44 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

I just find the notion of more laser vomit... nauseating.

I really have enough of that, and don't want any more. Now, I'm growing extremely fond of dual CUAC10's. My HBKIIC tears up face with them. But yeah, a flat 4E 2B would be a bit anemic for a 100t assault. I'd prolly look at something like 2xCUAC10, 5t ammo (25t) 2LPL (37t) 2ERML (39t), then DHS.

Single B models, a CUAC20, LPL's, missiles. I'm not actually working it out, because I'm lazy. But yeah... I'd go larger engine with fewer ballistics; how large depends on slots/tonnage/DHS.

But this much is sure: I will not run a purely laser vomit Kodiak. God, no.

Tarogato, on 09 January 2016 - 10:00 PM, said:

There's not one thing that it can do that a DWF can't do better.

Except move?

With a 350 rated engine, the mobility gains would be substantial.

Edit: Rather, the agility gains would be substantial. The Direwolf's current agility post-nerf is horrifically bad. Being able to twist and turn faster would allow you to get a lot more mileage out of your armor.

And while that's at a cost in tonnage, it's not a huge one. Most notably, being able to get more speed would make a huge difference in it's viability in CW. +10kph is pretty substantial there.

Edited by Wintersdark, 09 January 2016 - 10:14 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Wintersdark, on 09 January 2016 - 10:03 PM, said:

I just find the notion of more laser vomit... nauseating.

I really have enough of that, and don't want any more. Now, I'm growing extremely fond of dual CUAC10's. My HBKIIC tears up face with them. But yeah, a flat 4E 2B would be a bit anemic for a 100t assault. I'd prolly look at something like 2xCUAC10, 5t ammo (25t) 2LPL (37t) 2ERML (39t), then DHS.

Single B models, a CUAC20, LPL's, missiles. I'm not actually working it out, because I'm lazy. But yeah... I'd go larger engine with fewer ballistics; how large depends on slots/tonnage/DHS.

But this much is sure: I will not run a purely laser vomit Kodiak. God, no.

UAC20 (4t), 6cMPLs, 25DHS

Again all slots used, 400XL, striped right arm (or left, your choice for the 1 laser arm, or on the 5E arm variant, fully Sword and Board).
Not sure it would have the agility for that, though...but it isn't locked into laser asymmetry.

A nasty short range punch.

[El Bandito]

Wintersdark, on 09 January 2016 - 10:03 PM, said:

With a 350 rated engine, the mobility gains would be substantial.

Edit: Rather, the agility gains would be substantial. The Direwolf's current agility post-nerf is horrifically bad. Being able to twist and turn faster would allow you to get a lot more mileage out of your armor.

And while that's at a cost in tonnage, it's not a huge one. Most notably, being able to get more speed would make a huge difference in it's viability in CW. +10kph is pretty substantial there.

Cost in tonnage can be mitigated by Clan Endo/Ferro, each costing only 7 slots. With those, the Kodiak can save around 8 tons of weight. I still find it amusing that Clan Ferro is superior than IS Ferro while costing only half the space.

Edited by El Bandito, 09 January 2016 - 10:27 PM.

[Wintersdark]

El Bandito, on 09 January 2016 - 10:24 PM, said:

Cost in tonnage can be mitigated by Clan Endo/Ferro, each costing only 7 slots.

Yeah. Depending on the loadout. At least Endo, probably not Ferro, though with larger engines it'd be worth it.

I just think the speed difference substantially differentiates it from the Direwolf, and the Highlander for that matter. The Executioner is unique due to MASC and such, while the Gargles is... the Gargles.

The Kodiak offers Clan's a solid heavy assault able to move as useful speeds, but with a lot of tonnage for heavy weaponry too.

[Mcgral18]

El Bandito, on 09 January 2016 - 10:24 PM, said:

Cost in tonnage can be mitigated by Clan Endo/Ferro, each costing only 7 slots. With those, the Kodiak can save over 7 tons of weight.

From the little things I've built...best to leave the Ferro alone.
Lacks Ballistic tonnage filler to make up for the Heatsink Crit filler.

Hardpoint inflation to change. Quad UAC10, for example, can be done on the XL400, but with 0 heatsinks it has 6 tons of ammo.

Downgrade to the 375 for 7 extra tons. So, you COULD bring 0 heatsinks, 4 UAC10s, and 13 tons of ammo (with 0 crit slots left).
That's a whopping 2300 damage worth of ammo...so let's bring that down to 1400 damage/7 tons (a reasonable amount for all but the Carry Harder matches).
This allows for 16 heatsinks, to handle the pretty hot UAC10s (or lasers, if you like blast furnaces).


Of course...I don't expect an Assault of this calibre to get much hardpoint inflation.

[El Bandito]

Mcgral18, on 09 January 2016 - 10:32 PM, said:

From the little things I've built...best to leave the Ferro alone.
Lacks Ballistic tonnage filler to make up for the Heatsink Crit filler.

Hardpoint inflation to change. Quad UAC10, for example, can be done on the XL400, but with 0 heatsinks it has 6 tons of ammo.

I doubt the Kodiak will get four ballistic slots. It might happen, but not guaranteed. Most likely two ballistic slots, in which case, adding ferro is fine.

Edited by El Bandito, 09 January 2016 - 10:45 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Mcgral18, on 09 January 2016 - 10:32 PM, said:

From the little things I've built...best to leave the Ferro alone.
Lacks Ballistic tonnage filler to make up for the Heatsink Crit filler.

Hardpoint inflation to change. Quad UAC10, for example, can be done on the XL400, but with 0 heatsinks it has 6 tons of ammo.

Downgrade to the 375 for 7 extra tons. So, you COULD bring 0 heatsinks, 4 UAC10s, and 13 tons of ammo (with 0 crit slots left).
That's a whopping 2300 damage worth of ammo...so let's bring that down to 1400 damage/7 tons (a reasonable amount for all but the Carry Harder matches).
This allows for 16 heatsinks, to handle the pretty hot UAC10s (or lasers, if you like blast furnaces).


Of course...I don't expect an Assault of this calibre to get much hardpoint inflation.

I wouldn't expect much inflation either. It's possible, of course, but unlikely - see the HGN-IIC's for a likely example.

Dual CUAC10's is the most I'd be likely to run. More, and you're getting into "should have brought a Direwolf" territory - but even then, quad 10's isn't very practical there either, despite pushing a tremendous amount amount of damage. Just doesn't actually work well, what with ghost heat and all that.

With 4B, I'd be tempted to run 4xUAC5's, though. Or 3xUAC5+1AC5, if ghost heat irritated me.

[kapusta11]

Guass x2, probably high mounted
LPL x2
XL390 (68 kph), a bit slower than Wubshee, can't die to ST loss.
16x DHS

Almost heat neutral 56 damage alpha at 600m range. Why people keep telling it will suck?

[Revis Volek]

Alistair Winter, on 09 January 2016 - 08:33 PM, said:

God, I hope they pick a different mech than the Kodiak.

[Mcgral18]

Tarogato, on 09 January 2016 - 10:00 PM, said:

Mcgral... dude, quit stealing my thunder. First the Turkina, now this.

But mah tables.
They have colours!


Not sure what the best layout is, but mine certainly isn't it.

[Yosharian]

Wait, it's not an Omnimech??

[Hit the Deck]

Yosharian, on 10 January 2016 - 05:45 AM, said:

Wait, it's not an Omnimech??

Someone asked the same question about the Mad Cat Mk.II.

[Antares102]

Hit the Deck, on 09 January 2016 - 07:26 PM, said:

Because we could get it according to the running "vote", I'd like to know the possible loadouts. Let's start!

KDK (O):

• 4x cLPL + 4x cMPL on the arms
  
• Endo, Ferro, XL400, 24 DHS
  
• 84 Firepower, 26% Cooling, ~70kph

My build would be:
XL375
2x LPL + 6 MPL
No Ferro, no Endo.
30 DHS
TC1
Alpha of 74 without ghostheat

Edited by Antares102, 10 January 2016 - 10:28 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

Antares102, on 10 January 2016 - 10:25 AM, said:

My build would be:
XL375
2x LPL + 6 MPL
No Ferro, no Endo.
30 DHS
TC1
Alpha of 74 without ghostheat

It's shorter ranged which means that generally you need to be nimbler but a 375 rated engine will only give you ~65kph....

Edited by Hit the Deck, 10 January 2016 - 02:01 PM.

[Antares102]

Hit the Deck, on 10 January 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

It's shorter ranged which means that generally you need to be nimbler but a 375 rated engine will only gives you ~65kph....

Yes if you want more range you can also go for 2 LPL and 6 ML with 400XL.
The thing is that you need to have as little face time as possible. Fireing 2x2 LPL is optimal 1.62 sec but more realistically 1.8-2.0 sec till you are done.

[StonedVet]

Us ghost bears need our signature mech

[Darkside99x]

El Bandito, on 09 January 2016 - 07:47 PM, said:

Here is hoping that the Kodiak retains its lasers on top of the forearms. PGI tend to put them under the arms, which sucks balls. The hitboxes look fine, as are the high mounts of CUAC20+SRM launchers.

Thats a Kodiak II. or some ******* hybrid of both.

Edited by Darkside99x, 10 January 2016 - 05:24 PM.

[El Bandito]

Darkside99x, on 10 January 2016 - 05:23 PM, said:

Thats a Kodiak II. or some ******* hybrid of both.

No, it is Kodiak 1. Straight from MW4. I miss sized hardpoints.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 January 2016 - 06:01 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Hit the Deck, on 10 January 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

It's shorter ranged which means that generally you need to be nimbler but a 375 rated engine will only give you ~65kph....

Not like the 69kph you get from a 400XL is going to make any difference there.

really, though, the 2LPL's get you decent ranged firepower, and with 30 DHS he's able to push that pretty much constantly, so it's not like it's a fully short ranged build.

[FupDup]

El Bandito, on 10 January 2016 - 06:00 PM, said:

No, it is Kodiak 1. Straight from MW4. I miss sized hardpoints.

I think the way it happened is that CGL added the Kodiak 2 to TT based on the Dark Age/MW4 design of the mech, implying that the "original" Kodiak was the derpy looking one from other artwork.

This of course happened well after MW4's release; MW4 didn't intend to create a "new" Kodiak type.

The same thing happened to the MW4 design of the Vulture, too.