118 replies to this topic

[Ted Wayz]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 01 March 2016 - 12:51 PM, said:

You do know that the Rifleman is kinda famous for having paper armor. It's strength is ment to be long range Direct fire support. Anything else and it put's itself in real danger.

Source? Already provided my source and it doesn't say that at all. It is supposed to have 30% more armor than a Jager and be able to mix it up with lights and mediums.

[Ted Wayz]

Kyynele, on 01 March 2016 - 04:05 AM, said:

Well, the reason I could keep stay sane and play that many matches was because I had exceptionally few bad matches, and actually had fun playing it. Which is exactly why I find this Rifleman complaint threads so baffling.

I honestly was expecting the Rifleman to be an underdog, but it had no trouble keeping up with the current meta mechs, even when pushing hard to get the solo kills. The screenshots I took during the tournament show only a few massive peaks, most of the won matches ended with a steady 500-600 damage done, and lost ones with typical 300-400. I think I did die early on in something like 5 of those games, but all of them were pure pilot error, being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even if the mech would've had the structure quirks of an Atlas, I wouldn't have lasted longer than an alpha or two, and it wouldn't have made any difference for the match outcome.

And yeah, lower tiers have it much easier to get high tournament scores, farming new T4 and T5 pilots. I'm sure you could've done it, too.

Oh the lower tier zinger. Never understood why people have to try and tear people down instead of just being happy with their own results. I could spew assumptions about how you got to tier 1 but instead I will say good job!

Did the whole tournament with an XL 2XAC10's and 4XMPL, not an ideal loadout. But my Rifleman has to have big guns because Rifle-man. Achieved the same average scores in wins and losses you did, just didn't have the same peaks that come with more play. We both know the 500-600 damage games didn't count towards your rank so if that was your average I am guessing there were more than 5 clunkers in the mix, statistically speaking.

And I don't meta. My favorite ride is a Kintaro and this weekend I was cruising is an AC20 raven and a flamer Blackjack. Heck I did the Warhammer event with PPCs!

So all you haters that want me to be bad I am sorry to disappoint you. The assessment that I provide is from a good pilot with no agenda other than to see a mech be viable and in use. But hey, I am fighting to improve a mech that no one plays anyway. Let's make sure we see the same ten mechs used for the next ten years. it will be fun!

[TKG]

Ted Wayz, on 01 March 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

Source? Already provided my source and it doesn't say that at all. It is supposed to have 30% more armor than a Jager and be able to mix it up with lights and mediums.

That is not particularly hard to prove, the Jager carried 6.0 tons of armor and the Rifleman 7.5. Both got more armor in later versions so it's safe to presume we are fairly only referencing the RFL-3C and the JM6-S. From that comparison it is found that the following is true

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman
Where it is flatly stated that "The Rifleman suffered from a miserly amount of armoring - just seven and a half tons total - with its rear torso particularly thin." Compared to the Jaeger mech which is located at the following link and says the following:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/JagerMech
From Sarna "Carrying only a miserly six tons of standard armor, the Jagermech is very vulnerable to return fire."

From the above links and quotes it's clear that mathematically the Jager has 25% less armor but it traded teh 1.5 tons of armor for ammunition which is referenced several times in the 3025 Jagermech TRO entry. Keep in mind my copy of the TRO does not include the missing 21 so in reverse I pull the following information from the Jager's entry in the 3025 TRO to question the logic of your point.

"As a last resort, however, the 'Mech will close with enemy units, relying on it's own weight and it's Magna medium lasers to carry the fight."

The reason I quote that is that if closing to medium or short range is an absolute last resort for jagermechs, what makes you think it is any different for a Rifleman who has on average less ammo (mentioned MANY times in the TRO as a problem) and moves at the exact same speed as a jager? 1.5 tons of armor actually isn't that much protection even in MWO; yes I'd rather have the ton and a half than not have it, but again if one cannot do what you claim and still do it's normal job what makes yout hink the other can when they're essentially the same mech.

[Ted Wayz]

TKG, on 01 March 2016 - 04:20 PM, said:

That is not particularly hard to prove, the Jager carried 6.0 tons of armor and the Rifleman 7.5. Both got more armor in later versions so it's safe to presume we are fairly only referencing the RFL-3C and the JM6-S. From that comparison it is found that the following is true

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman
Where it is flatly stated that "The Rifleman suffered from a miserly amount of armoring - just seven and a half tons total - with its rear torso particularly thin." Compared to the Jaeger mech which is located at the following link and says the following:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/JagerMech
From Sarna "Carrying only a miserly six tons of standard armor, the Jagermech is very vulnerable to return fire."

From the above links and quotes it's clear that mathematically the Jager has 25% less armor but it traded teh 1.5 tons of armor for ammunition which is referenced several times in the 3025 Jagermech TRO entry. Keep in mind my copy of the TRO does not include the missing 21 so in reverse I pull the following information from the Jager's entry in the 3025 TRO to question the logic of your point.

"As a last resort, however, the 'Mech will close with enemy units, relying on it's own weight and it's Magna medium lasers to carry the fight."

The reason I quote that is that if closing to medium or short range is an absolute last resort for jagermechs, what makes you think it is any different for a Rifleman who has on average less ammo (mentioned MANY times in the TRO as a problem) and moves at the exact same speed as a jager? 1.5 tons of armor actually isn't that much protection even in MWO; yes I'd rather have the ton and a half than not have it, but again if one cannot do what you claim and still do it's normal job what makes yout hink the other can when they're essentially the same mech.

How did this turn in to a low ammo discussion? Think we covered that in previous threads. But by all means if you feel compelled.

The Sarna quote is an opinion based upon the original source material. I'll stick with the technical readout. But okay let's use your source too (even though it doesn't say fragile) and then answer my question, does the MWO Rifleman feel tougher than the MWO Jagermech?

So far no one has answered the question. If one is supposed to be tougher than the other then...it should be tougher than the other, correct?

Since no one is brave enough to answer I will for you. The MWO Jager is tougher than the MWO Rifleman. Why?

On average the Jager was given +12.5 structure IN ALL LOCATIONS!

I have only asked for additional structure in the ST. That is it.

[Volthorne]

Ted Wayz, on 01 March 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:

I have only asked for additional structure in the ST. That is it.

The roflman doesn't need extra armor/structure. Stop being a bad and putting XL engines in them. Or, if you do put an XL engine in your roflman, make sure to assign it the appropriate weaponry to minimize the extra vulnerability. Really, this isn't rocket science.

Edited by Volthorne, 01 March 2016 - 07:22 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Volthorne, on 01 March 2016 - 07:22 PM, said:

The roflman doesn't need extra armor/structure. Stop being a bad and putting XL engines in them. Or, if you do put an XL engine in your roflman, make sure to assign it the appropriate weaponry to minimize the extra vulnerability. Really, this isn't rocket science.

Yeah, ROFL is perfectly capable of running XL. Even stubbornly running LB-10X on the LK does just fine with an XL.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 01 March 2016 - 07:36 PM.

[TKG]

Ted Wayz, on 01 March 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:

How did this turn in to a low ammo discussion? Think we covered that in previous threads. But by all means if you feel compelled.

The Sarna quote is an opinion based upon the original source material. I'll stick with the technical readout. But okay let's use your source too (even though it doesn't say fragile) and then answer my question, does the MWO Rifleman feel tougher than the MWO Jagermech?

So far no one has answered the question. If one is supposed to be tougher than the other then...it should be tougher than the other, correct? Since no one is brave enough to answer I will for you. The MWO Jager is tougher than the MWO Rifleman. Why?
On average the Jager was given +12.5 structure IN ALL LOCATIONS!
I have only asked for additional structure in the ST. That is it.

To answer most of what you've said; I was explaining the critical difference and reasoning for the jagermech's existence in context. It supports the fact that the Rifleman and the jager are basically the same mech but one is 5 tons heavier and has less armor by BT standards.

In terms of MWO, you asked if the rifleman seemed tougher, than the Jager or vice-versa. My answer is simply that I cannot tell the difference, five tons means nothing but as you pointed out the structure perks may make all the difference. I'd also point out that you should consider how long the Jager has been available...did it even start with the perks you mentioned? I know that all models of Jager get those structure perks while mysteriously only the 3C Rifleman gets a weird set of side-torso and arm perks only while the other models are left out of the loop for some reason*. I agree a CT perk boost on the rifleman would be nice, but will PGI do it and how long will it take before they get to it?


*For fair disclosure I did not get the LK rifleman and cant even find what it's perks are. I really could not justify owning one when I could mount most or all of it's load out on the 3C.

[Chados]

In answer to the "is the JM6 tougher than the RFL in MWO" question, I'm running a lot of time in RFLs and I started the game back in July in a JM6-A. I think the JM6 is slightly more tanky but the RFL has better hit boxes.

I'd like to see a little CT buff on the RFL-3N. I've said before that if the 3N got the LK's structure buffs I'd be cool with that. It's just too squishy as is. The 3C isn't too bad but for the CT, which is made of tinfoil, but I'd rather have my lasers on the arms with the autocannon...hence, I like the 3N best. I don't like the 5D-I miss the autocannon too much-and the LK is very interesting with one AC10 paired with an LB10X but I just like the 3N better.

[Ted Wayz]

Volthorne, on 01 March 2016 - 07:22 PM, said:

The roflman doesn't need extra armor/structure. Stop being a bad and putting XL engines in them. Or, if you do put an XL engine in your roflman, make sure to assign it the appropriate weaponry to minimize the extra vulnerability. Really, this isn't rocket science.

Post your Rifleman stats or ignored. Sorry I am through with opinions at this point.

I have run standard engine Rifleman. Instead of dying to ST loss you instead lose your weapons very very fast. Oh, and because you are not running the XL you have worse heat management and less room for ammo if you still want to carry rifles.

Just give the Rifleman the same structure quirks as the Jager. That is all.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 01 March 2016 - 08:17 PM.

[Trainee]

Metus regem, on 29 February 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

Learn to play maybe? Mine do just fine... 350-600 damage with 2 to 5 kill matches on average.... It's not a typical mech you can just hop into and do well, she takes some getting used too...

Also, don't chase quirks.... quirks are like drugs, you don't want to be on drugs do you?

Lets see that proof. I'd be highly interested in those stats.

[Ted Wayz]

Chados, on 01 March 2016 - 08:11 PM, said:

In answer to the "is the JM6 tougher than the RFL in MWO" question, I'm running a lot of time in RFLs and I started the game back in July in a JM6-A. I think the JM6 is slightly more tanky but the RFL has better hit boxes.

I'd like to see a little CT buff on the RFL-3N. I've said before that if the 3N got the LK's structure buffs I'd be cool with that. It's just too squishy as is. The 3C isn't too bad but for the CT, which is made of tinfoil, but I'd rather have my lasers on the arms with the autocannon...hence, I like the 3N best. I don't like the 5D-I miss the autocannon too much-and the LK is very interesting with one AC10 paired with an LB10X but I just like the 3N better.

The LK has worse structure buffs than the worst Jager structure buffs. In short, a mech that is supposed to be tankier than the Jager is not.

Still like the 3C best. I thought the LK would be the BW of the Rifleman due to at least having structure quirks, but the LBX makes it more of a finisher than a punisher. The Ac10 quirks on the 3C paired with a cooldown module is very effective.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 01 March 2016 - 08:16 PM.

[Volthorne]

Ted Wayz, on 01 March 2016 - 08:11 PM, said:

Post your Rifleman stats or ignored. Sorry I am through with opinions at this point.

I'm up on the leaderboard for the 3N. You're free to go check. 29th place. I also half-assed my way to 131st on the 3C boards - if I'd actually tried I probably could have made the top 50. As far as stats go, I kill more than I die, and though it doesn't show assists, I easily put up 5-6 assists per kill, the majority of them being KMDD.

Is that a big enough of an e-peen flex for you?

Quote

I have run standard engine Rifleman. Instead of dying to ST loss you instead lose your weapons very very fast. Oh, and because you are not running the XL you have worse heat management and less room for ammo if you still want to carry rifles.

"Worse" heat management is debatable since 10 truedubs should be more than enough for most roflman builds outside of the 5D, and some exceptions with the 3C - after Endo, a STD250 leaves you with plenty of room for ammo, weapons, and armor. If you're losing your weapons, you're getting shot. Getting shot is bad. Don't do that.

Quote

Just give the Rifleman the same structure quirks as the Jager. That is all.

No.

[Xavori]

If you play the Roflman like an assassin it works great. It's fairly nimble for its size and you can mount twin AC20's on it which make anything you sneak up on very sad very fast.

[PocketYoda]

Lets stop following table top rules that do not work in a online environment and have a game that is some what playable, for all mechs not just the poor Rifleman..

If not then at least give refunds...

[VirtualSmitty]

I'm not having an issue running XL engines in my riflemen, in fact all but one are rocking an XL of some sort. It's got better hitboxes than the Jager, even without structure quirks i'm finding it to be a tougher ride.

[CDLord HHGD]

Metus regem, on 29 February 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

Learn to play maybe? Mine do just fine... 350-600 damage with 2 to 5 kill matches on average.... It's not a typical mech you can just hop into and do well, she takes some getting used too...

Also, don't chase quirks.... quirks are like drugs, you don't want to be on drugs do you?

This 10000%!

[Beaching Betty]

"AC40 TO DA FACE!!" - Jagermech-s

[CDLord HHGD]

Beaching Betty, on 02 March 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

"AC40 TO DA FACE!!" - Jagermech-s

"UAC5x2 from range" = Rifleman
I've plinked a DWF to death like this, a JM6 would be no problem.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

Fire support mech is for.... fire support.

cdlord, on 02 March 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:

"UAC5x2 from range" = Rifleman
I've plinked a DWF to death like this, a JM6 would be no problem.

And the Jager-DD w/ 3x UAC5 and the quirks to boot still wins.
At least the Rifleman is prettier...

[Graugger]

It needs moar lazor points... Get rid of those cruddy little ballistic hard points!