low ELO play respective )

I agree the Atlas needs help. The fact that one can still perform in it doesn't disprove that.

I still wonder which would be better

*Cut the individual structure quirks and replace with blanket armor and structure quirks?

Or

*Improve mobility of the mech. Increase pitch and yaw, turning radius, speed or similar.

I'd still like to see some differentiation between the atlas chassis besides which weapons are quirks as well.

[YueFei]

Quirk with added armor, not structure, since critical hits will rapidly knock out equipment anyways.

Re-design hitboxes to enlarge arm hitboxes? And change the arm-hitbox-model for destroyed arms, so that Atlas can continue to use arm hitbox debris as a damage soak, which rewards skillful piloting, rather than just making them hard to kill because of lots of extra armor from quirks?

[Bishop Steiner]

Boulangerie, on 11 July 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

Well, I think we agree them. I wasn't claiming pilot error or meta trends are the reason people don't ride atlas in general, just that we do need to account for them when viewing small sample sizes like anecdotal evidences, outlier great game/bad game, etc.

I understand high ELO is a good indication as well, but with this many mechs, we are bound to have some wit higher skill ceilings or lower skill floors (therefore being more suited to high/low ELO play respective )

I agree the Atlas needs help. The fact that one can still perform in it doesn't disprove that.

I still wonder which would be better

*Cut the individual structure quirks and replace with blanket armor and structure quirks?

Or

*Improve mobility of the mech. Increase pitch and yaw, turning radius, speed or similar.

I'd still like to see some differentiation between the atlas chassis besides which weapons are quirks as well.

I generally believe, that unless there are huge differences in variants (Hunchbacks vs Swaybacks), that the basic Quirks should be the same, but with secondary ones defining the differences. Even though it's boring, in some cases. For instance, most Grasshopper variants are more field refits than engineered factory differences, so massive quirk changes don't make sense. Other mechs, like the CPLT-C1 vs the CPLT-K2 are almost different mechs, built on the same chassis. So while I would expect anything on the Legs, CT and Head to be the same, I could see the two having very different armor/structure quirks on the STs and Arms. With The AWS-8Q and AWS-9M, the 9M is a full factory re-engineering, with not only updated weapons, but a massive engine upgrade. So I could see where perhaps the 8Q would have more Structure and Armor Quirks in the STs, where the 9M would have less (to make room for the much bigger engine) but have mobility quirks instead, that aid in twisting, etc.

At least in the perfect world.

As I have often said, I believe that each chassis should have it's role and identifying features focused on. Some are about mobility, some toughness, some firepower, sensors, etc.

No Atlas is noted for it's speed, sensors, agility, etc. They were, originally, the most heavily armored mech in the game though. I think that should be the primary focus, making it into a walking fortress. Then each should have milder, secondary quirks focused on their weapons. The 7D: AC20, 7K: Gauss, 7DDC: Maybe no weapon because ECM, 7S: Missiles, 7RS: Split the quirks to lower levels for the AC10 and LLs.

The Atlas: “ A 'Mech as powerful as possible, as impenetrable as possible, and as ugly and foreboding as conceivable, so that fear itself will be our ally. ”
-Aleksandr Kerensky

YueFei, on 11 July 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Quirk with added armor, not structure, since critical hits will rapidly knock out equipment anyways.

Re-design hitboxes to enlarge arm hitboxes? And change the arm-hitbox-model for destroyed arms, so that Atlas can continue to use arm hitbox debris as a damage soak, which rewards skillful piloting, rather than just making them hard to kill because of lots of extra armor from quirks?

Mechs with structure boosts have shown this is not actually true (I don't pretend to know the "science". But original HBK with armor quirks, always lost the AC the moment the armor was breached. Once the RT got a structure buff, now it almost never loses the AC until the torso goes.

Structure buffs are HUGELY important if you want to keep the gear in them, for whatever reason.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2015 - 01:25 PM, said:

The Atlas: “ A 'Mech as powerful as possible, as impenetrable as possible, and as ugly and foreboding as conceivable, so that fear itself will be our ally. ”
-Aleksandr Kerensky

Yeah, and in CB, they really were. Ive watched videos of CB and I drove a few Atlas in CB. They were insanely tough. Now its DHS, quirks galore, lolpha all the things and massive laser damage buffs along with PPD and 100 point heat scales allowing us to bring enough fire onto a single mech to melt it in seconds.

and since im sure you got that quote off sarna/wiki w/e...

heres this from there to

and theoretically a single Atlas can take on and wipe out an entire battalion of Stingers in exchange for minor armor loss.^[7]

To bad assaults are not that powerful....

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 11 July 2015 - 01:30 PM.

[Averen]

I remember the old days, when an Atlas was a terrifying sight, and he could actually lead his team into combat, taking insane amounts of punishment. Now it's just an outdated, slow piece of metal with inadequate armor and poor hardpoints.

Current patch was another nail in the coffin. Also, the teamplay in Pug queue has been absolutely horrible these days. Never seen such an utter lack of coordination and situational awareness, not even in this game. 12v12? No problem, both teams still might manage to run past each other. Even if you just wrote into chat where exactly they are.

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2015 - 11:32 AM, said:

Atlas, really only works as a CQB brawler, preferably using cover to close and crush. Then the arms and waist guns are not a HUGE disservice. My RS works OK at mid range.... as long as the other guy is not too good.

You basically have to be a ninja, avoiding any long/mid range engagement, coming unseen, and wreckfing peoples faces before they know what's up, always keeping a look out not to be surrounded.

A fat, slow, 100 ton heavy ninja with a giant skull face.

Also, every dire has the same firepower and 4 times the range. They are just a bit slower. And every Timber has still more alpha than you, even if a bit hotter. Until the last patch firestarters also were around as tough as you.

Edited by Averen, 11 July 2015 - 02:05 PM.

[InspectorG]

The Mechromancer, on 09 May 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

In the category of 100-tonners, the Atlas is just so under-gunned compared to the KC and DW. Even Banshees have substantially more firepower for a barely noticeable armor difference, and better hit boxes.

The thing is supposed to be a walking fortress right?

PGI plz.

NOTHING in MWO is a fortress, because, FOCUSED FIRE.

Any 3 mechs can focus down any other mech if they can aim/ work together.

Now, IMO, for Heavies and Assaults:

HALVE AGILITY, turn rate, accel, deccel, arm rate, arm reach. Torso twist range per variant/quirk.
DOUBLE FRONT ARMOR for Assaults, x1.5 for Heavies.
HALVE INCOMING DAMAGE to FRONTAL STRUCTURE CT, ST, Legs for Assaults. 0.75 for FRONTAL INCOMING damage for Heavies.
HALVE REAR ARMOR for ASSAULTS, 0.75 REAR ARMOR for Heavies.
NORMAL DAMAGE to REAR STRUCTURE.

WHY?

2 things.

Buffs fat mechs for frontal assaults.

Buffs Lights/ certain fast Mediums for Flanking/Knife fighting.

Want your team's Fat mechs to live to fight the enemy fat mechs? SUPPORT THEM!

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yeah, had to resell the Atlas in my garage.....took it out for a 2nd game, it just wasnt working for me. Just yikes......2 games, 252 dmg, 0k, 1d...ugh. Thing is just miserable.

Meanwhile, took my Warhawk into Terra Therma no less.....4x ERPPC. 3k, 4a, a loss and a death, 707 dmg. Ill take it.

[Mcgral18]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

Mechs with structure boosts have shown this is not actually true (I don't pretend to know the "science". But original HBK with armor quirks, always lost the AC the moment the armor was breached. Once the RT got a structure buff, now it almost never loses the AC until the torso goes.

Structure buffs are HUGELY important if you want to keep the gear in them, for whatever reason.

Mechanically....this makes no sense. Structure is unrelated to critical hits.

Extra armour (which the Hunch has 18) will prevent the crits, because it takes longer to open said structure.


Additional structure just helps you keep the stump together, doesn't help prevent the crits. AC20, being 10 slots big, will nearly always be crit, even with crit padding. 18 HP means it has the most, but spread across 10 slots is very little.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mcgral18, on 11 July 2015 - 03:12 PM, said:

Mechanically....this makes no sense. Structure is unrelated to critical hits.

Extra armour (which the Hunch has 18) will prevent the crits, because it takes longer to open said structure.


Additional structure just helps you keep the stump together, doesn't help prevent the crits. AC20, being 10 slots big, will nearly always be crit, even with crit padding. 18 HP means it has the most, but spread across 10 slots is very little.

I am well aware of that (and even stated so in my comment), and we have had this discussion before. And yet it is true. Go take a 4G out and test it. Of course that would require you to remember how the 4G used to be pre quickening. Yet virtually every mech I have tried with extra structure keeps their weapons longer than ones with extra armor.

Don't shoot the messenger.

With 1000+ HBK-4G matches, pretty sure I can tell the difference in performance.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 11 July 2015 - 03:16 PM.

[Moldur]

LordKnightFandragon, on 11 July 2015 - 02:27 PM, said:

Yeah, had to resell the Atlas in my garage.....took it out for a 2nd game, it just wasnt working for me. Just yikes......2 games, 252 dmg, 0k, 1d...ugh. Thing is just miserable.

Meanwhile, took my Warhawk into Terra Therma no less.....4x ERPPC. 3k, 4a, a loss and a death, 707 dmg. Ill take it.

I average 600-700+ damage in my Founder Atlas. Here's the loadout:

AS7-D
2xUAC5 120 rounds
2xML
2xLL
2xSRM6 150 missiles



-----------------------------------

If I can expend all my UAC ammo in a match, I'm pretty much ensured to have an 800+ damage game.
I can nail people pretty hard when they're in range of both the LL and the UACs
If someone comes to me point blank, it's a 63.8 damage alpha, plus the repeated fire of the UACs. Even though the build is not 'close range' specific, anything directly in front of me that I can alpha will go down Quickly. Even a full dire or KK can only take 2 alphas to the CT before it is critical.

I really don't know what people's problem is with the Atlas. It's not easy to pilot since you pretty much have to commit to whatever you do since you're too slow and huge to back out, but that's how most assaults work. Yeah, you're a goat or a hero. If you read wrong and go in, you die.

It requires some situational awareness and a good build I guess. You really can't do well in an Atlas with a subpar build. Those two are really the only tricks. Sorry if we all can't go willy nilly in whatever we like and do well in the atlas. That doesn't mean it sucks. My build is scary. It has full armor. It kills stuff well at medium-longish range, and it vaporizes anything standing directly in front of it sans other 100 tonners.

How does the Atlas suck, exactly? I'm lead to believe that an overwhelming majority of people here just have bad atlas builds.

Edited by Moldur, 11 July 2015 - 04:10 PM.

[Sir Wulfrick]

Moldur, on 11 July 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

I average 600-700+ damage in my Founder Atlas. Here's the loadout:

AS7-D
2xUAC5 120 rounds
2xML
2xLL
2xSRM6 150 missiles



-----------------------------------

If I can expend all my UAC ammo in a match, I'm pretty much ensured to have an 800+ damage game.
I can nail people pretty hard when they're in range of both the LL and the UACs
If someone comes to me point blank, it's a 63.8 damage alpha, plus the repeated fire of the UACs. Even though the build is not 'close range' specific, anything directly in front of me that I can alpha will go down Quickly. Even a full dire or KK can only take 2 alphas to the CT before it is critical.

I really don't know what people's problem is with the Atlas. It's not easy to pilot since you pretty much have to commit to whatever you do since you're too slow and huge to back out, but that's how most assaults work. Yeah, you're a goat or a hero. If you read wrong and go in, you die.

It requires some situational awareness and a good build I guess. You really can't do well in an Atlas with a subpar build. Those two are really the only tricks. Sorry if we all can't go willy nilly in whatever we like and do well in the atlas. That doesn't mean it sucks. My build is scary. It has full armor. It kills stuff well at medium-longish range, and it vaporizes anything standing directly in front of it sans other 100 tonners.

How does the Atlas suck, exactly? I'm lead to believe that an overwhelming majority of people here just have bad atlas builds.

What you say about the necessity of having a good build is very true, as is the fact that even with a gigantic engine it's too slow to disengage from most fire fights, thus requiring situational awareness as you pointed out.

The position most of us take is that unfortunately for the Atlas, what it can do can be done far, far more effectively by almost every other assault mech in the game, certainly both the King Crab and Dire Wolf. I've mastered all four of my DWs and with my favourite dakka build (3 x U/AC-5 + 2 x U/AC-10) I actually feel sorry for the rare Atlas pilots that I come across, so quickly does the AS7 melt in the face of that much firepower. Same with the standard 4 x U/AC-5 build on the King Crab.

The Atlas, both the DDC and S variants, are better in a brawling situation but a true brawl is so rare these days that not taking at least medium or long range weapons is often suicide and additionally doesn't help the team much either.

As I've said before, sadly the DDC and S variants are currently at best tier-3 assault mechs, while the BH, RS and god forbid the K variants are barely viable at all. Their initial design combined with power creep as the game has developed has sadly consigned them all to obsolescence.

The best and most canonical way to re-invigorate the Atlas as a chassis is to give it substantial 'health' buffs, both armour and internal structure. Make it the tank it was always supposed to be.

Nice to see this discussion thread still active. I'm really hoping that someone at PGI will at least see it and consider what we've proposed.

[Sarlic]

Moldur, on 11 July 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

I average 600-700+ damage in my Founder Atlas. Here's the loadout:

AS7-D
2xUAC5 120 rounds
2xML
2xLL
2xSRM6 150 missiles



-----------------------------------

If I can expend all my UAC ammo in a match, I'm pretty much ensured to have an 800+ damage game.
I can nail people pretty hard when they're in range of both the LL and the UACs
If someone comes to me point blank, it's a 63.8 damage alpha, plus the repeated fire of the UACs. Even though the build is not 'close range' specific, anything directly in front of me that I can alpha will go down Quickly. Even a full dire or KK can only take 2 alphas to the CT before it is critical.

I really don't know what people's problem is with the Atlas. It's not easy to pilot since you pretty much have to commit to whatever you do since you're too slow and huge to back out, but that's how most assaults work. Yeah, you're a goat or a hero. If you read wrong and go in, you die.

It requires some situational awareness and a good build I guess. You really can't do well in an Atlas with a subpar build. Those two are really the only tricks. Sorry if we all can't go willy nilly in whatever we like and do well in the atlas. That doesn't mean it sucks. My build is scary. It has full armor. It kills stuff well at medium-longish range, and it vaporizes anything standing directly in front of it sans other 100 tonners.

How does the Atlas suck, exactly? I'm lead to believe that an overwhelming majority of people here just have bad atlas builds.

I agree that the Atlas requires pilot experiences and has a different playstyle then others. But so are other Assaults. Building the Atlas with a decent optimized loadout is one of the core keys.

But you are forgetting how many are struggling with the low arms and the big profile. People hit dirt. You still have to expose atleast 50% of your upperbody just to shoot at a target. The giant classical loadout and how big the hitbox of the AC/20 is just one lf these problems people are facing with, the hitbox rework screwed over.

The most heard discussion is that other Assaults are doing better for the same job.

Or what about speed: Take the STD300 for example and see your chassis getting stuck on the most simple placed objects such as stones, small logs and more. Mechs with more speed between 70-90 does not have this problem. The PP/Perfect convergence is killing for it's CT and or ST: there-of most heard complaint. It doenst hold up against a DW with 2x Gauss + 2x ERPPC perfect fire. One salvo is needed just to lose half of your FP at long range. The Stalker has more speed and a faster twist then you. The DW packs more punch at the same speed. The Battlemaster has... etc etera.

I am not saying it sucks. It needs attention: especially for the new players among us. But go ahead; browse the forums either here on Reddit. I don't see many Atlas threads. I do see more complaints then love for the Atlas itself. Or look at the Victor to start with. Similar boat.

I bet you haven't looked at the other variants. They're litterally dust if you compare peformance/job within the same Assault class.

I respect your opinion but you are just shitposting here to make a point based on your own experience of 5 matches without looking further then your nose.

I can tell there's something wrong with the Atlas when TTK is laughable low to start with for a 100 ton Assault. And i'm playing it since CB. Builds, experience, or whatever is irrelevant.. It's the endurance what's getting the risk of losing and the image of a fearless though Kerensky- machine is fading away when people are starting to look at the Atlas and see it as a teddy bear to cuddle with.

It doens't take rocketsciene to see it's what all about.

Edited by Sarlic, 11 July 2015 - 11:34 PM.

[Xetelian]

Atlas needs buffs.

[Random Carnage]

And which Atlas build, any Atlas build, would stand up to an omni mixed Dire packing 6 CUAC5's and a head mounted ERML - at any range from point blank out past 1200m? I'll take the Dire any day. Incidently, my Atlas KDR over some 3000 matches was about 1.7 pre reset, then over another 1200 odd was about 1.6. I know how to pilot an Atlas. My point is that is still got slaughtered post Clan invasion, and is no match for a well piloted Dire, or any other clan mech for that matter, and any half decent IS light will core its back too.

[Joseph Mallan]

Random Carnage, on 12 July 2015 - 02:29 AM, said:

And which Atlas build, any Atlas build, would stand up to an omni mixed Dire packing 6 CUAC5's and a head mounted ERML - at any range from point blank out past 1200m? I'll take the Dire any day. Incidently, my Atlas KDR over some 3000 matches was about 1.7 pre reset, then over another 1200 odd was about 1.6. I know how to pilot an Atlas. My point is that is still got slaughtered post Clan invasion, and is no match for a well piloted Dire, or any other clan mech for that matter, and any half decent IS light will core its back too.

The Dire Pilot must have been good. I have killed a few of the Dires you described.

[Joseph Mallan]

LordKnightFandragon, on 11 July 2015 - 01:28 PM, said:

Yeah, and in CB, they really were. Ive watched videos of CB and I drove a few Atlas in CB. They were insanely tough. Now its DHS, quirks galore, lolpha all the things and massive laser damage buffs along with PPD and 100 point heat scales allowing us to bring enough fire onto a single mech to melt it in seconds.

and since im sure you got that quote off sarna/wiki w/e...

heres this from there to

and theoretically a single Atlas can take on and wipe out an entire battalion of Stingers in exchange for minor armor loss.^[7]

To bad assaults are not that powerful....

So theoretically 1 Atlas can beat 36 Stingers..
...
...
...
Thats 36 medium lasers or 180 damage in a turn. An Atlas only has a LRM20 for ranged attacks so It can only target one of those 36 until 180 (on TT, tournament rules). There is a snowballs chance in Hell 1 Atlas can ever beat 36 Stingers.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 12 July 2015 - 02:39 AM.