52 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 April 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

They did that because it has no accel/decel/turn/twist quirks, making it actually pretty sluggish on the poke compared to existing options. And that's just the energy variants, the others have the same issue on top of the low-mounts problem with so much firepower in the arms.

Honestly I don't have a statement on the Roughneck itself yet. I haven't played against it enough - I'm not concerned about it's powerlevel but it is a bit odd to give it so much structure and armor.

Yeonne Greene, on 21 April 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

Also, those shoulder mounts are extremely easy to isolate and hit. Poof, XL.

If you are just peeking with them, then you are minimizing exposure.

Unless the boxes that house the weapon are enormous, high mounts are better than low mounts even if they are where the Roughneck has them.

Edited by Ultimax, 21 April 2017 - 09:29 AM.

[AphexTwin11]

brroleg, on 21 April 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

All new "mechpacks" comes with lots of high mounted hardpoints. Guess its cause people want to pay money to win, so they dont buy mechs with low hardpoints. And in result game goes to the direction where all mechs are the same high mounted hardpoint boats and only has difference in color and cosmetic shape.
I dont see how this could be undone, except maybe if PGI will find another way to earn money except selling "mechpacks".

The QQ is strong with this one

[Y E O N N E]

Ultimax, on 21 April 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

Honestly I don't have a statement on the Roughneck itself yet. I haven't played against it enough - I'm not concerned about it's powerlevel but it is a bit odd to give it so much structure and armor.

It has the armor of a 75 tonner. Actually, it's a literal two or three points more in most places. IMHO, that doesn't make it OP, it just makes it a budget 75-tonner...that can't fit 75-tonner equipment. Meh.

I've been leveling them. I'm not impressed at all. It is a very stiff chassis, can't get out of its own way.

Quote

If you are just peeking with them, then you are minimizing exposure.

Unless the boxes that house the weapon are enormous, high mounts are better than low mounts even if they are where the Roughneck has them.

They literally are that big. They jut out further forward than your CT and they raise higher than your head. You can hit them from any angle regardless of what the pilot is doing.

Them being high and useful (i.e. not missiles, usually) is the only thing that stops them from being completely 'Mech killing, but if you are doing the usual fire and twist while you peak, your ST is going to get #rekt as your gun barrels catch the return fire. That seems to be how it usually goes. As a result, I face stare a little more than I would prefer to in a 'Mech with this general shape and broad torso.

[Mole]

Can we please do away with this silly myth that high mounted hardpoints make a 'mech superior? If this were really the case then the following 'mechs would be heavily in the Meta right now: Blackjack, Hunchback, Rifleman, Catapult, Jagermech

What's that? Those 'mechs are not in the meta tryhard 'mechpile right now? But they have such delicious high mounts!

Edited by Mole, 21 April 2017 - 10:14 AM.

[MechaBattler]

I agree with Bandito, fixed convergence for torso mounts would balance some of the disparity in hardpoint placement.

Also people accusing PGI of power creeping for cash. Should consider the fact there are better mechs for civil war packs. Mechs with high mounts.

Edited by MechaBattler, 21 April 2017 - 10:15 AM.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 April 2017 - 10:11 AM, said:

It has the armor of a 75 tonner. Actually, it's a literal two or three points more in most places. IMHO, that doesn't make it OP, it just makes it a budget 75-tonner...that can't fit 75-tonner equipment. Meh.

I've been leveling them. I'm not impressed at all. It is a very stiff chassis, can't get out of its own way.



They literally are that big. They jut out further forward than your CT and they raise higher than your head. You can hit them from any angle regardless of what the pilot is doing.

Them being high and useful (i.e. not missiles, usually) is the only thing that stops them from being completely 'Mech killing, but if you are doing the usual fire and twist while you peak, your ST is going to get #rekt as your gun barrels catch the return fire. That seems to be how it usually goes. As a result, I face stare a little more than I would prefer to in a 'Mech with this general shape and broad torso.

It's mostly coming doing to tech (Clan XL) than location at this point (not that location isn't important)

We still see Timberwolves with PPC-Gauss, and what holds that together is literally Clan XL.

Outside of the Grasshopper-5P, you're not going to see much peeking and poking from something like a BJ, which got structure nerfs years ago.

Hunchback-IICs are still rather fragile in a brawl, but yet have awesome sustainability at range due to hardpoints AND Clan XL...

Shadowhawks were a thing once upon a time (used sparingly now for brawl decks) because everything at the time had IS XL (no Clan XL to deal with).

IS XL vs Clan XL is still the dealbreaker.

[Khobai]

Quote

Can we please do away with this silly myth that high mounted hardpoints make a 'mech superior? If this were really the case then the following 'mechs would be heavily in the Meta right now: Blackjack, Hunchback, Rifleman, Catapult, Jagermech

and some of those mechs would still be meta still if clan battlemechs hadnt come along

clan battlemechs like the kodiak are just incredibly overpowered

high hardpoints definitely contribute to making a mech superior. theyre just not the only factor. clan XL is a huge factor too. and clan endosteel. and clan weapons. and pretty much all things clan that PGI has failed to balance.

Edited by Khobai, 21 April 2017 - 10:18 AM.

[Mystere]

Promessa, on 21 April 2017 - 10:08 AM, said:

Can someone explain to me why weapons mounted on arms that can't move side to side (no lower actuators) would have automatic convergence? All the weapons have gimbals is the reason, right? Why wouldn't they work in the torsos then? Arm convergence idea only makes sense with lower arm actuators. I'm gonna avoid a huge write-up right now, but I felt like trash talking this idea just a bit more again.

Just assume that when someone said "arm-mounted", they also meant "with lower arm actuators". The former is just easier to type.

[PlayerUnknown]

brroleg, on 21 April 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

All new "mechpacks" comes with lots of high mounted hardpoints. Guess its cause people want to pay money to win, so they dont buy mechs with low hardpoints. And in result game goes to the direction where all mechs are the same high mounted hardpoint boats and only has difference in color and cosmetic shape.
I dont see how this could be undone, except maybe if PGI will find another way to earn money except selling "mechpacks".

that is not true, when u can buy the mechs with high mounts using cbills,

i think its because you do not know how to use high mounts correctly and encounter those who do a lot on the battle field.

if you like add me Jayrtech and i will show you how to, what to and how to fight with them. if you like.

[Jonny Taco]

MechaBattler, on 21 April 2017 - 10:14 AM, said:

I agree with Bandito, fixed convergence for torso mounts would balance some of the disparity in hardpoint placement.

Also people accusing PGI of power creeping for cash. Should consider the fact there are better mechs for civil war packs. Mechs with high mounts.

I like the idea of creating an incentive for lower arm mounted weapons in some way however I feel this may be a little bit to steep. How about have a fixed convergence for torso weapons however having an active target (the one you're locked onto) will change the convergence to meet it? This could make arm mounted weapons superior for long range and mid range anti ecm work (along with close in against fast targets) compared to high mounted hull weapons which are superior for fighting in a "hull down" position.

[MechaBattler]

Jonny Taco, on 21 April 2017 - 11:08 AM, said:

I like the idea of creating an incentive for lower arm mounted weapons in some way however I feel this may be a little bit to steep. How about have a fixed convergence for torso weapons however having an active target (the one you're locked onto) will change the convergence to meet it? This could make arm mounted weapons superior for long range and mid range anti ecm work (along with close in against fast targets) compared to high mounted hull weapons which are superior for fighting in a "hull down" position.

It would also create a reason to rework infotech.

[Y E O N N E]

Mole, on 21 April 2017 - 10:13 AM, said:

Can we please do away with this silly myth that high mounted hardpoints make a 'mech superior? If this were really the case then the following 'mechs would be heavily in the Meta right now: Blackjack, Hunchback, Rifleman, Catapult, Jagermech

What's that? Those 'mechs are not in the meta tryhard 'mechpile right now? But they have such delicious high mounts!

It's not a myth.

Those 'Mechs aren't the meta because they have to use isXL engines AND because there are heavier 'Mechs with similarly high mounts. Those 'Mechs are called the Timberwolf, Ebon Jaguar, Hellbringer, Night Gyr, Warhammer (RIP), Grasshopper (soon to be RIP), Hunchback IIC, and Kodiak.