Wintersdark, on 17 February 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:
This is kind of my position on it.
I don't think "Slow, short ranged brawler" should be an approach that's perfectly valid everywhere. People like to think that it should be, but IMHO from a logical standpoint if you want to focus on short range, you need to be fast enough to force short ranged combat.
Tiny maps make it work, because there's really nowhere to go and the combats always happen in the same place, so you just go there.
But that's an aberration, not a reasonable result.
Slow+short ranged is fine in, say, CW defense. It's great in close quarters. But it's a tactically flawed build when you have to be close, but cannot force combats to be close ranged.
Agree with so much of this
Even the BT rulebooks talk about mechs like the Atlas being ideal for defensive positions, when the enemy has to come to you.
The extreme builds (short range brawl, or extreme range sniper with little/no backup weapons) work well on faster mechs simply because you can control distance more easily. The faster brawler can pounce on openings, and the fast sniper can reposition as needed without taking their finger off the trigger for too long.
Your point about big vs. small maps is also a great one, with all these big new maps assaults need to know their destination and their routes a lot better, since it takes you forever to redeploy.
Wintersdark, on 17 February 2016 - 05:39 PM, said:
Truth. But what can happen is that you keep up with the pack (you almost always can, even in DWF's I have no trouble with that) but can't close to short range effectively if your opposing team doesn't play nice.
But, like I said, if that's happening, it's your own fault for choosing both short range and slow speed.
It's pilot error - either on the battlefield or in the mechlab.
Another mistake is that some players catch up with the pack, but they stay at the wrong edge. So when the group pushes, they are quickly left behind again. If they moved up the front when they had the chance, they would be in a better position to support the push with covering fire. Granted, if you have extremely long ranged weapons and clear sight lines this might not be an issue... but that's not always the case
Void Angel, on 17 February 2016 - 04:21 PM, said:
Well, it does depend; 52kph - 48K before speed tweak - is risky, but workable. Usually when those guys get "left behind," its because they don't know how to drive their Battlemechs. I know; I've driven those big, slow brawlers. They'll occasionally get picked up by aggressive lights and destroyed, but normally they get "caught" when they stop to try and fight the enemy team instead of just accepting a little long-range damage and moving on to catch up. Or they pick the worst possible routes, or they stumble into the open so the enemy can see that they're slow and alone...
Its gotten to the point where if someone spouts something in match about "Assaults getting left behind," I privately just count it that much more likely that they're a bad player.
Yep, knowing your routes and picking your battles are essential skills for assault pilots. Sure, if you're marching and you get a Cheetah on your butt with 6xSPL you can't afford to ignore that. But assaults really do make the pilots plan a few moves in advance to make up for their poor speed. Especially if you don't have jump jets, having to take the longer paths around at 50kph is killer.
Assaults can sometimes be victims of circumstance, through no fault of their own, but often a poor performance from an assault is a result of bad planning more than anything else. I know I play a lot more fast and loose in a light/medium where you can get away with it, but personally I really try to coordinate more and stick to the plan if I'm slower than 70kph. Winging it is just way more dangerous when you're slow.
6
