101 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Ultimatum X, on 28 November 2015 - 07:57 AM, said:

The Stalker plays like that because of it's high mounts, if the Stalker had to compensate for low mounts with bad side torsos it would be called "A Warhawk". Which is exactly why the Warhawk has issues, it's STs get demolished easily.

The Marauder won't be as bad as the Warhawk (it's much smaller) - but it's in a similar boat.


Also, Stalkers aren't tanky. It's one of the most overly simplistic things people falsely perpetuate.


High mounts make a mech tanky, good hit boxes or the ability to shield makes a mech tanky.

Stalkers out in the open (which happens a lot in the current high speed game) will lose half their mech, and weapons easily.






There are already a number of heavies that can do this through either their build potential, or their quirks, or both.

GRH-5P, TDR-5SS, QCK-5K - even the Black Knight if you don't mind belly mounts.

No, it really wouldn't. It would offer the same target to the enemy, with more exposure. That's it. I've piloted Stalker almost exclusively for 4 years. I promise you when it comes to Stalkers I know what I'm doing with them

The "bad" side torsos? The Mad has the same profile. Hitting side torsos and arms is all you'll be able to do and a decent pilot will be able to spread that damage.
Stalker ARE tanky. I tank with mine all the time. They're one of the best zombie mechs in the game. I can't count the number of times I've stood there soaking up damage from bigger assaults, or a few big guys on the other team, it takes hundreds of points of damage to take down a Stalker AND render it combat useless. One leg, no arms, one CT and I'm STILL firing off a LL at you. That's the very definition of tanking. Soaking damage and keeping enemy attention. If you don't think a Stalker can tank, you haven't tried hard enough in them

The Black Knight is the only one that comes close to a Stalker. Due to hardpoint placements, profiles, size, scale, etc. the other mechs you mentioned (did I also mention I'm a dedicated LL boaters for nearly 4 years now as well?) The Tbolt, Hopper, and QD are nowhere near the same as a Stalker as far as tanking ability, weapon locations, etc. I own all of those mechs (except the QD but I own anothrr QD) and I speak from personal experience. The only mech that might give the BK a run for its money in this specific case is the Mad and possibly the Whammy (depending on scale and hitboxes).

You severely underestimate Stalkers as well as what the design of that Mad could mean for its potential. If it has similar hitboxes to the Stalker I promise you, people are about to hate energy heavy platforms again and I'll be leading the charge

Sjorpha, on 28 November 2015 - 09:35 AM, said:

It's much more like a mini King Crab than a mini Stalker in design, but the speed and jump jets are a major difference. I see no reason to believe it will play anything like either of those mechs. The 3R is more like a Jager with it's focus on high mounted Dakka, and I think the MAD-5M will play a bit like the CTD-3D with 2AC5+2PPC right sided poptart or 2AC5+3LL being popular builds.

Most times I hear the meme "It's a fire support mech" or "not a frontline mech" it's as a part of some kind of apologetic for a bad mech being totally good in secret kinda thing. But I think the MAD will be a pretty good mech, and very much a mech that can work the front lines too.

The 3R will have a pretty interesting slow standard DPS build with 3AC5+4Mlas, std250,14DHS and 7 tons of ammo. I wonder if those shoulder high AC5s will make slow builds like that worth it, but that could be the one possibly playing a bit like a Stalker.

The 5D I guess will be pulse+SRM brawler, which might actually be good with the new missile stats, I'm thinking something like 2ASRM6, 4MPL, 1LPL, std300 for that one. Of course, if this against all odds works well with XL there are a whole range of builds opening up.

Really it's not. The king crab is this wide [_____________________] and the Mad is this wide [_______]
Which one of those are easier to target?

Just because it has arms that are similar doesn't mean the rest of the mech is anything like a KGC. The arms are the ONLY similarity between those two mechs.


You're extremely misinformed on the meaning of "fire support" and "not frontline" (which I think is the main reason a lot of players don't know how to fully utilize certain mechs in this game) statements.

The Stalker is not a frontline mech and is a fire support mech. It's also one of the best mechs in the game. It's not designed to walk out in the open and deliver massive damage. It's meant to fire from behind cover while the frontline mechs brawl it out at range. (That's very simplified because you CAN build Stalkers to frontline but they're never as effective in my opinion). I love fire support mechs. Think of it like this. The difference between a "front line" mech and a "fire support" mech is kills and assists.
Brawlers and frontline mechs often get more kills. Fire support mechs get damage and a lot of assists typically. It has nothing to do with how "good" a mech is. Anyone stating otherwise really just quite simply doesn't understand Btech, mech designs, etc.

[Madcap72]

Damn, Sadnpit nailed it.


I think the problem is that people see "assault" and think that means "brawl", which is weird because for as many BT purists are on here, you'd think they would know better.

[Mister Blastman]

My Dragon and Catapult are pissed off.

[Mister Blastman]

Madcap72, on 28 November 2015 - 01:04 PM, said:

Damn, Sadnpit nailed it.


I think the problem is that people see "assault" and think that means "brawl", which is weird because for as many BT purists are on here, you'd think they would know better.

Some assaults can tank exceptionally well...

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

Some assaults can tank exceptionally well...

In my experience, zombie mechs with torso mounted weapons are the best tanks. It's much harder to get them down to the point where they can't shoot back. Then they become the equivalent of a light sniper at end of game from the rear. You want to keep your exposure to the enemy limited and reposition a lot.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 28 November 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

In my experience, zombie mechs with torso mounted weapons are the best tanks. It's much harder to get them down to the point where they can't shoot back. Then they become the equivalent of a light sniper at end of game from the rear. You want to keep your exposure to the enemy limited and reposition a lot.

IMO most zombie mechs are overrated. The Stalker is one of the few exceptions, and even it isn't particularly scary in and of itself. But it's high hardpoints are a huge key to it's success.

But most of the other mechs you can "zombie", are usually NOT better than mechs that can shield and XL and therefore go faster (more tactical versatility) and hit harder, earlier. The earlier in a match you can front load damage the better it is for your teams chances of actually winning.

Haven't seen many "pewpew" Centy Zombies, for instance carry the team to a win... but seen plenty running around at the end of a loss.

Stalker stands out because as an Assault, it takes a lot more damage to begin with, and from the front, where laser centric builds will usually face, it has a small profile, combined with high hardpoints. 1v1, once you get a stalker where you can start flanking it, they die very easy. As part of a firing line, they are damnably effective and no fun to face.

The STs on a the Marauder Model protrude a LOT more that the STs on the Stalker, from the front, giving a lot more real estate to catch fire, proportionally. Center of mass cockpit not a huge help, either.

And on a 75 tonner, it's biggest comparo is that Timberwolf, which, due to Clan XL, has a lot more firepower and speed, while for all intents, is equally tough. The MAD won't necessarily be bad, but the fact it's almost certainly relegated to a STD Engine, limits it's versatility tremendously, and leave it most effective with Lasers.... but what happens when the Meta shifts again?

[Mister Blastman]

Zombies are okay but I prefer big beastly arms that can block and tank damage.

[Madcap72]

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

Some assaults can tank exceptionally well...

Never said they couldn't. Some assaults are intended for fighting other assaults, some assaults are intended to support fighting other assaults.

The Victor is a great example. People bag on it for being weak, and not brawling well, when it's specifically intended as a support mech that supports the mechs that DO brawl I.E. the King Crab, which can torso twist like a boss, and with a big STD engine, can out twist lights trying to grief it and lose multiple components and still fight. (Asymmetric loaded KG's can lose an entire side as a shield taking massive damage)

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 November 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

IMO most zombie mechs are overrated. The Stalker is one of the few exceptions, and even it isn't particularly scary in and of itself. But it's high hardpoints are a huge key to it's success.

But most of the other mechs you can "zombie", are usually NOT better than mechs that can shield and XL and therefore go faster (more tactical versatility) and hit harder, earlier. The earlier in a match you can front load damage the better it is for your teams chances of actually winning.

Haven't seen many "pewpew" Centy Zombies, for instance carry the team to a win... but seen plenty running around at the end of a loss.

Stalker stands out because as an Assault, it takes a lot more damage to begin with, and from the front, where laser centric builds will usually face, it has a small profile, combined with high hardpoints. 1v1, once you get a stalker where you can start flanking it, they die very easy. As part of a firing line, they are damnably effective and no fun to face.

The STs on a the Marauder Model protrude a LOT more that the STs on the Stalker, from the front, giving a lot more real estate to catch fire, proportionally. Center of mass cockpit not a huge help, either.

And on a 75 tonner, it's biggest comparo is that Timberwolf, which, due to Clan XL, has a lot more firepower and speed, while for all intents, is equally tough. The MAD won't necessarily be bad, but the fact it's almost certainly relegated to a STD Engine, limits it's versatility tremendously, and leave it most effective with Lasers.... but what happens when the Meta shifts again?

MOST mechs aren't scary in and of themselves. My Stalkers won't stand up real well in the KDR department going toe to toe with another Assault designed to brawl or do high damage output per volley. However, if you pair me up with a medium thru assault weapons platform, that Stalker becomes deadly. I'm able to soak up tons of damage while the other guy puts damage out. I wear them down, they shred their armor.

There's very few (outside of very heavy assaults and some heavies) mechs that represent much "danger" on their own. That's what Btech is all about. You team up and form up with other mechs that create synergy through teamwork.

Bmasters, Wolfhounds, Crabs, BKs (hopefully Mads as well) are all great soaking fire support mechs. They can take tons of damage while still holding target locks, spotting, putting out damage, etc.

I can hold several key areas in a few maps all by my lonesome with any of those mechs (well heavies and up) for that very reason. 4-5LL isn't "massive" damage, but it's enough to make enemy mechs think twice about rushing into it.

That's why I am a fan of STD engines. I can literally lose both side torsos and a leg and STILL be shooting back and performing the above tasks. That's what I mean by tanking.

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

Zombies are okay but I prefer big beastly arms that can block and tank damage.

I have certain mechs and builds I use that do that as well. Those shield arms don't help legs shots or a patient pilot who waits for you to profile again to take the shot

[Ultimax]

Sandpit, on 28 November 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

No, it really wouldn't. It would offer the same target to the enemy, with more exposure. That's it. I've piloted Stalker almost exclusively for 4 years. I promise you when it comes to Stalkers I know what I'm doing with them

The "bad" side torsos? The Mad has the same profile. Hitting side torsos and arms is all you'll be able to do and a decent pilot will be able to spread that damage.
Stalker ARE tanky. I tank with mine all the time. They're one of the best zombie mechs in the game. I can't count the number of times I've stood there soaking up damage from bigger assaults, or a few big guys on the other team, it takes hundreds of points of damage to take down a Stalker AND render it combat useless. One leg, no arms, one CT and I'm STILL firing off a LL at you. That's the very definition of tanking. Soaking damage and keeping enemy attention. If you don't think a Stalker can tank, you haven't tried hard enough in them

The Black Knight is the only one that comes close to a Stalker. Due to hardpoint placements, profiles, size, scale, etc. the other mechs you mentioned (did I also mention I'm a dedicated LL boaters for nearly 4 years now as well?) The Tbolt, Hopper, and QD are nowhere near the same as a Stalker as far as tanking ability, weapon locations, etc. I own all of those mechs (except the QD but I own anothrr QD) and I speak from personal experience. The only mech that might give the BK a run for its money in this specific case is the Mad and possibly the Whammy (depending on scale and hitboxes).

You severely underestimate Stalkers as well as what the design of that Mad could mean for its potential. If it has similar hitboxes to the Stalker I promise you, people are about to hate energy heavy platforms again and I'll be leading the charge

You believe what you want.

They are easy to disarm, and no one is afraid of a 64kph zombie with one LLAS or LPL at most in a CT, big deal.


I'm not underestimating anything, I know Stalkers are good mechs. They are good sniping mechs, good hill humpers - some of the best in the game.

They're good at those things because of their hitboxes and their high mounts, they are bad out in the open because they have no arms to soak damage and have enormous side torsos. That's why it's bad to run XLs in them.


The time when you could safely hump a hill while the enemy team slowly comes to you are long over, 90% of the matches I'm in end up 80-90kph NASCAR or Micro-nascar.


The Marauder is going to weigh 10 tons less, it's likely going to need a STD engine with those hitboxes.

ONE of them has 3 high ballistic mounts, all in the same torso. The rest are limited to 1 or 2.


So yeah, it'll be like a Stalker in that it will probably not want to use XL. It will be a slow heavy, with a STD engine and few high mounts to work with.

There is another mech in the game that is already designed almost exactly like that, I mentioned it already, the King Crab.



The fallacy of Stalker hitboxes = tanky all the time are what led to some of the failed hitbox redesigns we've seen recently. It's a misnomer that gets perpetuated because believing it as 100% is simpler than understanding the nuances of when it is good and when it is not good.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 28 November 2015 - 02:53 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 28 November 2015 - 02:47 PM, said:

I have certain mechs and builds I use that do that as well. Those shield arms don't help legs shots or a patient pilot who waits for you to profile again to take the shot

Unless that pilot has you 1v1 it means he's not shooting... which still removes his effectiveness. I've had people try to play that game and I'll twist from them and shoot his friend in the flank. Eventually he has to shoot. The guy twisting has just as much ability to dictate that engagement, too. And if the guy twisting is packing a nice PP_FLD volley, it's worth it to take your laser shot, nail you in one location, and spread the counterfire.

Moves and countermoves. That's why I like this game, if you get a good matchup... it can become so very situational.

[Sandpit]

Quote

[color=#959595]You believe what you want.[/color]

Considering it's served me well for my entire life, I'll keep doing it Believing myself is integral to my decision making capabilities

Quote

[color=#959595]They are easy to disarm, and no one is afraid of a 64kph zombie with one LLAS or LPL at most in a CT, big deal.[/color]

Yes because you can disarm them so easily and quickly. I'm always wandering around the map with only one LL left 2 minutes into the game...

Quote

[color=#959595]They're good at those things because of their hitboxes and their high mounts, they are bad out in the open because they have no arms to soak damage and have enormous side torsos. That's why it's bad to run XLs in them.[/color]

Let's correct something real quick. YOU are bad with them out in the open. I'm not

Quote

[color=#959595]The Marauder is going to weigh 10 tons less, it's likely going to need a STD engine with those hitboxes.[/color]

We could get into a long-winded debate on XL vs. STD but that's another thread. I prefer and run STD engines for most of my builds. What your'e considering a "bad" thing about the mech is actually one of the perks in my opinion

Quote

[color=#959595]There is another mech in the game that is already designed almost exactly like that, I mentioned it already, the King Crab.[/color]

If you can't understand the fundamental differences in the design of a mech like a MAD and a KGC, you really don't understand mech designs in my opinion. The Mad will run, work, damage, and tank in a whole different way than the KGC. If you attempt to use the MAD in a manner like a KGC you're not going to do very well in it and you're definitely not going to like it or think it's a "good" mech.

It's not a matter of opinion on most of what I've said. It's a matter of over 1300 matches with LLs and over 1000 matches in Stalkers.
It's a matter of using what most considered "subpar" weapon systems and mechs for nearly 4 years while maintaining a competitive KDR and W/L record.

You can try to use the Mad in the same manner as a KGC, but you're going to be sorely disappointed. As I said earlier, those that learn to use the Mad effectively are going to love it and make it a force to be reckoned with. Those who don't... well they'll be the first ones on the forums complaining how "bad" it is.

The htibox and hardpoint locations will obviously determine some of this, but I guarantee you if you attempt to use this mech like a KGC in how and where you move to on the map, how you profile yourself, how you reposition, etc. you're going to hate it.

If you treat in the same vein and the stalker you'll be much more effective with it.

Bishop Steiner, on 28 November 2015 - 02:58 PM, said:

Unless that pilot has you 1v1 it means he's not shooting... which still removes his effectiveness. I've had people try to play that game and I'll twist from them and shoot his friend in the flank. Eventually he has to shoot. The guy twisting has just as much ability to dictate that engagement, too. And if the guy twisting is packing a nice PP_FLD volley, it's worth it to take your laser shot, nail you in one location, and spread the counterfire.

Moves and countermoves. That's why I like this game, if you get a good matchup... it can become so very situational.

If you're in a 1v1 situation the "other" guys is a non-factor. There are no "friends" around in a 1v1

I understand what you're saying, what I'm saying is that there are counter tactics to any and everything out there that mitigate the effectiveness of a strategy. You twist, I wait and fire more promising shots.

Edited by Sandpit, 28 November 2015 - 03:23 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Madcap72, on 28 November 2015 - 02:24 PM, said:

Never said they couldn't. Some assaults are intended for fighting other assaults, some assaults are intended to support fighting other assaults.

The Victor is a great example. People bag on it for being weak, and not brawling well, when it's specifically intended as a support mech that supports the mechs that DO brawl I.E. the King Crab, which can torso twist like a boss, and with a big STD engine, can out twist lights trying to grief it and lose multiple components and still fight. (Asymmetric loaded KG's can lose an entire side as a shield taking massive damage)

Well the Victor is trash. It's just... trash. It looks nice. But it is bad. You're gimping yourself if you take one.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 28 November 2015 - 03:14 PM, said:

If you treat in the same vein and the stalker you'll be much more effective with it.

gonna say this is hard to declare before it releases.
-Less armor than a Stalker,
-wider frontal profile,
-a need for a (comparatively) larger engine to really keep up (Stalkers can make do with a 300, on a decent IS 75 tonner a 300 is a bare minimum)
-less available tonnage with std engine than a Stalker for guns and sinks
-no CT hardpoint (ditto with many STKs, of course)
-only one set of "high rise" hardpoints

It's silhouette sits firmly between the Stalker and the Krab thanks to those rather conspicuous intakes where the Stalker has Arms, but it's majority lower hardpoints, and lower armor make it tactically different from BOTH the Stalker and Krab, IMO.

I think it's awfully hard to make any definitive claim as to how it will play.

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Well the Victor is trash. It's just... trash. It looks nice. But it is bad. You're gimping yourself if you take one.

tell me about it........

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 November 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

gonna say this is hard to declare before it releases.
-Less armor than a Stalker,
-wider frontal profile,
-a need for a (comparatively) larger engine to really keep up (Stalkers can make do with a 300, on a decent IS 75 tonner a 300 is a bare minimum)
-less available tonnage with std engine than a Stalker for guns and sinks
-no CT hardpoint (ditto with many STKs, of course)
-only one set of "high rise" hardpoints

It's silhouette sits firmly between the Stalker and the Krab thanks to those rather conspicuous intakes where the Stalker has Arms, but it's majority lower hardpoints, and lower armor make it tactically different from BOTH the Stalker and Krab, IMO.

I think it's awfully hard to make any definitive claim as to how it will play.


tell me about it........

Obviously this is all theory crafting until we see what it is like in the game, but the profile fits a Stalker much more closely than a KGC to me. Time will tell, but if I'm right, this is going to be a very deadly heavy mech to contend with.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Torgun, on 26 November 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

Every size comparison that involves the Catapult always brings the lulz, because it sure looks like it's 10 tons lighter than the Marauder.

Personally I'm glad PGI isn't making the mechs stupidly big anymore. Now they just need to take the time to redo the old ones which will never happen.

[Sandpit]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 28 November 2015 - 03:53 PM, said:

Personally I'm glad PGI isn't making the mechs stupidly big anymore. Now they just need to take the time to redo the old ones which will never happen.

I like this sentiment as well. The newer mechs may be smaller in scale, but they "feel" better in the game. The maps still make you feel like you're tromping around in a big mech.

[Y E O N N E]

I just wish the rear overhang on the MAD wasn't so big. Compressing it by about 15% would be dandy.

[Madcap72]

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Well the Victor is trash. It's just... trash. It looks nice. But it is bad. You're gimping yourself if you take one.

Well, I don't, I was using it as an example. Though i am super tempted to buy one just for old times sake. Same reason I bust the ssrm Catapult out. Because sometimes it's fun to bust out garbage builds and see how well you can do. It's also great practice for running good mechs.

[Lightfoot]

Well, I will tell you the Avatar became the top mech in MW3 PvP because it had the smallest profile of any heavy. It makes the hitboxes smaller and makes it harder to hit.

So don't be left out, go buy MWO's Avatar.

Mister Blastman, on 28 November 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Well the Victor is trash. It's just... trash. It looks nice. But it is bad. You're gimping yourself if you take one.

The Victor is great actually. Very tough, high mounted weapons. They nerfed it's movement though because it was used for jump-jet combat and PGI don't allow that because new players don't know how to counter a mech with jump-jets which is really so easy to do. Oh well, so much for the value of Skill.

Edited by Lightfoot, 29 November 2015 - 01:02 AM.