80 replies to this topic

[Kmieciu]

After the re-scale I dusted of my Catapult-K2 which I haven't used for over 2 years.
It had 20 points of rear armor, and full armor all around.
I promptly set the rear amor to 1 point, arm armor to 1 point, head armor to 2 points, leg armor to 40/60.

Then I used that Catapult to complete the Invasion challenge (20 games / 10 wins).

During the last weak:
- haven't been backstabbed even once
- haven't died to a headshot even once
- haven't been legged
- no ammo expllosions
- all my deaths were due to ST or CT loss

- in almost every match I've used the AC10 ammo (100 rounds = 1000 damage)
- shaving 4 tonnes of armor is an equivalent of 800 points of AC10 damage you can deal

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 July 2016 - 07:57 PM, said:

Sounds good in theory. Very doable with disciplined teamplay. A heck of a lot less controllable, at least in my experience in CatHerder land. And Doubly so if you are one of the poor schmucks who have to wander about the fringes, flanking and skirmishing to make a living. I've learned even a so called "wingman" more often sits there liek an idiot when you have that Oxide or Locust nipping at your jewels.

Call me jaded, but my Solo play has taught me to count on NO ONE. And again, Walls are only of limited use for survival in a 50 ton IS mech, most times.... since keeping moving is the ONLY way I'm staying alive. Heavies and Assaults probably can get a lot more mileage out of it, but probably half my kills are backstabs, even so.

I just don't think the "hard and fast" rules of one format of play necessarily translates verbatim to the other.

CatHerder land is obviously a crapshoot, but there are usually ways to mitigate the issue.

Either being in the middle of the pack, being at the front of the speartip, or making sure when you go wide/flank in faster mechs that you aren't completely alone.

You can't always count on PUGs to do anything, on the other hand as a team game winning always comes down to the team that worked together better - so even at a basic level we do find "teamwork" as it were.

Is possible to always protect your back? No.

However as Winter said, the number of times I've actually died to back coring is infrequent enough that the value of frontloading remains consistently higher as the vast majority of deaths come from the front.



Oddly enough most of the times I've been back cored were in 8v8 competitive scenarios on brawl maps where both teams are full on brawl - that's actually the most chaotic situation where back coring can happen even though the team is coordinated (often because a priority target has been called, and sometimes you have to focus that target even without regards to your own survival).

Edited by Ultimax, 11 July 2016 - 12:09 AM.

[Tarogato]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 July 2016 - 07:12 PM, said:

I do love frontloaded "compuberpro" armor. When they bring those mechs to the chaos of my PUG queue and forget that they get flanked on whole hell of a lot more often there...it makes it so much easier for a sneaky SoB of a Medium Pilot to punch their kidneys out their throat.

What works in the relatively controlled environment of team play don't always hold up in ChaosLand.

But I'm ok with comps disagreeing. Makes my life easier and my KDr appreciates it.

Eh, I've done the majority of my play in solo queue and I can definitely say that running just 1-3 points of rear armour has served me well. The reason behind doing it is that you want to use as much of your armour as possible throughout a match --- if you run 8 or more armour on the rear, and you frequently end matches or die with some armour still intact on the rear, then you would have been better running that armour on the front instead. The "compuberpros" simply avoid getting shot in the rear - always twist so that the enemy is never behind you and never put yourself in a situation where the enemy can be behind you. Not sure what qualifies this as "compuberpro", it's just smart, intelligent play.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I actually run a fair amount of rear armor on my mechs because I play a lot of scouts and mediums and I'm actually quick enough to when I need to and once my front armor is pretty badly damaged if I'm not gonna run I'll turn my back to the enemy and let it take a hit or two while I'm reloading.

[Moldur]

I've never had a problem with getting legged except in lights because that is where people are aiming. Occasionally, it happens in something heavier. Occasionally, I see the opportunity to leg something heavy.

I'll be honest OP, the problem you describe sounds completely made up.

[Bishop Steiner]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 11 July 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

I actually run a fair amount of rear armor on my mechs because I play a lot of scouts and mediums and I'm actually quick enough to when I need to and once my front armor is pretty badly damaged if I'm not gonna run I'll turn my back to the enemy and let it take a hit or two while I'm reloading.

Crazy idea, right?

Usually, unless I just FUBAR (it happens, ya know) most of the time my HBKs and CN9s are stripped naked on all front torsos, 1-3 rear torsos and missing one or both arms before they die.

But when I'm off hunting, you always have to be wary when you get pinched between a pair of Lights. 5-8 pts of armor on my front, I have found, at least with my play style to make minimal survival difference after nearly 25000 matches. Number of times having a modicum of rear armor has (literally) saved my butt? Countless.

Perhaps if I found myself on teams with a hint of desire to coordinate even a little, that would be less the case, but If I want to carry harder, I pretty much have to freelance, 75% of the time. in my experience, doing that with a naked bum, is detrimental to me (except on my TBR which still runs the same 2 rear armor it has since June 2014). Between it's hitboxes and normal Heavy Mech structure though, it's a lot more survivable to a volley of missiles than a Centurion, from behind.

Also, I find people focus too hard on the total alpha damage of an Oxide or Jenny II.... but unless it's within about 50 meters...those missiles will be spread across all 3 torso on my Medium. With a Medium's speed and agility, it's not quite as easy for a Jenny to park in my back pocket as it is to do on a DWF. But I also find myself exposed a bit more often, all things considered.

[Podex]

Frontloading isn't the problem, it's constant high damage alpha strikes and lack of refined tactical maneuvers. Yes, lights can get behind you, but the game has turned into a high-alpha poke and hide snipefest which make front loading a necessity. Throw in the spray and pray accuracy of these long range shots, and you have a lot of damage going to the extremities and they just can't hold out, nor should they.

I'm not a big fan of ghost heat, but I understand why it is there. Something needs to be done to bring down the use of alphas and close the gap between teams without having a sniper's perch overlooking the entire battlefield.

Urban CQB or a dense forest map may be a way out without totally screwing people over. The old Forest Colony map had good areas for CQB, as did the old Frozen city map, but those are gone QQ

TL;DR, tighten up the maps, give teams protected spots to maneuver, and rear armor will increase while arms stay attached longer.

Edited by Podex, 11 July 2016 - 10:24 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Podex, on 11 July 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

The old Forest Colony map had good areas for CQB

PUGs may have found it nice for CQB but good teams ran mid-long on the waterfront.

Podex, on 11 July 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Frontloading isn't the problem, it's constant high damage alpha strikes and lack of refined tactical maneuvers.

Removing high damage alpha strikes won't change the need for front loading....you'll still need it for dealing with dakka boats. Making maps more cramped won't solve the problem either since there is less room to maneuver behind an enemy and still have viable escape routes meaning it will more likely devolve into two lines clashing against each other, or two deathballs running into each other.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 11 July 2016 - 10:37 AM.

[Podex]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 10:34 AM, said:

Removing high damage alpha strikes won't change the need for front loading....you'll still need it for dealing with dakka boats. Making maps more cramped won't solve the problem either since there is less room to maneuver behind an enemy and still have viable escape routes meaning it will more likely devolve into two lines clashing against each other, or two deathballs running into each other.

It's the long-range alphas that necessitate front loading armor. A short range dakka will hurt like hell, but he will also aim. A little extra in the front isn't going to help in that situation, but some in the rear will buy time if you are flanked. I'm a fan of tight battles and I'd love to see a downtown map with only a small open area for a park or something. Bring some life in the game. Change it up a bit.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Podex, on 11 July 2016 - 10:43 AM, said:

A short range dakka will hurt like hell

I think you have some misgiving on what ranges dakka is useful, if you think it's just short range you are not up to speed on when dakka is useful. Against dakka face rushes, I guarantee you will want as much front armor as possible.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

I think you have some misgiving on what ranges dakka is useful, if you think it's just short range you are not up to speed on when dakka is useful. Against dakka face rushes, I guarantee you will want as much front armor as possible.

no amount of frontloading allows my HBK to endure a KDK3 facerush.

So if I'm to contribute, it behooves me not to try.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

no amount of frontloading allows my HBK to endure a KDK3 facerush.

So if I'm to contribute, it behooves me not to try.

Defeatism isn't a reason not eek out as much survival from your machine as possible. If you are dying from a Kodiak 9 times out of 10, what point is there in putting armor towards your rear when it goes untouched?

[LT. HARDCASE]

I have no more than 6 on any mech. My meds and lights have less than 5.

If you're regularly getting killed from behind, you aren't positioning your mechs correctly.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 11:10 AM, said:

Defeatism isn't a reason not eek out as much survival from your machine as possible. If you are dying from a Kodiak 9 times out of 10, what point is there in putting armor towards your rear when it goes untouched?

because if you read ANY of my previous posts, my rear armor seldom goes untouched? Even sometimes from intentional spreading? But 5-8 pts of armor on a Medium MEch buys exactly how much more life when facing a 4x UAC10 KDK? .25 seconds? .5?

So for me to build my mech to face that, is rather pointless, because it is for all intents a lost fight. To acknowledge other more realistic win scenarios I might encounter might leave my back exposed to Lights and other Mediums, not so much.

The difference is, while I can see your PoV and get it, from your playstyle and comp level, you probably will never see the game from my eyes. Period.

It's nothing to do with realism, but recognizing what my mech is and isn't capable of. Overcompensating my front armor in these cases won't make it any more capable of pulling it off. It makes perfect sense in heavier units and when you actually have battlelines. I'm not talking about either. One size doesn't fit all, I'm afraid.

LT. HARDCASE, on 11 July 2016 - 11:19 AM, said:

I have no more than 6 on any mech. My meds and lights have less than 5.

If you're regularly getting killed from behind, you aren't positioning your mechs correctly.

Good thing I'm not getting killed from behind... because I have enough armor to mitigate that.

[meteorol]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 July 2016 - 09:24 PM, said:

A fun game to play for those who wonder what a good ratio for armor distribution is for every death through the front, drop your rear armor by one point, and when you die through the rear bump it up one.

Did that for a while, but i somehow don't feel comfortable with 0 rear armor. Settled for ~ 4 on most mechs

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

because if you read ANY of my previous posts, my rear armor seldom goes untouched? Even sometimes from intentional spreading? But 5-8 pts of armor on a Medium MEch buys exactly how much more life when facing a 4x UAC10 KDK? .25 seconds? .5? So for me to build my mech to face that, is rather pointless, because it is for all intents a lost fight.

In a game, that .25 or .5 seconds could mean more than the low chance that you get killed through the rear since good positioning (both for you and your team) eliminates as much need for rear armor. It may be a lost fight for you, but not the rest of your team, and you buying time for your team makes all the difference. The only valid concern for rear armor imo is if you have torso in the Gauss, since shots can register in the rear and crit out your Gauss. In PUGs this is less the case since that time is almost always squandered, but meh.

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

The difference is, while I can see your PoV and get it, from your playstyle and comp level, you probably will never see the game from my eyes. Period.

This is where I disagree, there are plenty of comp players that PUG it often, one of those is TFun, and I know he runs very little rear armor (mostly so people don't realize how little he actually has). In PUGs if you died through the rear enough that you feel the need to up your rear armor, then honestly you are just playing bad (I've been guilty of it quite a few times).

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 11:33 AM, said:

In a game, that .25 or .5 seconds could mean more than the low chance that you get killed through the rear since good positioning (both for you and your team) eliminates as much need for rear armor. It may be a lost fight for you, but not the rest of your team, and you buying time for your team makes all the difference. The only valid concern for rear armor imo is if you have torso in the Gauss, since shots can register in the rear and crit out your Gauss. In PUGs this is less the case since that time is almost always squandered, but meh.


This is where I disagree, there are plenty of comp players that PUG it often, one of those is TFun, and I know he runs very little rear armor (mostly so people don't realize how little he actually has). In PUGs if you died through the rear enough that you feel the need to up your rear armor, then honestly you are just playing bad (I've been guilty of it quite a few times).

whelp, guess what?

99% of the playerbase, plays bad, by comp standards. Telling em to gitgud, ain't realistic. Most have neither the time, or desire to play to comp level competency. So for most of us bads, a little back armor makes sense.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 11 July 2016 - 11:35 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

whelp, guess what?

99% of the playerbase, plays bad, by comp standards. Telling em to gitgud, ain't realistic. Most have neither the time, or desire to play to comp level competency. So for most of us bads, a little back armor makes sense.

That's moving the goal posts a little bit don't you think?

Stacking rear armor is a band-aid for poor situational awareness/positioning, can we agree on that then? I won't lie those few times I take a light into PUGs, new players having so much rear armor has saved them from a swift(er) death, but again, its more because they simply aren't more aware of their surroundings that it was possible in the first place.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 11:41 AM, said:

That's moving the goal posts a little bit don't you think?

Stacking rear armor is a band-aid for poor situational awareness/positioning, can we agree on that then? I won't lie those few times I take a light into PUGs, new players having so much rear armor has saved them from a swift(er) death, but again, its more because they simply aren't more aware of their surroundings that it was possible in the first place.

don't see it as moving the goalposts as addressing reality. For top tier players, it may seem a bandaid. For those without that skill set, it can and often is, a life saver. So unless this Thread was directed at Comp Tier players, to dismiss the relaity that probably 9)% of the playerbase faces? I think is either somewhat disingenuous, or even a little arrogant.

And all the situational awareness in the world doesn't save you from team fail. I'm generally very alert to my surroundings, though I do get tunnel vision at times liek anyone else. You can't survive as a slow Medium jock without it, even at scrub tiers. But when more often than not within a few minutes I have to potentially deal with half their team because half of mine went and got dead?

I guess I should find a wall to lean against?

No. The only chance of a win at this point is usually by playing cat and mouse... and I don't care how good you are, there are times in that scenario you are the mouse, no matter your awareness. Having that modicum of rear armor often gives me the chance to survive long enough to retake being the cat. Because unless it's a wolfpack, if they don't kill me that first shot to my back if they get the drop, now I have a very real chance of killing them.

But for me to survive hunting big game like KDKs, I have, in most cases, no choice to but come at them from the side or behind, and not part of a convenient firing line (since most PUGs never try to form one). When you freelance, you run the risk of getting ambushed by another freelancer.

You talk about analyzing your armor use for best survivability. Well believe it or not, having rear armor is the result of my analyzing 25k matches. The amount of times having a pittance more front armor would have saved me compared to the number of times rear armor absolutely did? In favor of having that rear armor.

You can call it the result of being bad if you like. Doesn't change the fact that it's the reality of my playing that it helps a heck of a lot more to have than not.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

No. The only chance of a win at this point is usually by playing cat and mouse... and I don't care how good you are, there are times in that scenario you are the mouse, no matter your awareness.

You are the mouse in any fight if you don't have the maneuverability/speed advantage, but even then, appropriate counter-twisting can keep all but apt Locusts away from your rear long enough unless you are a Whale or Mauler (where no amount of rear armor will save you).