98 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Snowbluff, on 29 June 2016 - 10:08 AM, said:

Okay, well you are factually wrong about its tonnage. The math for that has been done already. If anything it is too light.
It not being an omnimech makes sense though.

I'm not actually, at 85t the JJ's go from 2T to 1T, saving it 3t, the engine steps down from a 360 to a 340, saving it another 3t, so I've saved 6t by going to 85t from 90t. The stock armour on the Mk. II is 13t, so 1.5t under max at 85t or 2t under at 90t. This means that for all the same armour values, crit spaces, jumping ability and weapons would be better off at 85t rather than 90t. Combined with the new scaling system it would be smaller at 85t as well.

Edited by Metus regem, 29 June 2016 - 10:19 AM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Snowbluff, on 29 June 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

You mean the Diamond Sharks made mad bank selling it, and as a war machine the higher mounts make it a better machine than the warhawk in individual engagement.

Of course, being an omnimech the warhawk is better for upkeep, because you can swap out damaged parts more easily. Gonna give creadit where credit is due, mostly because it frames my statement in a more positive light.

Oh please. It's a 90 ton 4/6 XL engine mech with JJ. It has 2.5 tons less free space than an 85 ton JJ mech at the same speed. Plus it was designed with LESS armor than the 85 ton warhawk which as an omni can mount JJ in TT as needed. Also only the missiles are high mounted which doesn't really matter considering they're well missiles and the warhawk traditionally mounted its LRMs on the top as well.

None of this of course applies to mwo, but we're talking TT and the Timbie 2 is flatly inferior and the 10% cost savings don't outweigh the lower performance of a poor design.

[Snowbluff]

Metus regem, on 29 June 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

I'm not actually, at 85t the JJ's go from 2T to 1T, saving it 3t, the engine steps down from a 360 to a 340, saving it another 3t, so I've saved 6t by going to 85t from 90t. The stock armour on the Mk. II is 13t, so 1.5t under max at 85t or 2t under at 90t. This means that for all the same armour values, crit spaces, jumping ability and weapons would be better off at 85t rather than 90t. Combined with the new scaling system it would be smaller at 85t as well.

Oh, you're right about the jumpjets. I forgot it had those weight more there. Of course, without them you have a better weapon system, with better max armor, better hardpoints, uses Endo (4 tons, warhawk). So when/if it comes out, people will probably drop the jets.

Narcissistic Martyr, on 29 June 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Also only the missiles are high mounted which doesn't really matter considering they're well missiles and the warhawk traditionally mounted its LRMs on the top as well.

I mean the Cockpit to weapon distance for the arm hardpoints. The arm hardpoint, IE basically all of them for the Warhawk, are relatively far down. Much more of a warhawk is expose to bring up its armament. Practically speaking/in universe, this same logic applies as it would in MWO.

Also, what is 4/6? I've heard it referred to on the forum, but never explained. I've never played TT, only read some of the rules.

Edited by Snowbluff, 29 June 2016 - 10:35 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 29 June 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

we're talking TT and the Timbie 2 is flatly inferior and the 10% cost savings don't outweigh the lower performance of a poor design.

In TT the Mad Cat MK II is definitely not worth the BV imo. I would much prefer a Highlander IIC over the Mad Cat MKII.

Snowbluff, on 29 June 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:

I mean the Cockpit to weapon distance for the arm hardpoints. The arm hardpoint, IE basically all of them for the Warhawk, are relatively far down.

The problem with the arm hardpoint on the MK II would be Gauss convergence depending on how wide the mech ends up. Though it does have the singular advantage over the Kodiak in that it wouldn't have squishy exploding torsos, but it also wouldn't be able to run somewhat asym builds with Gauss either.

[CK16]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 29 June 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Oh please. It's a 90 ton 4/6 XL engine mech with JJ. It has 2.5 tons less free space than an 85 ton JJ mech at the same speed. Plus it was designed with LESS armor than the 85 ton warhawk which as an omni can mount JJ in TT as needed. Also only the missiles are high mounted which doesn't really matter considering they're well missiles and the warhawk traditionally mounted its LRMs on the top as well.

None of this of course applies to mwo, but we're talking TT and the Timbie 2 is flatly inferior and the 10% cost savings don't outweigh the lower performance of a poor design.

Hey, we could go all day about what mech has what flaws....but let's be honest as I said before. The Mad Mk II is not a pile of crap as you are saying. Is it perfect? No...Is it grand and amazing? No...Is it a good mech? Yes! It's above average I would say to many designs. I could go o and say why the Stinger and Wasp sucks cause we have the Phoenix Hawk and yadda yadda but you don't see me doing that nor would I ever want to say anything cause I feel trashing mechs unless they are darn trash piles is un called for and many just do it to stand up thier own pet mech in some form, it's petty and annoying..let PGI release what they plan too, and universally liked mechs like the Mk II, Nova Cat, Bushwacker, Uziel, and ect. Wll always be favored by the majority of the community because of past memories of the mech, performance, looks ect. Nothing you saying try to dish on them will change the facts it's a popular mech sorry.

Edited by CK16, 29 June 2016 - 10:43 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 29 June 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

The problem with the arm hardpoint on the MK II would be Gauss convergence depending on how wide the mech ends up. Though it does have the singular advantage over the Kodiak in that it wouldn't have squishy exploding torsos, but it also wouldn't be able to run somewhat asym builds with Gauss either.

Yeah, that could be a problem up close. Good thing for those 4 lasers, right?

As for the side torsos, I view that with missile ears the side torso hitbox is a bit of a weakness. YMMW on that and how much it will affect the MKII, I guess.

Edited by Snowbluff, 29 June 2016 - 10:41 AM.

[Metus regem]

Snowbluff, on 29 June 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:

Oh, you're right about the jumpjets. I forgot it had those weight more there. Of course, without them you have a better weapon system, with better max armor, better hardpoints, uses Endo (4 tons, warhawk). So when/if it comes out, people will probably drop the jets.


Also, what is 4/6? I've heard it referred to on the forum, but never explained. I've never played TT, only read some of the rules.

4/6 is the hex movement speed of the mech, 4 hex walk and 6 hex run, as far as MWO is concerned that means that it will run at 68km/h give or take some speed tweaking.

It's not just the JJ's though..

with 13t of FF Armour, Endo steel and 3 JJ's

85T (340xl)
41t used (Endo, 3 JJ's, 13t FF Armour)
44t free (for weapons and equipment)

90t (360xl)
47t used (Endo, 3 JJ's, 13t FF Armour)
43t free (for weapons and equipment)


That's the difference I'm talking about between 85t and 90t for efficiency.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

I'd say no past 3055 mech without mix-tech in the game.
I really like the MKII (tho, i like the MKIII and MKIV more) but it has literally nothing to do with MWO and our current timeline.
Îf PGI breaks that simple rule, i'll say GG, raise my middlefinger and go away.

[Metus regem]

Toha Heavy Industries, on 29 June 2016 - 10:44 AM, said:

I'd say no past 3055 mech without mix-tech in the game.
I really like the MKII (tho, i like the MKIII and MKIV more) but it has literally nothing to do with MWO and our current timeline.
Îf PGI breaks that simple rule, i'll say GG, raise my middlefinger and go away.

I got to ask, why do you like the Mk IV?

It's literately a death trap.

XXL engine (4 Engine crits per ST)
Generates a crap ton of heat (2/4/6 standing/walking/running)
Has less BV than the orginal (3700 for the Prime Mk, IV, 3701 for the Delta Orginal, same weapon sets.)

The only thing that the Mk IV really has going for it is that it uses FL armour, a damage reduction of 1 point per 5 taken, so a big F-U to LB cluster shot.

[CK16]

Snowbluff, on 29 June 2016 - 10:38 AM, said:

Yeah, that could be a problem up close. Good thing for those 4 lasers, right?

As for the side torsos, I view that with missile ears the side torso hitbox is a bit of a weakness. YMMW on that and how much it will affect the MKII, I guess.

Who runs stock loadouts though? I mean I might be one who does and keeps 1 MCMK-II-1 stock cause I am weird like that, but most will run meta on them, aka LRM's will go bye bye, they will focus on the mechs strengths, being arm mounted ballistics and torso mounted energy, except PPC with Gauss builds, if we get a quad Ballistic mount one, quad UAC 5' and 10's or mixing.

For the MCMK-II-2 since we would get 4 missile expect super splattercats! 4x A-SRM 6's with LBX/UAC 20's

The other varriants fill in laser boating roles I feel, PGI might need to make a varriant or 2 but nothing to drastic IMO.

Also the arms can shield worth a damn here as well now compared to say Direwolf and Warhawk

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 29 June 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

The only thing that the Mk IV really has going for it is that it uses FL armour, a damage reduction of 1 point per 5 taken, so a big F-U to LB cluster shot.

I <3 FL armor, on average it gives better reduction than the listed 20% thanks to the amazingness that is rounding. I don't think the XXL is worth it to mount FL though. I do like the Mark IV visually more than I like the Timby, I'm a terrible person, what can I say.

CK16, on 29 June 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

they will focus on the mechs strengths, being arm mounted ballistics and torso mounted energy, except PPC with Gauss builds, if we get a quad Ballistic mount one, quad UAC 5' and 10's or mixing.

All of those builds will be inferior to the Kodiak for the most part since JJs don't make up for the spread out hardpoints. The mech that will give the Kodiak a run for its money needs either 4-6 torso mounted ballistics or 2B/2E in the torso and potentially JJs on either and I don't think there is a mech that exists that fits that bill completely (I don't think even the Blood Asp does).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 29 June 2016 - 10:57 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Metus regem, on 29 June 2016 - 10:43 AM, said:

4/6 is the hex movement speed of the mech, 4 hex walk and 6 hex run, as far as MWO is concerned that means that it will run at 68km/h give or take some speed tweaking.

Oh, so it's considered "slow," right? Thanks! :0

Quote

with 13t of FF Armour, Endo steel and 3 JJ's

85T (340xl)
41t used (Endo, 3 JJ's, 13t FF Armour)
44t free (for weapons and equipment)

Then it's not the Warhawk you're talking about. Is there a chassis with this profile? You are right, as that is a tad irksome in terms of profile.

And of course, I'm saying the MCM does lose out because of the Jumpjets, but it does earn points on the practical layout. In game, it's going to rock as long as you take advantage of the max armor for the weight class and drop the JJ.

CK16, on 29 June 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

Who runs stock loadouts though? I mean I might be one who does and keeps 1 MCMK-II-1 stock cause I am weird like that, but most will run meta on them, aka LRM's will go bye bye, they will focus on the mechs strengths, being arm mounted ballistics and torso mounted energy, except PPC with Gauss builds, if we get a quad Ballistic mount one, quad UAC 5' and 10's or mixing.

Pfft, it's going to have 4 lasers. I'm not a big fan of C-ERPPC.

Quote

For the MCMK-II-2 since we would get 4 missile expect super splattercats! 4x A-SRM 6's with LBX/UAC 20's

KA POW!

Quote

The other varriants fill in laser boating roles I feel, PGI might need to make a varriant or 2 but nothing to drastic IMO.

If we're luckky we'll get a x4 ballastics variant.

Of course, I think 2E per arm instead of the ballastics would be a variant as well.

[CK16]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 29 June 2016 - 10:57 AM, said:

I &lt;3 FL armor, on average it gives better reduction than the listed 20% thanks to the amazingness that is rounding. I don't think the XXL is worth it to mount FL though. I do like the Mark IV visually more than I like the Timby, I'm a terrible person, what can I say.


All of those builds will be inferior to the Kodiak for the most part since JJs don't make up for the spread out hardpoints. The mech that will give the Kodiak a run for its money needs either 4-6 torso mounted ballistics or 2B/2E in the torso and potentially JJs on either and I don't think there is a mech that exists that fits that bill completely (I don't think even the Blood Asp does).

Honestly I see the Blood Asp having hit box issues in MWO, those Top mounted GR seem like a great idea, till everyone seems them before you poke up. Idk what would be considered a decent meta though, you don't see a lot of players focusing on the arms anyway in the first place so idk.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

CK16, on 29 June 2016 - 11:04 AM, said:

Honestly I see the Blood Asp having hit box issues in MWO, those Top mounted GR seem like a great idea, till everyone seems them before you poke up.

Oh I know, I'm just talking about even having those hardpoints in the first place.

[Bishop Steiner]

Assassin.

We need it. It'll be fantastic. What more needs be said?

Any haters are just wrong, and well, haters gonna hate.

[Juodas Varnas]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2016 - 11:11 AM, said:

Assassin.

We need it. It'll be fantastic. What more needs be said?

Any haters are just wrong, and well, haters gonna hate.

I don't think anyone *HATES* the assassin.

Some people would just like other 40 tonners instead of it. *Cough* *cough* Vulcan *cough* *cough*

[CK16]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2016 - 11:11 AM, said:

Assassin.

We need it. It'll be fantastic. What more needs be said?

Any haters are just wrong, and well, haters gonna hate.

If I said you had to wait a few more months then other mechs would I be considered a hater >.>

[Bishop Steiner]

Juodas Varnas, on 29 June 2016 - 11:13 AM, said:

I don't think anyone *HATES* the assassin.

Some people would just like other 40 tonners instead of it. *Cough* *cough* Vulcan *cough* *cough*

Look...until Alex comes and blows it away, anyhow (and he's gonna need at least his B game to do it, darn it!)...I would say I'm the King of the Vulcans..... I'm darn proud of the baller style I made for it. That said, speed and multi missiles is more useful at 40 tons. Especially with the JJs.

Vulcan is still my number 2 girl, though. And I think with really good accel/decel quirks, it's geometry might make it a tough mech to hit at range.

Assassin, though is just... BALLER potential.

CK16, on 29 June 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

If I said you had to wait a few more months then other mechs would I be considered a hater >.>

only if you were lacking a logical credible reason, and blindly attacking everyone not living under your same delusion.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 June 2016 - 11:18 AM.

[Juodas Varnas]

CK16, on 29 June 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

If I said you had to wait a few more months then other mechs would I be considered a hater >.>

As long as those "other mechs" include the quadrupeds, you're considered OK in my book.

Disclaimer: I don't actually have a book.

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 29 June 2016 - 11:18 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Juodas Varnas, on 29 June 2016 - 11:17 AM, said:

As long as those "other mechs" include the quadrupeds, you're considered OK in my book.

Disclaimer: I don't actually have a book.

Are we playing Mechwarrior or CircusWarrior Online here, son?

(now that's being a straight up, outta compton, OG hater, dawg!)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 June 2016 - 11:19 AM.