77 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

ChapeL, on 26 May 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

The Archer isn't a Viking or a Yeoman, it is expected to bring something else to a party than LRMs. My favorite is a 2R which has a pair of LRM 10 with sufficient ammo to be usefull in LOS situations. I don't expect to kill anything with them ( yet I do sometimes ) and it gives me an option at extreme ranges or in indirect support situations. The real firepower is the pair or Large lasers and quartet of mediums it also brings. I don't get into people's faces yet I don't sit way out in the back. 74 kph from my standard engine is plenty of speed to keep me where I want to be and a good match is anywhere from 600 to 800 with 1-3 kills.

I like the mech enough that I may actually consider upgrading to the 2R(s) for the added C-Bill boost.

except that the Archer WAS the Viking or Yoeman before they ever existed, and the concept of uberboating everything hit the TROs.

the ARC 2Rs offensive compliment was 2x LRM20 and 2 Mlasers (the other two faced rear). Out of it's 50 pt frontal dmg potential, 80% of it was LRMs. The Mech was mean to be the tough, reliable, unexciting heavy Support Mech.

Yes, various models were created to minimize their CQB vulnerability, but even the best CQB fighter of the original series, the ARC-2S was still meant to be a LRM mech first and foremost, which is further reinforced by it's geometry and cockpit location, both of which are frankly terrible for anything other than long range (preferably indirect) support.

[ChapeL]

I understand what you say Bishop and I don't disagree. All I am saying is, the mech as it stands now isn't complete garbage as some let out. ( the 2R at least ) It's only underwhelming is you build it only around LRMs as a primary weapon because it only has 3 hardpoints.* The mech is too fragile for XL engine and large IS LRM racks are very heavy so in MWO I'd leave heavy fire support to the Catapult which leads me to a controversial statement:

I believe the stock TRO Catapult to be a better fire support mech.

*3 Hard points should be plenty if LRMs were given some actual teeth though

Edited by ChapeL, 26 May 2016 - 12:26 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2016 - 12:02 PM, said:

but would more in depth aiming really impact the need for positioning terribly, or just help reduce the focus fire effect on TTK some? I mean, shooting a mech is still shooting the broad side of a barn.

Reducing the effect of focus fire and lengthing TTK directly impacts positioning though.

I mean making it so you can't land perfect shots at 1000m sounds nice, but either way it is simply a way to limit potential damage which could easily be done. Have weapons that are being used to do massive alphas? Lower their damage potential in some way, give it a higher risk (increased cooldown time, increased heat, lower damage/faster recycle). I don't think CoF is absolutely necessary and just makes balancing things even more complicated because suddenly movement and running hot is penalized, which has more ramifications than people may realize depending on implementation.

By now we have deviated far from the thread's intention though (but imo more interesting).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 26 May 2016 - 01:43 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

It's one thing that I love when driving my RFL-3N... mid range fire support mech that's is a Glass Cannon, because thankfully Teddy and his whine brigade didn't convince Russ to uber Buff it's structure. (Now if only the Jager gets similar treatment in the requirkening.....)

Ah, the narcissistic bullying followed misrepresentation of facts we all know and love you for. And another example why the silent majority remains so until it is suggested you somehow represent the community at which point that rise up and voice their resounding NO!

Fact check: No one asked for an uber buff of structure of the Rifleman. The request was to make it tougher than the Jaeger because the Rifleman is tougher than the Jaeger in lore. Given you call yourself a "Loremonkey Asparagus" or such I think you would know that.

Fact check: No one tried to convince Russ that I know of. Not all of us have sold our credibility for a Twitter account and drops with the developers.

On to the subject.

A person who doesn't own the mech enters a supposition that they are somehow bad without the support of data or actual observations. I guess the forums are dying if this warrants four pages of response.

I see Archers in every drop, sometimes more than one. This is more than can be said for many chassis in-game. So I guess the subjective term "bad" is being used subjectively?

[Novakaine]

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ted Wayz, on 26 May 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

I see Archers in every drop, sometimes more than one. This is more than can be said for many chassis in-game. So I guess the subjective term "bad" is being used subjectively?

How often you see them isn't a strong indication of how good they are. People use TBT-5Js in comp, yet I they are one of the rarer mechs, same with Ice Ferrets (outside of recon mode). Don't get me wrong, usage can help get a good idea, but that is it, you can't say something is good or bad strictly on usage numbers.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 26 May 2016 - 02:34 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ted Wayz, on 26 May 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

A person who doesn't own the mech enters a supposition that they are somehow bad without the support of data or actual observations. I guess the forums are dying if this warrants four pages of response.

I see Archers in every drop, sometimes more than one. This is more than can be said for many chassis in-game. So I guess the subjective term "bad" is being used subjectively?

Yes, I'm sure in tier 5 you do see a lot of them. LRMs OP and all that.

But hey, such a master of the chassis, where'd you place on the Archer Leaderboards, again?

Oh wait...that's right. My bad.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 26 May 2016 - 03:06 PM.

[TercieI]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

Yes, I'm sure in tier 5 you do see a lot of them. LRMs OP and all that.

But hey, such a master of the chassis, where'd you place on the Archer Leaderboards, again?

Oh wait...that's right. My bad.

That's so tryhard snarky for you, Bish. High five.

[Bishop Steiner]

TercieI, on 26 May 2016 - 03:08 PM, said:

That's so tryhard snarky for you, Bish. High five.

Teddy Ruxpin tries so hard to try to look like a big dog, nipping at my heels, sometimes I feel sorry enough to actually deign to notice him and toss him a bone to let him feel special.

[Mole]

I think the ultimate problem with the Archer right now is that it is a 'mech that was designed for LRMs, and LRMs suck. I do really well in my Archer 5W though with 5 LRM5 in the torsos and 4 SRM4 in the arms. I'm dangerous at any range.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mole, on 26 May 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

I think the ultimate problem with the Archer right now is that it is a 'mech that was designed for LRMs, and LRMs suck. I do really well in my Archer 5W though with 5 LRM5 in the torsos and 4 SRM4 in the arms. I'm dangerous at any range.

Pity being that it's the only really "decent" variant.

[C E Dwyer]

Hmm K/d 3.56 with the 2R using Tag, MLx5 LRM15 x2 averaging 376 damage

While not Stella, with the way I've been playing I'll take that, for a mech that's supposed to suck, while using a weapon that's supposed to be really bad.

[C E Dwyer]

Mole, on 26 May 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

I think the ultimate problem with the Archer right now is that it is a 'mech that was designed for LRMs, and LRMs suck. I do really well in my Archer 5W though with 5 LRM5 in the torsos and 4 SRM4 in the arms. I'm dangerous at any range.

Strange, I thought the 5W was going to be my top Archer, using the same build, turned out it was the worse, only variant I didn't get a greater than 2/0 k.d and under 350 average damage, yet I remember it wrecking face.

[Alex Morgaine]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

Yes, I'm sure in tier 5 you do see a lot of them. LRMs OP and all that.

But hey, such a master of the chassis, where'd you place on the Archer Leaderboards, again?

Oh wait...that's right. My bad.

Ow. I got this sun spot on my arm, feel the burn.

[GreenHell]

I must be incredibly lucky in my Archer then...
Currently got a 5.0 W/L ratio and 3.0 K/D on my -5W
Pumped out a completely unanswered 1200 dmg match in the Tempest (x3 A-LRM5 + x3 LL)
I mean... I guess it could be a fluke? I haven't played 'TOO' many games in them, but it's enough to have them Elite so.....

[Trauglodyte]

Alistair Winter, on 26 May 2016 - 04:03 AM, said:

Is it just a matter of bad hitboxes and lack of quirks, or are there some other issues?

I don't own it, so I don't understand why everyone dropped it almost immediately after release. Even though the meta has shifted to favour SRM-boating and SRMs+lasers (in addition to other builds), it's commonly regarded as a terrible mech.

Good hardpoints, good engine cap, even an ECM variant. I don't quite remember the hype during the pre-order phase, but I do seem to recall that a lot of people were excited about the prospect of SRM-boating.

What went wrong here?

The Archer isn't bad, per se. The Archer suffers from existing in an environment where you can now do 80 damage in 0.5s from a newly released mech. Now, the Kodiak didn't kill the Archer, obviously. Rather, what has happened is that you've got the following:

• A mech, in lore, designed around LRMs in a game where LRMs are horrible which means
  
• You ditch all of the LRMs for SRMs but
  
• The mech upon which you dumped all of those ARMs is a big target that is slow, land locked, and not agile plus
  
• It can't hill hump because the cockpit is nearly at its waste and
  
• It lacks the quirks to be an energy platform

So, all in all, you've got an easy target that has to get close to what it wants to kill but isn't fast enough to get there, can't use JJs to get around things easier, and is only good at using 1 out of 2 missile weapons. With that combination, there isn't anything that you could do, to the mech, to make it better. The only way to fix it is to a) add MRMs to the game and fix LRMs.

[Ace Selin]

WHHAAAT.

Archer, even the name sounds deadly!

Edited by Ace Selin, 26 May 2016 - 06:10 PM.

[EGG]

I like the Catapult in spite of all it's drawbacks, and hoped the Archer would be a C1 + 5t/ECM or +5t/hardpoints. But it turned out to be marginally worse than the C1.