Jump to content

Let's Talk: Hellbringer Champion Discussion


41 replies to this topic

#1 Tina Benoit

    Community Manager

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 817 posts

Posted 23 January 2017 - 06:12 PM

Regarding the community-created Hellbringer Builds here: https://mwomercs.com...champion-build/

Let's discuss the top 3 voted Hellbringer builds! Answer the following:
- Which one of the below 3 builds do you think should get implemented as the champion?
- Why would this fit best as the Hellbringer Champion?
- Is your pick new-player friendly? If so, how?

Build #1: Hellbringer F(L)
Build #2: Hellbringer Prime
Build #3: Hellbringer A


Discuss! Also please try to keep it fairly short as a designer will be taking their time to review this thread to make the final call.

#2 Scout Derek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,016 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationSomewhere where you'll probably never go to

Posted 23 January 2017 - 06:17 PM

Short And Simple. Got it.

I think Build #1 is in order for the champion spot, for the Synchronized Laser burn rates and hardpoint location, as well as having a fairly well Cooling rate. It's user friendly for this alone, that it teaches new players that mechs with such load outs can be fairly powerful in medium range fights should they decide to engage the enemy.

#3 Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,806 posts

Posted 23 January 2017 - 06:48 PM

Build #1 is my favorite, I've spent a lot of time in Hellbringers and out of those 3 choices, number 1 is one of my best performing ones. It should teach players about proper hill peeking.

However, its very important to note that there seems to be an issue with the armor distribution in build #1. It has stock values on the torso sections, far too much armor on the rear compared to the front, players will get slaughtered with how badly it would tank if its setup like that.

#4 Moebius Pi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undertaker
  • The Undertaker
  • 211 posts

Posted 23 January 2017 - 08:54 PM

Build #1 as well.

It doesn't suffer from the issue of losing one Side Torso, walking around with most firepower gone. It isn't ammo dependent. It has a decently versatile range bracket from long to mid range to work from and okay weapon synchronization. The mounts are high. It's heat efficient. The weapons aren't prone to exploding.

That makes it a very forgiving (yet not ineffectual) loadout for a brand new player who needs to be able to shoot at differing ranges without a drawback.

#5 Dee Eight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 6,271 posts

Posted 23 January 2017 - 11:01 PM

Build #3.

#6 ProfPyro

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 91 posts

Posted 24 January 2017 - 12:16 AM

I will vote #2.

Reasons it is new player friendly? It won't necessarily get singled out IMMEDIATELY so they will live a little longer. It also carries the all-important gauss rifle (a MUST-LEARN for high tier play). While other champions have gauss, the Hellbringer has the right amount of speed to help them get back with the group if they get tunnel vision from sniping but not so fast that they'll outpace them and get into trouble.

Edit: Aren't loyalty mechs and omnipods not allowed? That would dq #1 out of the gate.

Edited by ProfPyro, 24 January 2017 - 12:18 AM.


#7 Stormie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 279 posts
  • LocationPerth, Australia

Posted 24 January 2017 - 12:34 AM

#3 for me.

we already have the build #1 as the TBR champion.
every second clan champion has a gauss so much so that I don't think pilots need even more exposure to it.
#3 is simple, best heat efficiency, basically the same engagement range as the gauss build, with the same alpha

#8 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 24 January 2017 - 12:44 AM

Build #1 - everything about this build is good except for the armour. Would recommend only 4-5 points rear, rest front.

Build #2 - Only change I would make is change the targeting computer for another heatsink, since a TC1 isn't really worth it.

Build #3 - I have no idea what this is. It doesn't have alpha, it doesn't have range... I just don't think it's a good fit for the chassis.



I vote for Build #1, because it is pure laservomit. The EBJ trial mech already has a gauss. With the HBR, people tend to focus its left torso automatically, so it's nice to not also give new players a right torso that instantly explodes because it contains gauss.

Edited by Tarogato, 24 January 2017 - 12:45 AM.


#9 Dr Decal

    Member

  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 24 January 2017 - 02:17 AM

View PostTarogato, on 24 January 2017 - 12:44 AM, said:

Build #1 - everything about this build is good except for the armour. Would recommend only 4-5 points rear, rest front.

Build #2 - Only change I would make is change the targeting computer for another heatsink, since a TC1 isn't really worth it.

Build #3 - I have no idea what this is. It doesn't have alpha, it doesn't have range... I just don't think it's a good fit for the chassis.



I vote for Build #1, because it is pure laservomit. The EBJ trial mech already has a gauss. With the HBR, people tend to focus its left torso automatically, so it's nice to not also give new players a right torso that instantly explodes because it contains gauss.


I don't understand the comment about not understanding the #3 build. the alpha is one point lower than the gauss build and five points lower than the laservomit one, with much better heat efficiency than either. I use a similar build to this (6erml, slightly different armour and heat sink setup) and its awesome for hot maps. since the gauss range nerf the gauss build offers basically no advantages over build 3.

I'd vote for build 3, with build one as second preference.

Edited by Dr Decal, 24 January 2017 - 02:18 AM.


#10 Shu Horus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Covert
  • The Covert
  • 133 posts

Posted 24 January 2017 - 03:02 AM

My favorite:
#1 Well balanced, multipurpose loadout. Only thing is the armor distribution on the front/rear. Way too much in the back.


#2 Too close to the EBJ Trial. Yes you should learn to use a Gauss if you want to go up the ladder, but there are other things to learn too and for these if you are not a natural with the Gauss it will be more frustrating then helpfull.


#3 Way to special, single purpose loadout. Yes, this will be the choice of a Veteran for performance. But unless you have build the skill to get into brawling range without having lost half your mech, this will be a beginner's loosing build.

Trial mechs are easy to recognise on the field so a build in weakness like the inability to effectivly return fire on a more than 400 meter distance is a no go for a starter.

MHO.

Another vote for #3: that's also a Chassis I would recommend to buy as first own Mech. Good hardpoints and a lot of Option for trying out more stuff, without the need to buy some Omnipods in the first place.


Cheers, Nuit

Edited by Shu Horus, 04 January 2018 - 05:56 AM.


#11 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 24 January 2017 - 03:42 AM

View PostDr Decal, on 24 January 2017 - 02:17 AM, said:


I don't understand the comment about not understanding the #3 build. the alpha is one point lower than the gauss build and five points lower than the laservomit one, with much better heat efficiency than either. I use a similar build to this (6erml, slightly different armour and heat sink setup) and its awesome for hot maps. since the gauss range nerf the gauss build offers basically no advantages over build 3.

I'd vote for build 3, with build one as second preference.


Actually you're right about one thing, I forgot how low the alpha was on the gauss build because I would never run gauss 4 med myself. I personally run gauss 6 med, but gauss 5 med is the traditional configuration, and that still has a better alpha than the silly 'only 6 meds' build.

The thing is... 6 meds is a build that I put on my Kitfox and Cheetah. Those are 30 ton light mechs. This is a 65-ton heavy mech. The difference in alpha damage is thus:

Posted Image



Sure, the 6 med has better cooling and DPS, but you have to expose more often to get that damage out there, and the fall off on cERML is pretty lousy. Having a pair of cLPL to boost your alpha helps a lot. Not to mention that running 6 med absolutely requires you to use an arm mount, which is terribly low and requires you to expose your entire torso if you want to use it. Whereas both the LPL build and the gauss build are all godlike high-mounted, so if you can barely even see it, you can still shoot it with everything you've got.

#12 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 24 January 2017 - 03:51 AM

View PostShu Horus, on 24 January 2017 - 03:02 AM, said:

#1 Way to special, single purpose loadout. Yes, this will be the choice of a Veteran for performance. But unless you have build the skill to get into brawling range...



How do you reckon 2 LPL + 3 ML is a "brawling" build? It's a mid-range trading build that is effective out to 600 meters. Are you looking at the wrong page?

#13 omnomtom

    Member

  • Pip
  • The Warden
  • The Warden
  • 16 posts

Posted 24 January 2017 - 11:14 AM

View PostTarogato, on 24 January 2017 - 03:42 AM, said:

Sure, the 6 med has better cooling and DPS, but you have to expose more often to get that damage out there, and the fall off on cERML is pretty lousy. Having a pair of cLPL to boost your alpha helps a lot.


+1 to that. Also, the sustained DPS of build #1 is better than it looks at first glance, because if you are caught in a situation where you need to keep firing, cLPL are much more heat efficient than mediums. The sustained DPS of build #1 firing only the LPL is nearly equal to the sustained DPS of build #3, despite all those extra heatsinks.

Build #3 also strips a dangerous amount of leg armour to mount that many heatsinks - on your personal build that's probably fine, but on a standard trial build - everyone is going to know you have the leg durability of a 50 tonner, and they will target accordingly.

My vote is for #1 with fixed front-rear armour distribution. Build #2 is a second preference.

#14 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,257 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 24 January 2017 - 11:27 AM

Build #1 is the best, giving new players access to good builds is good, and it doesn't incur heat scale.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 24 January 2017 - 11:29 AM.


#15 Duck Laurent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 283 posts

Posted 25 January 2017 - 01:15 AM

Build #1 is definitely the best, but I would switch the CT to the Prime variant and change RT instead because you shouldn't use a variant that isn't available yet.

Update:
copied build #1 to a fully mastered chassis and had a test run. Works well, but runs quite hot, new players will be overstrained. As in build #3: armor distribution has to be revised.

#2 is boring.

Edited by Duck Laurent, 29 January 2017 - 01:13 AM.


#16 Kuaron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Senior Captain
  • Senior Captain
  • 1,105 posts

Posted 25 January 2017 - 06:10 AM

#3.
I consider the DPM advantage here more important than the ability of hill poking with with two more MLs.
(Due to not having lasers in the arms, #1 can poke with all it’s weapons with less exposure but also less often.)
Stripping the arms is fine if you don’t use them, but being a humanoid and not overly armoured Mech, the HBR is doing better having some shield arms. With only 1 ML in each they are perfectly expendable if lost, but still important enough to armour.
Also, I don’t like build #1 being based on the F being already the (L).

#17 SlippnGriff

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Gold Champ
  • CS 2019 Gold Champ
  • 220 posts
  • LocationSpud farm

Posted 25 January 2017 - 03:35 PM

Build #1 is very good, but also pretty hot. From a player who guys the mech, they'll be able to handle it. However I think new players will be overheating a lot. But it could teach them heat control a lot and weapon grouping (if they pick up on it)
(also I'm pretty sure that was the build i posted and I didn't change the armor values for the back and front. Should be around 5 back armor for new players and max front

Build #3 New players will not overheat nearly as often and can learn how the gauss works. though I know when i first started playing i hated the gauss with the charge time and all. But that shouldn't be a factor. Adjustment for it I would say to be add more ammo http://mwo.smurfy-ne...db1a7234578ab8d but players who buy can change that. And new players may not need that much ammo, just a suggestion, doesn't have to be done.

TL;DR- I'd say build 1 (with adjusted 55 front armor and 5 back) Let new guys figure out that they shouldn't brawl with it and should pick guys off. Other C/trial build have been hot in the past, this one can be too

Edited by SlippnGriff, 25 January 2017 - 03:38 PM.


#18 Spheroid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 5,064 posts
  • LocationSouthern Wisconsin

Posted 25 January 2017 - 11:12 PM

Why do none of these builds feature actuators? If not for the movement then at least the crit padding aspect. That always bothered me regarding the Cheetah( C ).

Also anything with loyalty pods should be an automatic disqualification. Those pods aren't even out for c-bills yet.

Edited by Spheroid, 25 January 2017 - 11:18 PM.


#19 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 26 January 2017 - 08:59 AM

View PostSpheroid, on 25 January 2017 - 11:12 PM, said:

Why do none of these builds feature actuators? If not for the movement then at least the crit padding aspect. That always bothered me regarding the Cheetah( C ).

Also anything with loyalty pods should be an automatic disqualification. Those pods aren't even out for c-bills yet.


A: if all of your weapons are in the torso, you have no need for actuators. Actually, having actuators makes aiming more awkward unless you use armlock.

B: actually, I don't think smurfy links save actuator toggle state. So all builds will naturally lack them.

#20 Spheroid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 5,064 posts
  • LocationSouthern Wisconsin

Posted 26 January 2017 - 09:05 AM

@Tarogato: Does that twist speed advantage apply to mechs that lack LAAs though? I thought it was mainly a comparison with mechs that had elbows and hands but were running arm-lock.

In any case I never thought the reduction in twist rate was that severe, especially on lights.





6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users