53 replies to this topic

[Morggo]

Tempest is a fantastic results getter for me and my Archer lancemate. Admittedly, poor results until last week, until both of us decided to slam an XL340 instead of a smaller STD. He went missile heavy, I went energy heavy. We both immediately started wrecking in them. Slow archers = early death for both of us usually. Once it's into a quick and nimble medium speed bracket we found it pretty easy to work the firing lines where needed, and repositions in a moment, kills went up, and we survived more matches. Damage easily in the 400 - 600 range.

On the 9xM.. I agree with Bish and a couple others. Best mix for me has been 4xLRM5, 4xSRM4. Run just enough LRM to soften and close before depleting. Heavier on the SRM ammo for brawling once you get stuck in. Works a treat.

Clearly the Archer is a definite case of "your mileage may vary"

Edited by Morggo, 09 May 2016 - 06:19 AM.

[Legend Death]

dervishx5, on 09 May 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

Good place for an Archer is being in the middle of your allies' formation and provided LRM support >350 meters.

Best place for the Archer is in your mechbay.

I started this thread because that is how I felt but wanted to stay positive and see if I was just missing some important things about the archer. Having mastered all the variants and only kept the tempest and 2R(s) for the 30% bonuses. I find playing them as slow lrm mechs with low missle loadouts and 6 medium lasters (xl engine) is all too weak on the field. Trying srm builds with an xl is too squishy, and switching to standard is too heavy/slow. im rocking XL 325 with them and still getting ditched by timberwolfs at half my loadout being engine lol. that leaves little for weaponry and being squishy. So I did try the wub build too, and that was just so toxic that there was 0 chance for that to work. The closes thing ive made work is full coward, with 6ml and 3srm 6, and you only engage after a friendly is already fighting them and then you may do ok. but fighting any mechs in this thing, in any situation seems like a good way to get rekt lol. And thats for the tempest and the 2R(S) both 30% bonus mechs on cbills, so id only like to run those two.

After seeing this thread though I can tell the archer still needs a bit of attention from pgi to find a home on the battlefield.

[dervishx5]

I wont claim its a game changer, but my 4 ML, 2 LRM20 + artemis, ECM (keepin it real) Jamie Wolf paintedTempest works out more often than it doesn't. But that's probably due to my teammates' competence that allows me to wade into formations of enemies with them, duck and weave, and just provide general support and armor absorption.

Granted I'd help out a lot more in a Warhammer or Grasshopper, but it's useable.

Edited by dervishx5, 09 May 2016 - 06:41 AM.

[Escef]

My 5W is 4*SRM4, 5*LRM5, BAP, 300 standard. Just hang at midrange and usually chain the 5 packs until the ammo is tapped out, then start finishing people with the SRMs.

The Tempest I went with a 280 standard, 4*ML, 2*LRM15, and an LRM10. Nothing fancy, but it works. The ECM protects from counter-battery fire, and the lasers are usually enough to deal with small fries or finish people late game.

The 5S I just run with 5*LRM5 and a bunch of MLs. It plays a lot like the 5W, honestly.

My 2Rs... One is 2*LRM15, LRM5, and some medium lasers. I think it runs a 300 standard. The other is 2*LPL, 2*ML, 3*SRM4. A brawler Archer is generally a late game mech, but packs enough firepower the to really hurt people.

Archers are nostalgia mechs, but can be fun even for those that aren't Archer nuts if you kit them out well and don't expect top tier performance. I also strongly advise against an XL engine, too risky with the Archer's hit boxes, IMO.

[Barantor]

MobilSkill, on 09 May 2016 - 06:35 AM, said:

After seeing this thread though I can tell the LRM still needs a bit of attention from pgi to find a home on the battlefield.

Fixed it for you, the Archer might not be the best mech, but given that it has missile hard points hidden under bay doors means it needs LRMs to be better for it to be better.

When you have folks desperate to put LPL on them instead of something akin to it's original loadout it is a failure of the weapon, not the mech. You still see Jagers and Rifleman with autocannons, but the Archer can't perform with it's main weapon.

[Novakaine]

Archers should have been the premier LRM boat in the game.
Pgi gave us a half arsed care bear mech.
Archers just make Nova sad.

Edited by Novakaine, 09 May 2016 - 07:01 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Wintersdark, on 09 May 2016 - 01:06 AM, said:

Absolutely. Why not? LRM's are best used up close. ERSmalls are best used up close. SRM's are best used up close.

Stop thinking LRM's are just for muttonheads hiding in the back.

I do on my Mad dog, and it's brutally effective. Not "effective if I'm left alone" or "effective against bads" but effective even against very good players, in 1v1 or even 2v1 situations.

The Archer is different, of course, but in the case of Mr. 9M, you can maximize LRM effectiveness without using all the launchers. More don't make it better. That leaves plenty of room for a solid SRM punch. As you're already engaging with LRM's at mid range at most, moving in enough to hit with the srms as well is both easy and effective.

not to mention even the guy in back end sup with Lights in his face eventually.

Wintersdark, on 09 May 2016 - 01:10 AM, said:

15's do more actual damage than 20's, just saying. In 100% of cases, you're more effective mounting 15's. 5's or 10's too, if you have the hardpoints.

20's cycle too slow and spread too much - they spread so much some missiles even miss against motionless Atlases. That spread and thus misses plus increased cycle time results in less actual damage than firing a 15, despite using much more ammo.

Thus, even at a 1:1 trade, 15's are more effective than 20's.

just idiotic that unless one can only mount 1-3 launchers that LRM5s are outright better than all other LRM launchers

[Bishop Steiner]

Escef, on 09 May 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

My 5W is 4*SRM4, 5*LRM5, BAP, 300 standard. Just hang at midrange and usually chain the 5 packs until the ammo is tapped out, then start finishing people with the SRMs.

The Tempest I went with a 280 standard, 4*ML, 2*LRM15, and an LRM10. Nothing fancy, but it works. The ECM protects from counter-battery fire, and the lasers are usually enough to deal with small fries or finish people late game.

The 5S I just run with 5*LRM5 and a bunch of MLs. It plays a lot like the 5W, honestly.

My 2Rs... One is 2*LRM15, LRM5, and some medium lasers. I think it runs a 300 standard. The other is 2*LPL, 2*ML, 3*SRM4. A brawler Archer is generally a late game mech, but packs enough firepower the to really hurt people.

Archers are nostalgia mechs, but can be fun even for those that aren't Archer nuts if you kit them out well and don't expect top tier performance. I also strongly advise against an XL engine, too risky with the Archer's hit boxes, IMO.

used to run BAP on my 5W but the range bracket where it's useful and the minimum LRM range is so short that in most cases If I can't get a lock with my LRMs due to ECM I just pummel with SRMs instead.

Barantor, on 09 May 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

Fixed it for you, the Archer might not be the best mech, but given that it has missile hard points hidden under bay doors means it needs LRMs to be better for it to be better.

When you have folks desperate to put LPL on them instead of something akin to it's original loadout it is a failure of the weapon, not the mech. You still see Jagers and Rifleman with autocannons, but the Archer can't perform with it's main weapon.

Well, in fairness the the ARCs quirkset are still pretty MEH too. But any LRM above the 5 is usually not good (10s are passable, but usually still not as good as 5s in most cases)

[Barantor]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 May 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

Well, in fairness the the ARCs quirkset are still pretty MEH too. But any LRM above the 5 is usually not good (10s are passable, but usually still not as good as 5s in most cases)

Most of the mechs whose only 'main' weapon is LRMs are not terribly great in MWO, it's systemic of it being the LRMs and how the mechs are built around those launchers. Awesome's with big boxes, Catapults with big box 'ears', Archers with big torsos and the doors.

It could be forgiven if the things in the boxes did something viable, but they don't. People put other weapons in the spots where they had back up weapons and try to make something worth while. I'm that schlub that still uses the LRMs in them and tries to make them work, but that is an uphill battle I often lose.

Some mechs who either have a mixed build are able to make due. Stalkers are decent because their 'boxes' aren't as huge and they can use lasers and they do. This isn't so much about 'meta' as much as it is about viability.

You can quirk the LRMs out the wazoo, but it won't help the weapon system itself. They are finally figuring this out with PPCs (hopefully it gets another small buff), and maybe they will do incremental upgrades to LRMs eventually too.

[Bishop Steiner]

Barantor, on 09 May 2016 - 07:20 AM, said:

Most of the mechs whose only 'main' weapon is LRMs are not terribly great in MWO, it's systemic of it being the LRMs and how the mechs are built around those launchers. Awesome's with big boxes, Catapults with big box 'ears', Archers with big torsos and the doors.

It could be forgiven if the things in the boxes did something viable, but they don't. People put other weapons in the spots where they had back up weapons and try to make something worth while. I'm that schlub that still uses the LRMs in them and tries to make them work, but that is an uphill battle I often lose.

Some mechs who either have a mixed build are able to make due. Stalkers are decent because their 'boxes' aren't as huge and they can use lasers and they do. This isn't so much about 'meta' as much as it is about viability.

You can quirk the LRMs out the wazoo, but it won't help the weapon system itself. They are finally figuring this out with PPCs (hopefully it gets another small buff), and maybe they will do incremental upgrades to LRMs eventually too.

not arguing any point, but doubt LRMs will get such consideration. Because only one totally revamps them, the QQ from the Bads in the underhive too stupid not to stand in the rain, will drown out the forums. Plus because the self appointed "Goods" have decreed they are a no skill weapon.

[Barantor]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 May 2016 - 07:23 AM, said:

Not arguing any point, but doubt LRMs will get such consideration. Because only one totally revamps them, the QQ from the Bads in the underhive too stupid not to stand in the rain, will drown out the forums. Plus because the self appointed "Goods" have decreed they are a no skill weapon.

I'm in complete agreement and we will continue to have 'bad' mechs whose main weapons were originally LRMs get bastardized into something else in order to be able to be somewhat usable.

The only bright side I see from more LRM mechs is that the models will be there to be used in another game... which really says something about this one.

[Bishop Steiner]

Barantor, on 09 May 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

I'm in complete agreement and we will continue to have 'bad' mechs whose main weapons were originally LRMs get bastardized into something else in order to be able to be somewhat usable.

The only bright side I see from more LRM mechs is that the models will be there to be used in another game... which really says something about this one.

Well, lack of actual viable roles, and too open mechlab assured that would be the case.

Majority of mechs I see in game are

ABOMINATIONS

[Major Rikkard]

I play my Tempest a ton, I mean come on it's Morgan Kell's mech! I have tried various configurations but I feel the one major thing holding this mech back is hardpoints. It really needs IMO at least one more missile hardpoint in either of the side torso's. I feel like that would really help out. That or a special quirk like the cyclops to help with that LRMing. Maybe like a free BAP (for lock speed only) or something. I mean it's supposed to be the premier fire support mech.

[Legend Death]

Great to see the community really agreeing on something. Looking forward to seeing pgi say something on this topic.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 May 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

just idiotic that unless one can only mount 1-3 launchers that LRM5s are outright better than all other LRM launchers

Yeah, it's why I always harp on about it. Really bothers me that the larger launchers have no place, and particularly that there is no circumstance where an lrm20 is actually better than an LRM15, even if you've only got 1M. That's just not right.

IMHO, PGI needs to look long and hard at the LRM launcher scaling. I'd personally say make all launchers have the same spread, and cycle time. Small launchers save space and tonnage, but that should be the only advantage to going to small launchers.

And I say this as someone exploiting the hell out of multiple small launchers on my Mad Dog right now =/

[Felicitatem Parco]

Well... The LRM5 are the least heat efficient, and require the most hardpoints...
A mass of LRM5 should have better damage performance than a single launcher of equal tubes.

However, the performance disparity of the LRM20 to other launchers is clearly disproportionate relative to what it deserves.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 09 May 2016 - 01:03 PM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Running around with the bay doors up and open looks incredibly stupid. I can't even play the missile variants for that reason.

[Bishop Steiner]

Prosperity Park, on 09 May 2016 - 01:02 PM, said:

Well... The LRM5 are the least heat efficient, and require the most hardpoints...
A mass of LRM5 should have better damage performance than a single launcher of equal tubes.

However, the performance disparity of the LRM20 to other launchers is clearly disproportionate relative to what it deserves.

Heat and hardpoint are pretty misleading. Not wrong, but relatively unimportant in and of themselves. In part because even with 2-3 launchers, LRM15 and 20s are still bad.

DPS per ton?
LRM5: .77
LRM10: .50
LRM15: .45
LRM20: .36

LRM5 are more than TWICE the DPS per ton of the LRM20.

And what I always find odd, is the posted HPS... the LRM5 shoudl indeed run much hotter, overall, with DPS, etc. Yet LRM20s seem to run unreasonably hot, themselves.

For the tonnage of the LRM20, one can mount 5 LRM5, which, with cooldown is all but a continuous stream of missiles.
laying out 7.7 DPS to an LRM20s 3.64. And in a much smaller radius, so that the damage dealt is actually Effective.

Yes, it's hotter and takes more hardpoints.... and is absolutely worth it.

If the Missiles racks all had a similar spread it would be a start. But really, the only true limitation on LRM5s is hardpoints. and most effective missile mechs have more than enough to make that irrelevant.

[Bishop Steiner]

GAGONMYlOCK, on 09 May 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

Running around with the bay doors up and open looks incredibly stupid. I can't even play the missile variants for that reason.

It's an Archer. They're ALL missile variants.

[Morggo]

Very true, but I also get where Gag is going with it... the 2R and Tempest energy points outnumber missile 2 to 1, and the 5S is about 1 for 1. Which, as many point out above the archer makes a better E mech build than missile in many cases (again, abomination but sadly true)