Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
Yes. it is a mixed energy and ballistic mech. Marauder 5D also does missles, with 2 HP, 1 more than 4x, same as 2X. Same 10/20 velocity/cooldown as 2x. Where is the advantage?
The 5D also does not have any Ballistics.
A Cataphract can do say an AC 20, dual SRM 6's with artemis, and a trio of medium lasers.
The Marauder 5D can do a few large pulse lasers, medium lasers, and SRM 6's to get as similar as possible to the Cataphract here... no?
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
Yes some Phracts have 2 high energy points and can put PPCs therein, but without PPC velocity quirks I think you would again be gimping yourself relative to both the Firebrand and the Warhammer (torso mounts in the Warhammer are comparable to height of Phract's)
It is true that the Warhammer can have torso mounts, however compared to the Marauder it has a more ballanced load out (with energy on both side up high). To be quite honest I got no problem using PPC's on unquirked mechs. If you can't use them without velocity quirks (which doesn't effect DPS, damage, heat, range, etc. Can be considered overall the 'weakest' quirk.) then alrighty then, You can uses instead dual large pulse lasers, ER large lasers, etc.
The Firebrand is a hero mech that not all people own. However if you really want to compare I guess the fact the cataphract has a lot more armour is enough to make it compete against a firebrand.
To be quite honest though I wish that quirks can be applied only to a certain location... I am tired of seeing hellbringers, Thunderbolts, and warhammers with ER PPC's, or large pulse lasers anywhere besides the arm. I am all up for creativity but there is a fine line between creativity and abandoning everything the mech was intended to do and be...
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
Both the BW and the 6R have ballistics quirks that are most certainly applicable if not geared to Ballistics. These are quirks in addition to their other quirks for energy and PPCs. No Phract compares here. I don't know about you but I don't see many Hammers with machine guns, I do see a lot with AC/10s and AC/5s.
BW is a hero mech specifically and again is a bit iffy to compare it to the cataphract. The 6R however is only a 5% Rate of fire quirk. Nearly all cataphracts have between double to quadruple to that qurik as well as others (such as UAC jam chance reductions which is bloody great I must say, it wehat... makes a UAC 5 have a 1 in 10 chance of jamming instead of a 3 in 10? that's quite a great chance to play with.). The BW is the only warhammer t hat can compete with ballistics and it only has a 10% velocity and range quirk.
I do not know about you but I rarely see warhammers and when I do they never carry ballistics, if anything it's machine guns but most of them are geared to PPC's, large laser(s), or SRM 6's. I see more LRM warhammers then I do AC 10 / 20's. It may be because all of the warhammers die before I see them. Or that they are not that good... to be quite honest the warhammer to me is only good if you are a lore nutt who loves the standard load out which Is my best guess as that is how I treat a lot of mechs (especially kodiak
).
I haven't seen many Warhammers, I do not own (but I do want) them. So I geuss what they run is more of your experties. (I still see Cataphracts occasionally however)
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
Agreed, yet, a basic Marauder is an equivalent to the Hero Phract, but with better HP locations for ALL of its weapons. The opposite situation with the BW and 4x is just as real. Yes you can take the 4x for that 4 AC5 build, and a lot of your shots are going straight into the terrain. This is not nearly as big of an issue with the BW since again ALL of its ballistics HP are significantly higher than the Phracts.
Eeeh, debatable, having 3 Ballistic hardpoints in 1 ST isn't the same as having 3 across multiple hardpoints... however the main use of this besides prefferences is rather... "troll-build ish"...
For eg 3 gauss rifle cataphract is the reason why Gauss rifles got capped to 2... 3 AC 10's is far more serious (15 tons lighter, that's 15 tonnes more armour and ammo you could be using) and 3 LBX 10's saves a further 3 tonnes.
3 AC 10's or 3 LBX 10's with some lasers is kinda nice. (Marauder at best can only do two without an XL engine).
However besides those specific builds and choice of prefference the Marauder is better at say AC 2 and AC 5 purposes which should happen.
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
As to the 4X mixed build, certainly that is one of the few builds you can't do in a Warhammer (all lack the extra missile hard point), but even here I still believe the low hard points of the Phract and a particular problem to the 4x -that totally gimped engine- still makes the Mad or Hammer a better choice, unless that specific build is your ideal.
Welp, to be quite honest low hard points isn't the bane of my existance as much as other people.
High hardpoints only works well to those that actively use...
A) a ridge as cover.
firing over a ridge.
Firing around corners, going over/ around the corners, being in the open or a close enviroment and low hardpoints means nothing. I have a bit of a confession and 1 of my few atlases is far from meta, it'ss based on the Atlas S2 and Atlas S3 variants....
aka: gauss rifle, dual PPC's, and an LRM 20. with some small lasers. Now. It can't really use ridges to it's advantage like say a jagermech or king crab would. However it can still be equally effective (if not more) in other situations. It's a monster on Alpine peaks, Polar Highlands, and can be on a few other maps (I can not determine specifically where we fight and that's part of BT and MW: O). Personally in my Cataphract i never had a problem with my arms having ER PPC's or my main ballistic and to be quite frank I sometimers preffer it in my arm over a side torso due to the fact I can hit UAV's with my PPC or snap my arm quickly to snipe at someone and then roll my armour back away from them. It keeps my XL engine alive much more longer or me having all my equipment attatched with an Standard engine.
If you put a trio AC 5 Marauder and a quad AC 5 Cataphract on a 1 vs 1 situation you could be surprised how the match may go especially if it's in the open.
Note: no ammount of quirks or remodeling will make the 'low arms' of the cataprhact a high hardpoint. if you ask me having a 4th AC 5 in this case and superior movement arc over high hardpoints but less ballistics is a fair trade.
Do you want a high hardpoint or more lower ones?
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
This is the only point I truly disagre with. This is not about prefernce. Unless you prefer low weapon hard point location that is. Most of the Phracts hardpoints are lower than those of other comparable mechs. This is observable fact. There are no quirks or other features (other than the ECM of the 0xp) which the Phract posesses which compensates for that or in any way renders it "as good" and certainly not better than the other mechs which have been mentioned above.
It isn't a prefference of the negative attritibute of the low hardpoints but more of the possitive attribute of the location itself.
The arms are arms afterall, they can turn left, right, up and down on the cataphract independently on the Cataphract, lowing it to have faster movement in all directions (which even an extremely quirked agility marauder/ warhammer can't keep up with) as
well as aimming high enough to shoot at UAV's and mechs on a high hill or under neath you.
In some cases those lower hardpoints allow for builds and hardpoints not available to other mechs ie above (4 arm B vs 3 st high). In this case it's a rather big difference and not all negative/ possitive and as before
Low hardpoints is only a problem if you rely on using a ridge as cover to shoot behind. corners are still A-okay. Fighting in the open (depending on circumstance) is also okay or down a passage way. and so on...
Bud Crue, on 15 May 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:
I still play my Phracts too but I really do think they are just not in the same leauge objectively as the newer mechs. I would like them to be, and I think that giving them higher hardpoints (see one of my answers above for specifics) via redesign is what it would take to get them there.
I do apologies, but a change to the model will yeild no higher hardpoints besides the chance of a higher hardpoint for the 0XP and even that is a long shot.
If you want PGI to completely redesign the mech from scratch. They would rather add a completely new mech. Because that is what it would be as a complete redesign will change critical elements of what makes a cataphract a cataphract.
ie: the defiance. Which would have a high ballistic and higher arms.
Or the Hercules...
etc.
Eliminating low hardpoint mechs in MW: O just to make them competetive is not the best way to go at it as you start to make more mechs lose what makes them unique to begin with.... the Timberwolf doesn't have much high hardpoints besides missile and a 3 energy torso from the A and no one is complaining it's not competeting against say the Hellbringer or inner sphere Marauder.
To be quite honest. I think the biggest problem would be the fact that quirks are not inforced on segments of mechs specifically. If the PPC's only got benifits when they are in the arms and MG's in the torso (as well as many oither mechs) I do think it would help the game overal with mech diversity, build diversity, reinforces ballance and creativity (for eg. You traded most/ all of that weapons quirks from moving your PPC's from the arms to your ST in a hellbringer or warhammer. You gained a higher hardpoint in exchange for say better heat and velocity).
5
rest been small stuff =(
