44 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

Moar agile, actually, isn't it? 70% accel/decel? But something about the RoF and Heat is different which is why I prefer my 2x AC10 3N.

I don't have agility quirks memorized for any 'Mechs, I just assumed it was less off of a conservative viewpoint.

Rate of fire might have something to do with it, but then again that should be offset by the ability to engage sooner and from farther away and, if significantly far away, to make shots with impunity to return fire.

Though I don't even use AC/10 on my 3N anymore, and it is still far-and-away superior to the other variants.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarogato, on 17 June 2016 - 12:41 PM, said:

Just for you, my love, I haff mapped the mech that now troubles your dreams:

those are ....entirely sensible and logical Hitboxes...thus they must be wrong!!!!!!!

But actually explain much, love the crotch box design. No wonder I like this mech so much, it's pretty perfect distribution overall.

Thanks!

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 June 2016 - 12:50 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Yeonne Greene, on 17 June 2016 - 12:49 PM, said:

I don't have agility quirks memorized for any 'Mechs, I just assumed it was less off of a conservative viewpoint.

Rate of fire might have something to do with it, but then again that should be offset by the ability to engage sooner and from farther away and, if significantly far away, to make shots with impunity to return fire.

Though I don't even use AC/10 on my 3N anymore, and it is still far-and-away superior to the other variants.

RIFLEMAN Torso Yaw: 100 °

RFL-3N
Torso Yaw: 120 °
AC/5 COOLDOWN: 5.00 %
BALLISTIC COOLDOWN: 20.00 %
BALLISTIC VELOCITY: 40.00 %
ENERGY RANGE: 10.00 %
ACCELERATION RATE: 50.00 %
DECELERATION RATE: 50.00 %
TORSO TURN RATE (YAW): 45.00 %
TURN RATE: 35.00 %

RFL-3C
BALLISTIC COOLDOWN: 10.00 %
BALLISTIC RANGE: 20.00 %
BALLISTIC VELOCITY: 10.00 %
MEDIUM LASER HEAT GENERATION: -5.00 %
ENERGY HEAT GENERATION: -5.00 %
ACCELERATION RATE: 50.00 %
DECELERATION RATE: 50.00 %
TORSO TURN RATE (YAW): 25.00 %
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LT): 7.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RT): 7.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LA): 10.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RA): 10.00

RFL-5D
PPC HEAT GENERATION: -10.00 %
PPC VELOCITY: 50.00 %
ENERGY RANGE: 10.00 %
ACCELERATION RATE: 70.00 %
DECELERATION RATE: 70.00 %
TURN RATE: 35.00 %
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LA): 10.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RA): 10.00

LEGEND-KILLER
LASER DURATION: -10.00 %
LB 10-X COOLDOWN: 10.00 %
BALLISTIC COOLDOWN: 15.00 %
LB 10-X SPREAD: -10.00 %
ENERGY COOLDOWN: 10.00 %
ENERGY HEAT GENERATION: -5.00 %
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (CT): 10.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LT): 7.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RT): 7.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LA): 5.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RA): 5.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (LL): 7.00
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE (RL): 7.00
CATAPULT Torso Yaw: 120 ° Arm Pitch: 35 ° Max Engine: 315

20% Higher Accel/Decel, same Twist rate and added structure to the arms. Only thing I can think of is ballistics just flat outperform PPCs in DPS and endurance.

RFL-3N
all I can tell you is that is far and away my favorite heavy mech currently, though I have high hopes to reclaim CPLT-K2 soon...... But that RFL is a Medium Mechs in every way that matters, aside from official designation. And by Taragato's mapping, one with a pretty perfect blend of Hitboxes, potential firepower and one of the few cases of quirks that just absolutely perfectly fit the chassis, at least in the 3 non hero versions.

[Bishop Steiner]

If anything, laughable as it may sound? I think it actually exemplifies a perfect design, overall.

[Tarogato]

Btw, if you guys want to ever test hitboxes yourselves, just take your mech into Academy. Switch it out for another mech (I usually use the Cicada) and it will put your mech back on it's own pedestal near the Ember. When you stand on the beacon in front of the mech, it will power up so you can see the paperdoll for registering hitboxes. In order to test the rear hitboxes (or any other angle), get behind your mech and give it a good couple shoves until it slides onto the beacon, which will leave it powered up. You'll have to repeat this any time you kill and respawn the mech.

[Alistair Winter]

Tarogato, on 17 June 2016 - 12:41 PM, said:

Just for you, my love, I haff mapped the mech that now troubles your dreams:

Thank you! Or as we say in the tongue of my people: Takk skal du **** meg ha.

From your schematics, I would guess that my rear side torso is getting hit way at the top when I'm torso twisting. But you make a good point about the CT rear torso, so I guess the solution is to just... strip all rear CT armour and stare people down without twisting too much.

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

If anything, laughable as it may sound? I think it actually exemplifies a perfect design, overall.

Except for the fact that my rear side torso is getting hit 100 times more than any of my other mechs, I'd agree with that.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

If anything, laughable as it may sound? I think it actually exemplifies a perfect design, overall.

Both it and the Blackjack. Though, I do take issue with how the RFL's guns are not in line with the axle they pivot on. The torso could be a little narrower on both it and the Blackjack, but it's close. Very close.

As for the 3N, I do the AC/10 thing on the 3C, which it executes very well. I am just way too learned on the lower velocity AC/10 since I've been using it on other 'Mechs for so long, and as such the 3N gets the much less learned 5s. It can be AC/5 or UAC/5, depending on my mood, both are absolutely brutal. Constant DPS at all useful ranges, with massive surge potential at 350 meters. While the real alpha is 40, with UACs it's effectively 60-70.

[Tarogato]

Yeah, I'd surmise that if you're trying to do a more traditional twist 90° approach, you're going to get nabbed in the rear torsos quite a bit, even from foes directly in front of you. Quite a few mechs have this problem. And this is before considering that a lot of people (maybe even most) have a tendency to over-twist, exposing their rear torsos even when piloting mechs like Atlas, Timber, Griffin, etc, which all have flat and forgiving backs. Just a little bit a practice can solve this, eyeing your mech up in 3pv or have a buddy spot for you.

With the Rifleman in particular, yeah... it may benefit more from Raven-like techniques - almost wiggle your torso, and always position your legs so that you can be moving/strafing perpendicular to incoming fire, spreading it across multiple hitboxes just by mashing your W and S keys.

Edited by Tarogato, 17 June 2016 - 01:18 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarogato, on 17 June 2016 - 01:15 PM, said:

Yeah, I'd surmise that if you're trying to do a more traditional twist 90° approach, you're going to get nabbed in the rear torsos quite a bit, even from foes directly in front of you. Quite a few mechs have this problem. And this is before considering that a lot of people (maybe even most) have a tendency to over-twist, exposing their rear torsos even when piloting mechs like Atlas, Timber, Griffin, etc, which all have flat and forgiving backs. Just a little bit a practice can solve this, eyeing your mech up in 3pv or have a buddy spot for you.

With the Rifleman in particular, yeah... it may benefit more from Raven-like techniques - almost wiggle your torso, and always position your legs so that you can be moving/strafing perpendicular to incoming fire, spreading it across multiple hitboxes just by mashing your W and S keys.

I found this also to be true of the remapped Catapult hitboxes. Doing the "wet dog shake" really spreads the damage nice, on it the RVN and the RFL.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 01:32 PM, said:

I found this also to be true of the remapped Catapult hitboxes. Doing the "wet dog shake" really spreads the damage nice, on it the RVN and the RFL.

It's also true of the Marauder. That's how I tank better than a Black Knight while still using an XL on mine.

[DarthHias]

I also experienced some rear torso damage with normal twisting, so I think you guys got it right.
Rifleman seems tankier than my Jagers, because you can hit the damn fins on the Jags STs from all angles.

[Bishop Steiner]

DarthHias, on 17 June 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

I also experienced some rear torso damage with normal twisting, so I think you guys got it right.
Rifleman seems tankier than my Jagers, because you can hit the damn fins on the Jags STs from all angles.

Jager is also a barn door from the front

[DaZur]

Yeonne Greene, on 17 June 2016 - 12:40 PM, said:

You know, the 5D ought to play a lot like the 3N, but with PPCs...but for some reason it just doesn't. Its not significantly less agile, it spreads just as well, but the damage out of the 3N is just higher, consistently.

Hmmm...

DPS ma'boy... DPS.

Lot has to do with play style. For some reason I do much better in the D than the N despite the DPS deficit.

[Bishop Steiner]

DaZur, on 17 June 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

DPS ma'boy... DPS.

Lot has to do with play style. For some reason I do much better in the D than the N despite the DPS deficit.

just need tah gitgud son

[Ted Wayz]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

If anything, laughable as it may sound? I think it actually exemplifies a perfect design, overall.

If you ignore lore, sure.

I'll stop criticizing the RFL when the either it receives structure quirks or the Jaegermech loses all of it's structure quirks. Otherwise it is less tanky than the true glass cannon it is supposed to be a tankier version of.

Rear ST is a problem. You can draw all the hitboxes you want but we in the know know that damage transference is a real thing for certain mechs. But hey I am sure this was tested under all conditions on different systems with different twist rates at different angles using all weapon systems yada yada and therefore a valid test to be more than self realization of an opinion.

But hey, ego drives the defense of the RFL more than fact. Especially in the case of people who supposedly are defenders of the lore who somehow feel the need to flood posts about the RFL when all it really takes is one post to voice your opinion.

Keep piloting your RFL and I will keep killing them!

[Bishop Steiner]

Ted Wayz, on 17 June 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

If you ignore lore, sure.

I'll stop criticizing the RFL when the either it receives structure quirks or the Jaegermech loses all of it's structure quirks. Otherwise it is less tanky than the true glass cannon it is supposed to be a tankier version of.

Rear ST is a problem. You can draw all the hitboxes you want but we in the know know that damage transference is a real thing for certain mechs. But hey I am sure this was tested under all conditions on different systems with different twist rates at different angles using all weapon systems yada yada and therefore a valid test to be more than self realization of an opinion.

But hey, ego drives the defense of the RFL more than fact. Especially in the case of people who supposedly are defenders of the lore who somehow feel the need to flood posts about the RFL when all it really takes is one post to voice your opinion.

Keep piloting your RFL and I will keep killing them!

don't recall you killing me yet...RFL or otherwise....


Oh wait...that's right Tier 2 doesn't get to farm tier 5 anymore... my bad.
*shrugs*

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 June 2016 - 03:48 PM.

[Volthorne]

Ted Wayz, on 17 June 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

snip

Weren't you begging people to give RFLs more piloting love just the other day in that (obviously pointless) thread by Babycakes? Hypocrite much?

[Bishop Steiner]

Volthorne, on 17 June 2016 - 06:21 PM, said:

Weren't you begging people to give RFLs more piloting love just the other day in that (obviously pointless) thread by Babycakes? Hypocrite much?

Well, it's Ted. So yeah. Lol.

But he's whined for uber structure buffs for RFLs since they launched. Because somebody apparently has to stand and stare to hit stuff, I guess.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 June 2016 - 06:22 PM.

[Volthorne]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 06:22 PM, said:

Well, it's Ted. So yeah. Lol.

But he's whined for uber structure buffs for RFLs since they launched. Because somebody apparently has to stand and stare to hit stuff, I guess.

Hell, when I play my RLFs I stand and stare at stuff all the time, and quite often win the stand-off. I guess the difference between us (Ted and I) is that I know how to land my shots where they hurt? Or it could be the lack of an XL engine. I'd put money down on one of the two.

[Chados]

Alistair Winter, on 17 June 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

It's not a terrible mech, but it needs a few fixes to make it on par with other heavy mechs, I think.

• Fix the hitboxes. Probably the worst hitboxes I've seen on any mech since the Black Knight and Hellbringer CT fiascos. The Rifleman's rear side torso hitboxes can be hit from basically any angle, it seems like. No matter if they're standing directly in front of you, they will core you from behind.
  
• Give more structure quirks plz. For whatever reason, the Rifleman hero mech (Legend Killer) is the only variant that got CT structure quirks. RFL-3C gets +7 structure in the side torsos and +10 in the arms, RFL-5D gets +10 in the arms and the RFL-3N gets no structure quirks at all.
  For sake of comparison, the Dragon and Quickdraw gets +14 structure in the side torsos for basically every variant.
  
• Laser duration quirks would be a lot more helpful for the RFL-5D than PPC quirks. If they intend people to use PPCs on the RFL-5D, then 10% heat reduction isn't enough for a mech that can only combine PPCs with lasers.

Thank you, sir.