132 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Deathlike, on 22 September 2016 - 08:52 PM, said:

Both looks OK.. I'm not hating on the latter one... I don't think it's ideal for new players though. My personal substitution would probably be SSRM2s instead of SRM4s, but otherwise there's nothing wrong with it.

I can see your point, but the current spread (which I don't see changing soon), weight of the Sreaks, as well as needing BAP at that point... Might not be able to handle them plus SRMs are considered better than SSRMs for IS right now.

But it would help new players deal some damage against fast moving targets, something they will be harder pressed to do with the ERPPC as well as the SRM4s... So, fire power/damage or ease of use? Tough choice here. (I agree with you in some part, but I like to think and play the other side sometimes.)

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 22 September 2016 - 08:30 PM, said:

CRB-27SL
PNT-10K.

I personally like each of those builds, and I feel that they are more "new player friendly" than the current ones.

I believe I also voted/liked your Crab build as well...? (There were a lot of good builds, and many 5MPL versions...)

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Tina Benoit, on 22 September 2016 - 04:28 PM, said:

I can see the concern that OP is bringing up and I'm only going to suggest something regarding that for the future Champions.

for 1, I could be more specific in my posts when requesting for builds for the next champions, asking everyone to make sure their submissions are new player friendly, however there's still a chance the same thing will continue to occur the same way as current, where some of you worry it might be a popularity contest or due to being a "meta".

I think most of you agree that you still prefer letting community members make these builds, so maybe instead of having everyone submit a build and then vote, let's add a rule where the person who submits a build HAS to explain how that build will be compatible for new players the most.
Maybe we can even have more detailed discussions elsewhere on some of the specific submitted builds explaining why. We can still use the vote system, and at the end we could also make sure a designer reviews the discussed builds and let them make the final call as to which one would make it, rather than take the build with the highest votes like we have been.

We can try to make a judgment call upon your discussions of the build that most seem to agree for new player compatibility. Not everyone will always come to an agreement, there will most likely be debates where some will disagree but perhaps having us overview everyone's discussions rather than a vote system might just be the better way to pick the one.

I like that the players get to make and vote in champions! Its fun! A lot of the community gets together and posts their smurfy links they spent hours on! People get to see other peoples building philosophies... Its a great enjoyable experince!

And while I dont like many of the champions out there, i can honestly say there is NO mech that is new player friendly! I remember being a new player... when trial mechs were the the stock SHS 3025 varient... I overheated like every 10 seconds during a firefight... It made the game feel turn based... I was so happy when trials got changed into champions!

Because of this, maximizing mechs is still the best option for a new player.... (XL engines in Is mechs and everything!) because if they decide they like the mech, they can pay the (edit) MC and get a mech thats fully upgraded for them!

Designing and Kitting out a mech from scrap is a lot harder then buying something fully tuned and ready to rock steady!

If they decide to buy the stock cbill version, at least they have a template to look towards and copy.

Anyway, I would like to submit my vote for the system to "Stay as currently implemented."

Edited by Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, 22 September 2016 - 10:31 PM.

[Tesunie]

Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, on 22 September 2016 - 09:50 PM, said:

because if they decide they like the mech, they can pay the c-bills and get a mech thats fully upgraded for them!

Are you saying buying the champion version of said mech? If so, those are available for MC only, not C-bills. Just an FYI.

And of course, I respect your opinion. I, on the other hand, feel differently. There are certain things I feel can be built into a mech to make it more user friendly for new players. Some mechs are very XL safe, and those can and should have XL engines. Others would be best off as a Std engine to help survive-ability, and only XL for more experienced players (you own your own mech).

I can say, as an example, that there are many Crab designs that use a Std engine, and would be far better and easier for a new player to use. The XL engine Crab currently in the game isn't very new player friendly, as the Crab is known for having large side torsos. I know earlier today I saw the (C) Crab in a few matches. I called it out on the in game voip to aim for their side torsos, either one. They did and that Crab dropped quickly. If it had a Std engine (and a more balanced loadout), if that was a new player (if they where, I'm sorry!) they would and could have survive a little longer with more weapons intact.

New player friendly doesn't mean "fool proof", but only that they are easier to use and can survive more mistakes. I believe that trial mechs should have a little (don't read as "a lot") more rear armor, because it's typically easier to sneak behind a new player and kill them from the back. Some don't even notice themselves being shot in the back for a short while!


A trial mech should have a lot of considerations. Following the current meta (LPLs currently) probably isn't the best concept (which is what gets voted in). The reason? Because metas come and metas go. What may be meta now, a few weeks or months from now it may no longer be viable. I mean, when Energy Draw comes out, how well will many of the current Champions hold out? Just... Something to think about is all.

[Stealthrider]

Throwing my 2 cents in as a relatively new player that has brought several friends to the game this month.

I like (and my friends like) the current trials a LOT better than the previous ones, for two very specific reasons: Variety and apparent balance.

The previous trials may have been "friendlier" in terms of introducing players to basic gameplay, but they were so similar to each other in loadouts and playstyles that they got old, fast, and weren't much fun to play after a pretty short playtime. Take the Awesome and Battlemaster: the two were almost identical. More importantly, they only featured lasers, with few exceptions, which meant that my friends and I never got a taste of ACs (outside of the one 20 on the Orion), LB-Xs, SRMs, Streak SRMs or LRMs (save for the decidedly mediocre Trebuchet) until we bought mechs of our own. We couldn't really "try" most of the weapon types, which made the early experience a lot less fun than it could have been.

The current trials do a great job of showcasing pretty much all of the weapon types and playstyles. They're a lot more fun.

The other issue was apparent in Faction play more than quick play: the Clan trials were a LOT better than the IS ones, especially the mediums. I don't think much needs to be said here; the current roster has considerably more parity, with each side having one or more "strong" mech choices per weight class, even if the other option isn't that good. JR7-IIC and SDR-5k are great, Mist Lynx and Panther aren't, for example. Griffin is a fantastic Scout, as is the Hunchback-IIC. It's a lot less one sided, even if it's not perfect.

Sure the mechs might be harder to play, but that is NOT a bad thing for newbie mechs. More variety and parity is a good thing, even if it takes a bit more work to succeed. These trials are going to be around for a while, they shouldn't be boring or feel samey. They should show off all the game can offer, and they're a lot better at that than the old ones were.

[Tesunie]

Stealthrider, on 22 September 2016 - 10:14 PM, said:

More variety and parity is a good thing, even if it takes a bit more work to succeed. These trials are going to be around for a while, they shouldn't be boring or feel samey. They should show off all the game can offer, and they're a lot better at that than the old ones were.

Actually, variety was one of my points (just not in the original post of this thread). A lot of mechs had LPLs, which is not as helpful to new players exploring new options.

My issue is some mechs could have been altered (some even only slightly) to be more player friendly in their play aspects. They could even keep their weapons (for the most part) unchanged. Some things where just a lack of alternative weapons (that Panther with the PPCs should probably have some kind of SRM backup for within 90m ranges). Some things where an XL engine in a mech less suited for it in less skilled hands. (The Crab is known for losing side torsos easily, but it also is known for being able to "twist" damage around, redirected damage around the torso. If you have the skill to shield parts of your mech, it will serve you well. If not (like most new players), you will die quickly.) Some where even just weapon placement. (Once again, that Crab! I don't mind 3 LPLs, but all on one side? If a new player loses that arm, they also lose 2 LPLs out of 3. I'd imagine a "staring at your opponent" Crab player would be frustrated with always losing that arm by it being targeted.)

The builds themselves for the new trial mechs are sound builds. However, some of them just could be more user friendly in their construction. The new Trial mechs are much more suited to more experienced players who have the learned skills to utilize them, compared to new players. Seen as I've been helping a bunch of new players recently... I've been getting direct feedback from them. (And keeping my own opinions about the builds to myself while I do so.)

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Tesunie, on 22 September 2016 - 10:12 PM, said:

Are you saying buying the champion version of said mech? If so, those are available for MC only, not C-bills. Just an FYI.

Yes nice catch- I ment to say MC.

Fixed now

[Stealthrider]

Tesunie, on 22 September 2016 - 10:26 PM, said:

Actually, variety was one of my points (just not in the original post of this thread). A lot of mechs had LPLs, which is not as helpful to new players exploring new options.

My issue is some mechs could have been altered (some even only slightly) to be more player friendly in their play aspects. They could even keep their weapons (for the most part) unchanged. Some things where just a lack of alternative weapons (that Panther with the PPCs should probably have some kind of SRM backup for within 90m ranges). Some things where an XL engine in a mech less suited for it in less skilled hands. (The Crab is known for losing side torsos easily, but it also is known for being able to "twist" damage around, redirected damage around the torso. If you have the skill to shield parts of your mech, it will serve you well. If not (like most new players), you will die quickly.) Some where even just weapon placement. (Once again, that Crab! I don't mind 3 LPLs, but all on one side? If a new player loses that arm, they also lose 2 LPLs out of 3. I'd imagine a "staring at your opponent" Crab player would be frustrated with always losing that arm by it being targeted.)

The builds themselves for the new trial mechs are sound builds. However, some of them just could be more user friendly in their construction. The new Trial mechs are much more suited to more experienced players who have the learned skills to utilize them, compared to new players. Seen as I've been helping a bunch of new players recently... I've been getting direct feedback from them. (And keeping my own opinions about the builds to myself while I do so.)

Actually I feel like having a lot of LPLs isn't a bad thing, so long as the builds with them are different enough. For example, LPLs and SRMs vs LPLs and MLs, or three LPLs on the Crab vs a two LPL+anything build, all feel different despite all having LPLs. Also having similar builds across weight classes is fine, like the EBJ and Warhawk, whereas the Dire Wolf and Warhawk together was silly.

Having a few more "advanced" trials isn't bad, either, though I agree the Panther isn't great. I'd like to see some form of recommendation label ("Beginner, intermediate, advanced") applied to the "tougher" mechs, so newbies know what they're getting into, rather than not having those better (but less safe) builds at all.

Edit: I'd also argue that having these advanced builds helps teach newbies concepts like Shielding, face-time, twisting, etc, which otherwise wouldn't be really learnable (or necessary to learn) until they bought mechs, at which point they'd be moving on to "advanced" builds without knowing any of it. That's how I learned, and i feel like with these mechs it'll be easier to teach my friends. (For example, my friend just got the Kodiak pack, but knew nothing about Dakka builds, so playing the 3 was like learning a whole new game).

Edited by Stealthrider, 22 September 2016 - 11:00 PM.

[Dee Eight]

All my submissions had varied loadouts with no more than three fire groups needed (except my own personal Black Panther build detailed several pages back). I actually submitted three panther builds. These were the other two... both variations on the PNT-10P (which is the one armored like a medium mech with 98 pts of bonus quirkening, also its the one with +25% ballistic range and cooldown and 20% ballistic velocity).


http://mwo.smurfy-ne...de73a05056df3d8

Like someone elses gauss panther except faster and better armored (no need for double heat sinks when you only have a gauss rifle). Only 25 shots but that's still enough to harass and maybe get a kill or two with some careful aim. With the quirks that's a 3.75 second cooldown, 2400 velocity, and 825 meter optimal range / 2475 maximum range. Btw this also effectively makes this an improved hollander aside from placement of the beast... but still...48 total arm armor should protect the beast nicely (its as much as any heavy can mount on its arms). Hollanders only carried 2 tons of ammo, had a 175 rating standard engine, and a lot less armor.

And Scattergun...which combined an LB-10X and SRM4+artemis, with 2 and 1 tons of ammo respectively. The 10P also has missile quirks of 10% velocity, range, and cooldown, and SRM spread reduction of 5% (which of course stacks with the artemis spread reduction). So 297m range SRMs every 2.7 seconds and 675m optimal / 2025m maximum range for the LB-10X which fires every 1.875 seconds.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7ce8188f2363887

They got ONE like.

Edited by Dee Eight, 23 September 2016 - 12:37 AM.

[Pjwned]

I'm not surprised at all to see this complaint actually, because when I submitted a build for the Crab champion only to see the 3x LPL build get voted up the most I knew that all of the champions were going to be metapuke whether it was actually good for a champion build or not, so I stopped caring pretty quickly.

I'm not even really that bitter that my submission wasn't picked because it's not like the CRB-27B(C) is bad, but I don't think the community picked a good build to represent it as a champion.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...40fc0bef728f23e

I still think that would have been a better build for a champion variant because it's faster, has jumpjets, and has a more balanced loadout of weapons.

[Pjwned]

Dee Eight, on 23 September 2016 - 12:27 AM, said:

All my submissions had varied loadouts with no more than three fire groups needed (except my own personal Black Panther build detailed several pages back). I actually submitted three panther builds. These were the other two... both variations on the PNT-10P (which is the one armored like a medium mech with 98 pts of bonus quirkening, also its the one with +25% ballistic range and cooldown and 20% ballistic velocity).


http://mwo.smurfy-ne...de73a05056df3d8

Like someone elses gauss panther except faster and better armored (no need for double heat sinks when you only have a gauss rifle). Only 25 shots but that's still enough to harass and maybe get a kill or two with some careful aim. With the quirks that's a 3.75 second cooldown, 2500 velocity, and 825 meter optimal range / 2475 maximum range. Btw this also effectively makes this an improved hollander aside from placement of the beast... but still...48 total arm armor should protect the beast nicely (its as much as a Night gyr or warhammer can mount on its arms). Hollanders only carried 2 tons of ammo, had a 175 rating standard engine, and a lot less armor.

And Scattergun...which combined an LB-10X and SRM4+artemis, with 2 and 1 tons of ammo respectively. The 10P also has missile quirks of 10% velocity, range, and cooldown, and SRM spread reduction of 5% (which of course stacks with the artemis spread reduction). So 297m range SRMs every 2.7 seconds and 675m optimal / 2025m maximum range for the LB-10X which fires every 1.875 seconds.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7ce8188f2363887

They got ONE like.

I can't tell if you're being serious or not because both of those builds are hideously bad, let alone being represented as a champion build.

Why are you putting 10+ ton ballistic weapons on light mechs when they have to suffer with an atrocious engine rating & bad DPS for such a bad decision, and to top it off terrible sustainability by relying entirely on ammo weapons?

I am so triggered that somebody would even joke about this, let alone be actually serious about it, because it's so bad.

[Kmieciu]

Dee Eight, on 20 September 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

Nice balanced light support mech.

In MWO "support mech" in a euphemism for "bad mech".

[Spheroid]

The Crab is such a waste. You could have built the same thing on an Enforcer-5D while at the same time wasting fewer of the energy hardpoints. The underutilization is what bothers me most.

[MechWarrior5152251]

Some of the Champion builds put 20-30% of their armor on their backs. How the hell are you going to go up against someone who has 20% more armor than you one on one? Of course in a Tier 4 drop that 20-30% rear armor often prevents accidental team kills...

Spheroid, on 23 September 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

The Crab is such a waste. You could have built the same thing on an Enforcer-5D while at the same time wasting fewer of the energy hardpoints. The underutilization is what bothers me most.

Havent played in a while, but the Crab is tiny compared to the enforcer. 50 tons and barely bigger than a spider. Did they resize it?

[Spheroid]

The Crab is somewhat larger now. I never had a problem with the Enforcer's size for a fifty tonner. I am just venting. They are not going make a second Enforcer champion so obviously submitting a Lplas build on a Crab was the only option for submitted builds.

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 23 September 2016 - 12:27 AM, said:

All my submissions had varied loadouts with no more than three fire groups needed (except my own personal Black Panther build detailed several pages back). I actually submitted three panther builds. These were the other two... both variations on the PNT-10P (which is the one armored like a medium mech with 98 pts of bonus quirkening, also its the one with +25% ballistic range and cooldown and 20% ballistic velocity).


http://mwo.smurfy-ne...de73a05056df3d8

Like someone elses gauss panther except faster and better armored (no need for double heat sinks when you only have a gauss rifle). Only 25 shots but that's still enough to harass and maybe get a kill or two with some careful aim. With the quirks that's a 3.75 second cooldown, 2400 velocity, and 825 meter optimal range / 2475 maximum range. Btw this also effectively makes this an improved hollander aside from placement of the beast... but still...48 total arm armor should protect the beast nicely (its as much as any heavy can mount on its arms). Hollanders only carried 2 tons of ammo, had a 175 rating standard engine, and a lot less armor.

And Scattergun...which combined an LB-10X and SRM4+artemis, with 2 and 1 tons of ammo respectively. The 10P also has missile quirks of 10% velocity, range, and cooldown, and SRM spread reduction of 5% (which of course stacks with the artemis spread reduction). So 297m range SRMs every 2.7 seconds and 675m optimal / 2025m maximum range for the LB-10X which fires every 1.875 seconds.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7ce8188f2363887

They got ONE like.

Both are troll builds. I know the 10P is an all ammo variant, but you are literally trolling people with those builds. These are not even close to being new player friendly.

Pjwned, on 23 September 2016 - 12:30 AM, said:

I'm not surprised at all to see this complaint actually, because when I submitted a build for the Crab champion only to see the 3x LPL build get voted up the most I knew that all of the champions were going to be metapuke whether it was actually good for a champion build or not, so I stopped caring pretty quickly.

I'm not even really that bitter that my submission wasn't picked because it's not like the CRB-27B(C) is bad, but I don't think the community picked a good build to represent it as a champion.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...40fc0bef728f23e

I still think that would have been a better build for a champion variant because it's faster, has jumpjets, and has a more balanced loadout of weapons.

That's too hot. 2LPL+3MPL is a lot of tonnage and not realistically enough DHS to run them all. I understand you need staggered fire and firing within their ranges... but when push comes to shove... it's way too damn hot.

[Dee Eight]

Kmieciu, on 23 September 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

So you've played 2500 matches and still can't get out of tier 3?
No wonder seeing your W/L is still under 1.0 while your K/D ratio is dropping.
Hate to break it to you, but you're still a liability to your team. One of those pilots who need to be carried to victory.
If one hasn't figured out MWO after 2500 matches, he will never will.

I only entered Tier 3 at the start of this month during the assaults leaderboard when all I was using was high damage mechs I'd already elited or mastered. But nice to know who the tiertards are in this thread so I can stop wasting time replying to them. My W/L and K/D ratios are dropping because I've been playing with builds of brand new mechs for the past three weeks and they haven't been elite/master unlocked yet. Prior to taking delivery of the Night gyr's my W/L was above 1.0 for this season. As to my K/D ratio...actually when I started looking at it back in march it was 0.46 overall, its now up to .69 overall spread over 6900 games. As to the current season, as I'm doing the Night Gyrs only right now, we shall see where things go, but the Jade Kite has reached Elite already for me (and is at a 1.31 W/L ratio).

You and other tiertards can call my builds trolling if it helps you feel better about yourselves but I happen to find trying different loadouts fun. Playing the LPL / Ultra-AC / SRM barrage game all the time gets boring to me rather quickly. If figuring out MWO means only using meta builds... then I hope I am not alone in not ever wanting to figure it out. My Dragon 5N must surely count as a troll build by your standards then with its ultra-5, twin MGs, SRM6, twin MPLs and AMS mixture but its produced a 3.0 W/L and 3.25 K/D ratio for itself so far.

I was 252nd on the current leaderboard when I posted those stats yesterday, now I'm 225th. Really...what are you going to have to complain about once I hit Tier 1 and my W/L and K/D ratios pass yours ?

Edited by Dee Eight, 23 September 2016 - 10:24 AM.

[Dee Eight]

Pjwned, on 23 September 2016 - 12:39 AM, said:

I can't tell if you're being serious or not because both of those builds are hideously bad, let alone being represented as a champion build.

Why are you putting 10+ ton ballistic weapons on light mechs when they have to suffer with an atrocious engine rating & bad DPS for such a bad decision, and to top it off terrible sustainability by relying entirely on ammo weapons?

I am so triggered that somebody would even joke about this, let alone be actually serious about it, because it's so bad.

Why is teaching ammo conservation on builds which cannot overheat themselves to shutdown a bad thing ? I thought we'd reached a consensus that running hot energy builds was a bad move for new players.

[Tesunie]

Dee Eight, on 23 September 2016 - 12:27 AM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...de73a05056df3d8

Like someone elses gauss panther except faster and better armored (no need for double heat sinks when you only have a gauss rifle). Only 25 shots but that's still enough to harass and maybe get a kill or two with some careful aim. With the quirks that's a 3.75 second cooldown, 2400 velocity, and 825 meter optimal range / 2475 maximum range. Btw this also effectively makes this an improved hollander aside from placement of the beast... but still...48 total arm armor should protect the beast nicely (its as much as any heavy can mount on its arms). Hollanders only carried 2 tons of ammo, had a 175 rating standard engine, and a lot less armor.

And Scattergun...which combined an LB-10X and SRM4+artemis, with 2 and 1 tons of ammo respectively. The 10P also has missile quirks of 10% velocity, range, and cooldown, and SRM spread reduction of 5% (which of course stacks with the artemis spread reduction). So 297m range SRMs every 2.7 seconds and 675m optimal / 2025m maximum range for the LB-10X which fires every 1.875 seconds.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7ce8188f2363887

They got ONE like.

I would not have voted for the Gauss Panther due to the same reasons I did not vote for the current trial Panther. Everyone in one arm, and it's a Gauss rifle as well which is hard to use, with no backup weapons? As a more experienced player, it looks like a reasonable build to me. Much like my Cicada version I've been running for a long while. (I pull it out every now and again. It's a fun build to play! 1 Gauss, ECM, 2 MLs and goes 90 KPH. Has more ammo than it honestly knows what to do with, and I think it has single heat sinks as well...)

As for the second Panther Build, I actually like the concept. I've found that LBx and SRMs pair off very nicely. Only change I'd recommend would be to drop the Artemis because it's already got a fairly tight missile spread and place in probably another SRM2. However, as much as I enjoy it's uniqueness, I would not vote for it as a trial mech because of it's tight ammo restrictions and slower speeds for a light mech. It does look like a blast to play though.

For a trial Panther, if we had to use that variant, I'd probably look into an UAC5 instead of the LBx. More range, more DPS, lighter so I could add in a JJ and a larger XL engine.

But, for a trial Panther from any of it's variants? Probably a more standard (ER)LL or LPL with SRM backups would be more what I would be looking for. (Keep experimental builds to personal use. Trials should be a bit more standardized and have ease of use.)

I will reiterate though that I do like your build concepts. They are very interesting. You may convince me to check out the Panther 10P...

Pjwned, on 23 September 2016 - 12:30 AM, said:

I'm not even really that bitter that my submission wasn't picked because it's not like the CRB-27B(C) is bad, but I don't think the community picked a good build to represent it as a champion.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...40fc0bef728f23e

I still think that would have been a better build for a champion variant because it's faster, has jumpjets, and has a more balanced loadout of weapons.

Same statement as I have with the new Champion builds. They aren't bad builds, just not what I would be looking for in a trial mech.

I do like your build, but I wouldn't vote for it for several reasons. One is it's heat, though I do get range bracketed builds and using the right weapon in the right ranges when you need cooling. Second is that XL engine.

I'm not knocking your design at all, as I really do like the base concept, but I feel the Crab is better served with a Std engine over an XL engine when it comes to new player use. An XL Crab is far more so for players who know how to utilize it, and they can work but are harder to use well.

My suggestion to your trial verion of the Crab. I dropped your MPLs and changed them to MLs. This freed up 3 tons to covert your XL engine into a Std engine, letting the Crab move at 87 KPH. I also had to drop two DHS, which did make it less heat efficent than I would have prefered, but within reasonable levesl I think (without going into the game and testing it).

This opens up some zombie ability, and lets them stare down opponents without too much of an issue. It also, as they grow in experience, be able to twist damage to a side. A Crab that helps initially, and for as they gain more experience. (That heat is my biggest concen though...)

Spheroid, on 23 September 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

The Crab is such a waste. You could have built the same thing on an Enforcer-5D while at the same time wasting fewer of the energy hardpoints. The underutilization is what bothers me most.

An Enforcer would have also been far more XL friendly...

Dee Eight, on 23 September 2016 - 10:05 AM, said:

I happen to find trying different loadouts fun. Playing the LPL / Ultra-AC / SRM barrage game all the time gets boring to me rather quickly.

I too like to experient. I find it keeps things interesting, and it's resparked my love of the Adders/Pumas.

Experimentation keeps things interesting, and by experimenting I find that I learn more about how things work. Of course, sometimes experiments don't go well, and it has a considerable affect on my stats sometimes (like I care about those). Then again, I consider myself an "average" player in skill level.

[Tesunie]

Dee Eight, on 23 September 2016 - 10:51 AM, said:

Why is teaching ammo conservation on builds which cannot overheat themselves to shutdown a bad thing ? I thought we'd reached a consensus that running hot energy builds was a bad move for new players.

Too tight of restrictive ammo build can also be a bad thing, as new players are more likely to spam the shots, even if they can't hit or don't even have a target to shoot (sometimes).

Although, I get what you are saying here. It is a good skill to learn, but most people compensate ammo conservation skills with "add more ammo" to their mechs. Not to mention, honestly speaking, I'd rather not have builds that force specific skills if possible. Some skills will be required no matter the mech of course. But we shouldn't create designs where "This design will teach new players how to________ (or they will die/fail)". Reason I have arguments against shield sided mechs (to some extent).

[Dee Eight]

Tesunie, on 23 September 2016 - 11:04 AM, said:

Too tight of restrictive ammo build can also be a bad thing, as new players are more likely to spam the shots, even if they can't hit or don't even have a target to shoot (sometimes).

Although, I get what you are saying here. It is a good skill to learn, but most people compensate ammo conservation skills with "add more ammo" to their mechs. Not to mention, honestly speaking, I'd rather not have builds that force specific skills if possible. Some skills will be required no matter the mech of course. But we shouldn't create designs where "This design will teach new players how to________ (or they will die/fail)". Reason I have arguments against shield sided mechs (to some extent).

Well how's this... its ammo'ed to wang-zulu, and doesn't overheat. Standard engined, zombie capable, jump capable, and no wasted shield arm (other than that left arm bonus quirk). No complicated skills to learn. Just hose the MG and SRMs at something. MG optimal range is 150m. And yes its a support mech. Assault pilots always seem to demand the lights support them...well...here you go....I spent 1.3 million cbills refitting my white panther to this configuration. to test it out. Three quick games. Consumables are Improved UAV and Artillery Strike. Modules fitted seismic, radar derp, MG range and SRM4 cooldown.

On polar highlands skirmish I emptied the AMS bin shielding all the heavies without the sense to have fitted one to their slow mechs and then had a Shadow Cat flank behind them and core out my CT rear while I kept pace with a Kodiak driver who thought he should do the flanking to chase an urbie, and our only other light (RVN-3L) ran off to play sniper. The team ultimately lost by 12 to 8 but we also experienced a disconnect/lag drop player.

On Grim P skirmish I did better, deployed my Arty on the enemy deathball at echo 8 and put up my UAV in the midst of the ball skirmishing around the buildings there a couple mins later. My MGs and SRMs stripped an arm and SRM launchers from an archer just before he died, and in the end I got eight kill assists and the team finished 12 to 3.

In the bog conquest I raced for theta with a medium lance mate in tow, got to the square as their charlie lance moved on it also, used seismic and UAV to position to ambush, called the UAV and coordinates on VOIP... bravo and charlie was busy nascaring towards kappa and forgot of course sigma behind them on the drop (two other from alpha had to backtrack to it). I got off 158 damage of direct damage mostly onto a kodiak and some to a mad dog. Put my arty down on top of us before I died. The team won and this was my post match result.






[smurfy]http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0b93794160dd812[/smurfy]


This below is my standard white tiger build (camo is the tiger pattern with titanium white, camo light grey, ivory black) with AC2, MG, twin SRM4, 4 JJ, 180XL, full left shield arm. Also more ammo limited with only 3 tons for the AC2 and 1.5 tons for the SRM4s and 0.5 tons for the MG. Only needs two fire groups really (the MG shoot far enough you can combine with the SRM4s) but I run it as three. The AC2 with range module reaches out to 972 meters.

[smurfy]http://mwo.smurfy-ne...09a8e6644440822[/smurfy]

AND... if its still ammo usage that bothers folks... then.... this is pretty conservative on ammo usage since its a pair of streak launchers, a pair of ER large lasers and a TAG laser. 200XL, 11 DHS, 2 JJ, only really needs two fire groups ERLLs+TAG and Streaks+TAG, but could run the TAG alone on a third group. 92.6kph without speed skill. No minimum range like the champion picked, virtually the same damage at range for the same heat and better yet, MUCH more range. 742 meters without a module vs 540 for the PPCs.

[smurfy]http://mwo.smurfy-ne...cdb1e86531e72dc[/smurfy]