88 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

Ghogiel, on 24 May 2017 - 02:08 PM, said:

actually try the FS9. I had a really hard time ggclosing and a WHK in the back, even the KGC wasn't straight forward.

Very familiar with it. While I can snake in past most assaults it's hard to pivot in behind them and stick there. All for it getting some mobility buffs on nearly all lights.

Though I was shocked at how good the PTN is at trading with 2 LPLs now and an Urbie with 2 LL, 4MGs and full survival quirks is hilariously viable in pug queue.

[Druarc]

Has anyone done proper testing on this?

[Hopeasusi]

MischiefSC, on 24 May 2017 - 10:51 AM, said:

Atlas and King Crab used to let you go 340+ for good mobility and usually did. They also, panther included, have some serious durability quirks.

Linebacker carries less firepower than my Huntsman, which is 50 tons and the same speed. Your firestarter can carry just about the same firepower as a Linebacker at 30 tons less and much faster though less durability. Without serious mobility quirks it would be useless. So it's about as nimble as the worst lights and average/good lights/mediums.

Because mobility is a balancing factor and now a more useful one.

Show me a firestarter build that can match a quite cool running 5 cMPL build, then we can talk about similar firepower. Linebacker is a energy/missileboat due to it's limited weapon tonnage, yes. So dont put dakka in it, simple as that.

Just give one reason to take a firestarter(or even better adder) to QP instead of linebacker. Cause I can't find any. Linebacker does everything better except top speed(everything better than adder). If you want a small fast mech, a 40t viper is better in everyway to the FS9.

Linebacker needs to be faster and more agile than mechs of the same size, not more agile than much smaller mechs.
This is what the whole thing is about, small mechs having the mobility advantage against bigger mechs. As that is pretty much the only advantage they can have.
Or can you give us an advantage for lighter mechs that is not mobility? If you cannot, this is the only way.

Is that so hard to grasp?

Lighter mechs more mobile than heavier. The one big thing we need to have a meaning for lighter mechs other than saving tonnage in FP.
All you bark about it, is that some heavies need it to match OP mech. Guess what, the OP mechs are ones that need nerfs, not buffs for mid tier mechs. That only leads to more powercreep. It's time stop that.

Ps. A huntsman is a lot slower than Linebacker and has less armor, so it's only fair that it get more firepower. In my suggestion LBK would still be much faster with better acceleration, but just not faster at turning on the spot.

Think and give proper arguments to any side and don't base them on only 1-2 different chassis. That is meaningless rope pulling. Look at the whole picture, pretty please

Edited by Hopeasusi, 24 May 2017 - 09:00 PM.

[Xetelian]

Khobai, on 24 May 2017 - 06:10 AM, said:

I have to disagree with bigger engines giving more agility. the whole primary purpose of engine decoupling was to prevent heavies with bigger engines from having an agility advantage over mediums.

there should be an average baseline agility for each tonnage. and all mechs should fall within no more than say a 10% variation from that baseline. that allows for some variation since some mechs should be more agile than others, but prevents any outliers from existing.

I was fine with bigger engines giving bigger benefits to agility, I mean, that is kind of the logical step when you upgraded your engine as high as possible, that the trade off in firepower would be made up in mobility and agility. Now it doesn't matter and that doesn't make sound scientific sense. Faster top speed is barely worth the weight, I can't imagine anyone going up 12 tons of engine for 5 kph.


Right now we have really bad accel/decel on 100 ton assaults and people that don't pilot them are perfectly happy with that. In my agility for 100 tonners thread there are plenty of people who **** on my complaint that the 100 tonners didn't need the severe nerf. I personally thought the engine decoupling was to keep the huge engine cXL carriers in line, making the TBR, SCR and KDK not significantly better than the Thunderbolt, Shadowhawk, and Atlas.

Now it seems like everything below 100 tons is fine and can be upped with the mobility skill tree.

[Tincan Nightmare]

James The Fox Dixon, on 24 May 2017 - 05:57 AM, said:

In universe explanation is that the Marauder design has been in constant production since 2612. That's 438 years of being produced till 3050. It was designed at the height of the Star League using Star League era tech for everything outside of weapons, armor, internal structure, heat sinks, and engines. Meaning that its capacitors, myomar bundles, etc... are all more robust then the Timber Wolf.

Also, the Clans didn't have the schematics for the original Marauder and reversed engineered the few they had to make the IIC variant. As far as I know, the Clans never could make a production version of the Marauder.

Another big difference is that the Timber Wolf is an omnimech while the Marauder is a battlemech. The Omnimech is basically a frame that you bolt on various pods. It's great for altering loadouts, but sucks due to the electronics to power the drivetrain is not tailored like a battlemech version is. Those components are built into the mech and takes a complete redesign to change them out.

The way all MW games have handled it is very simplistic, except MPBT due to no customization. You get to customize everything except for the electronics and drivetrain of the mech. The design philosophy in the games was that mechs are nothing more than gun bags with just a cosmetic change to how it looks. A 35 ton mech handles exactly the same way as a 100 ton mech with no alterations to agility.The way PGI handled it is much better than what was done before and brings the fluff to the fore. In the fluff, Marauders are more nimble then the Timber Wolf and always has been.

What universe are you referencing any of this from, because it isn't BT. In no way would a Marauder be considered more durable than a Timber. The Clans refined and expanded Star League technology, while the Inner Sphere clubbed themselves backwards with the Succession Wars. Mechs like the Marauder were in production in the Inner Sphere for centuries because the had practically lost the ability to produce new designs, and most mechs were walking off automated assembly lines that they could barely keep running. Saying a IS Marauder had superior and more durable technology to a Timber, is like saying a WWI biplane was more advanced than a modern jet fighter. A timber is faster, has better armor, and carries weapons that hit harder and shoot farther than anything a Marauder can bring. In fact, a 75 ton Timber could probably take on a 100 ton Marauder II and win with the disparity in technology levels between the IS and the Clans.

As far as the IIC designs go, they were redesigns and improvements over the older Star League versions, built with far more advanced Clan tech. It's not that the Clans couldn't build a Marauder, it's that doing so would be like someone building a Sherman tank when they can build Abrams, totally backward.

And how is the drivetrain of an Omni any different than a standard mech? Yes it has modular equipment pods for weapons, ammo, and electronics like ECM or Artemis. But no Omni (or standard mech for that matter) can swap out engines in BT like we can in MWO. They are built around a specific engine and skeleton, which never changes, which is the case for ANY mech, Omni or standard. Marauders were never more 'nimble' than Timbers in lore or 'fluff'. If anything, the higher average speeds for Clan mechs, due to superior XL engines and lighter and more compact construction materials, weapons, and equipment meant that most Clan forces were far more mobile than IS forces.

Lets not confuse the issue with incorrect 'lore'.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Tincan Nightmare, on 25 May 2017 - 02:03 AM, said:

What universe are you referencing any of this from, because it isn't BT. In no way would a Marauder be considered more durable than a Timber. The Clans refined and expanded Star League technology, while the Inner Sphere clubbed themselves backwards with the Succession Wars. Mechs like the Marauder were in production in the Inner Sphere for centuries because the had practically lost the ability to produce new designs, and most mechs were walking off automated assembly lines that they could barely keep running. Saying a IS Marauder had superior and more durable technology to a Timber, is like saying a WWI biplane was more advanced than a modern jet fighter. A timber is faster, has better armor, and carries weapons that hit harder and shoot farther than anything a Marauder can bring. In fact, a 75 ton Timber could probably take on a 100 ton Marauder II and win with the disparity in technology levels between the IS and the Clans.

As far as the IIC designs go, they were redesigns and improvements over the older Star League versions, built with far more advanced Clan tech. It's not that the Clans couldn't build a Marauder, it's that doing so would be like someone building a Sherman tank when they can build Abrams, totally backward.

And how is the drivetrain of an Omni any different than a standard mech? Yes it has modular equipment pods for weapons, ammo, and electronics like ECM or Artemis. But no Omni (or standard mech for that matter) can swap out engines in BT like we can in MWO. They are built around a specific engine and skeleton, which never changes, which is the case for ANY mech, Omni or standard. Marauders were never more 'nimble' than Timbers in lore or 'fluff'. If anything, the higher average speeds for Clan mechs, due to superior XL engines and lighter and more compact construction materials, weapons, and equipment meant that most Clan forces were far more mobile than IS forces.

Lets not confuse the issue with incorrect 'lore'.

I never said it was more durable. I said it was more agile and the TRO bears this point out, especially 3050, as that was part of the fluff for the Marauder. This was also in many of the 3050 novels that covered the clan invasion. When I said it was more robust, I was specifically referring to the electrical components and myomar bundles that comprises the things that alters pitch, yaw, and twisting. Yes, those components are more robust for that particular mech.

I'd counter that the Timber Wolf is more akin to the F22 and the Marauder with the original Star League components being the F16 latest version. They're close, with the Timber Wolf having a slight edge. I also never claimed that the Marauder had superior tech, so please refrain from putting words into my mouth.

Higher speed does not mean greater agility. It only means that you can go faster due to bigger engine sizes. Yes, the Timber Wolf is faster than the Marauder, but it is not as agile.

As for the fluff surrounding the Marauder and the Clans they did not have the schematics to the mech. Clan scientists reversed engineered a Marauder and created the base IIC variant. They used Clan weapons, armor, and electronics to be superior to the original Marauder, but it was 10 tons heavier that was empty weight. As I said, they didn't have the specs when they left the IS for the original Marauder.

All of this information is in the TROs and in the novels so it is canon. Just because you don't believe it to be canon is on you.

[S p a n i a r d]

If the OP's suggestion is implemented,

(~10-15% variance in agility scores among mechs in the same weight class)

guess what will happen?

> Timber Wolf, Kodiak, Night Gyr, Black Knight, Banshee Meta. Some of the mechs on the list might be wrong but the point is, we will still see the usual mechs in-game.

A 10-15% variation in agility score is not enough for players to hesitate picking the Meta Mechs.

I think that's why PGI modified the Executioners, Linebackers, Highlanders (yep, they are more agile now), and other mechs etc. so they can grab the attention from the usual picks.

And again my usual argument. I'm ok with a few mechs having the agility of those in the lower weight class since those in the lower weight have acceptable agility anyways. And these agile "broken" mechs are those not usually picked due to some form of disadvantage (like lighter weapon loadouts)

Want some agility in Assault mechs? Take the EXE. No Quad UAC10 Dakka though. In the Heavies? Linebacker. But 10 tons lighter than the Meta TBR/Night Gyr. Do you really want that? Take your pick.

The choices are not so obvious now as it was before.

Fine by me.

Edited by S p a n i a r d, 25 May 2017 - 03:15 AM.

[Xetelian]

Cub, on 25 May 2017 - 03:29 AM, said:

Also, just did a calculation of MASC on the Spirit Bear with it's acceleration 6.19. A 180% increase (the rate at which MASC boosts speed) of 6 amounts to 16.8 acceleration speed (for a very limited time.)

To compare, these are the acc/dec rates of other Assaults:
Assualts
Atlas – D = Acc: 6.19 / Dec: 11
Awesome – BQ = Acc: 15.41 / Dec: 17.5
Banshee – LM = Acc: 17.72 / Dec: 15.52
Battlemaster – 1G = Acc: 20.02 / Dec: 18.23
Cyclops 11-A = Acc: 24.63 / Dec: 18.88
Direwolf Prime = Acc: 6.19 / Dec: 11
Executioner Prime = Acc: 24.63 / Dec: 17.89
Gargoyle Prime = Acc: 29.26 / Dec: 23.12
Highlander – HM = Acc: 22.33 / Dec: 18.05
Highlander IIC = Acc: 20.02 / Dec: 17.22
King Crab – 000 = Acc: 6.19 / Dec: 11
Kodiak -3 = Acc: 6.19 / Dec: 11
Marauder IIC = Acc: 13.11 / Dec: 15.58
Mauler – 1R = Acc: 10.79 / Dec: 13.88
Stalker – 5M = Acc: 13.11 / Dec: 15.58
Supernova – 1 = Acc: 15.41 / Dec: 15.55
Victor – DS = Acc: 24.63 / Dec: 21.25
Warhawk Prime = Acc: 17.72 / Dec: 17.35
Zeus – 6S = 26.94 / Dec: 22.18

Why does the HGN get 22 accel while the Atlas gets 6 and the Stalker gets 13?

Why does the EXE (95t) get 24? When the 100t spirit bear gets 6?



Going to spread this around a few times.

[Dracol]

Xetelian, on 25 May 2017 - 03:56 AM, said:

Why does the HGN get 22 accel while the Atlas gets 6 and the Stalker gets 13?
Why does the EXE (95t) get 24? When the 100t spirit bear gets 6?
Going to spread this around a few times.

For the same reasons they were never goto, meta mechs before skill tree.
.

[Hopeasusi]

S p a n i a r d, on 25 May 2017 - 03:14 AM, said:

If the OP's suggestion is implemented,

(~10-15% variance in agility scores among mechs in the same weight class)

guess what will happen?

> Timber Wolf, Kodiak, Night Gyr, Black Knight, Banshee Meta. Some of the mechs on the list might be wrong but the point is, we will still see the usual mechs in-game.

A 10-15% variation in agility score is not enough for players to hesitate picking the Meta Mechs.

I think that's why PGI modified the Executioners, Linebackers, Highlanders (yep, they are more agile now), and other mechs etc. so they can grab the attention from the usual picks.

And again my usual argument. I'm ok with a few mechs having the agility of those in the lower weight class since those in the lower weight have acceptable agility anyways. And these agile "broken" mechs are those not usually picked due to some form of disadvantage (like lighter weapon loadouts)

Want some agility in Assault mechs? Take the EXE. No Quad UAC10 Dakka though. In the Heavies? Linebacker. But 10 tons lighter than the Meta TBR/Night Gyr. Do you really want that? Take your pick.

The choices are not so obvious now as it was before.

Fine by me.

So you mean there is nothing else to balance mechs than agility? That news to me atleast.

and its 20-30% between best and worst in a class. 10+10 = 20, 15+15= 30 Maybe you calculate abit mate.
Also you forget that if some heavies have better agility than light mechs, there is absolutely zero reason to use a light.

30% agility difference is easily enough, if you combine it with some other form of balance. Or are you saying 20-30% difference is nothing? That much more damage would be flat out OP.

You need to balance all mechs, not just the best and the middle ground. This what has made meta so limited, PGI has basicly forgotten over half of the mech in game when it comes to balance. It also seems you want this too.

Unless of course you can give a solid reason to pick Adder instead of Linebacker other than tonnage. As linebacker is now faster, more agile, has more weaponry and far more armor. Cause you know tonnage does nothing in QP

[S p a n i a r d]

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 04:09 AM, said:

Also you forget that if some heavies have better agility than light mechs, there is absolutely zero reason to use a light.

Wait, whut? Do Linebackers (the controversial mech) reach 130-140 kph? Let's just replace Oxides with Linebackers, zero reason to use lights anyway. Furthermore, let's not use lights in CWs. Replace the 35 ton slot with 65 tons. Downgrade the Kodiak into a 70 ton to compensate since Linebackers are super OP anyway. And ECM is sh1t. No reason to use lights anyway.

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 04:09 AM, said:

Unless of course you can give a solid reason to pick Adder instead of Linebacker other than tonnage. As linebacker is now faster, more agile, has more weaponry and far more armor. Cause you know tonnage does nothing in QP

Nope I don't have a solid reason. Because Adder was trash right from the start.

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 04:09 AM, said:

You need to balance all mechs, not just the best and the middle ground. This what has made meta so limited, PGI has basicly forgotten over half of the mech in game when it comes to balance. It also seems you want this too.

Yup. That's why they decreased KDK and TBR's agility (and other meta mechs) and increased others' so there will be potential picks for other mechs of the same class. Having more choices post-patch, is an improvement for me compared to the usual-pick-meta

Edited by S p a n i a r d, 25 May 2017 - 04:52 AM.

[Hopeasusi]

S p a n i a r d, on 25 May 2017 - 04:47 AM, said:

Wait, whut? Do Linebackers (the controversial mech) reach 130-140 kph? Let's just replace Oxides with Linebackers, zero reason to use lights anyway. Furthermore, let's not use lights in CWs. Replace the 35 ton slot with 65 tons. Downgrade the Kodiak into a 70 ton to compensate since Linebackers are super OP anyway. And ECM is sh1t. No reason to use lights anyway.



Nope I don't have a solid reason. Because Adder was trash right from the start.



Yup. That's why they decreased KDK and TBR's agility (and other meta mechs) and increased others' so there will be potential picks for other mechs of the same class. Having more choices post-patch, is an improvement for me compared to the usual-pick-meta

Linebacker is a example, not the problem itself.
In my model it can still be a lot faster and more agile than a Loki. So there is the difference you need.

How do you get to oxide from adder or FS9, just how? Cause you seem to cherry pick to "justify" your rant.

You lost you creditably when you said no one needs to care for adder, that means you don't give damn about balance.
Even that bad mech needs to be made useful and you cant do that, if heavies are more agile than it. Literally the only think you can give to a light except tonnage.

No one in their right mind uses any other clan light than cheetah in FP. Cause its just so much better than the rest.

So they chanced meta picks, but still left all others to rot. THAT IS BAD BALANCE, everyone with even half brain understands this.

Agility needs to go mainly by size to give light mechs a proper role in QP and FP, other than tonnage limit. The limitness of lights also is shown in FP as everyone want more tonnage to be able to take bigger mechs.

You cannot balance only few mechs for meta and not care for others, if you want a healthy game. You need to balance ALL mechs to be useful. Not identical, but good enough to have a valid reason to be used. Lore or the looks are not a valid reason in a PvP game, acceptable performance is the only one.

MW5 can be a hot mess without balance, cause that will be a PvE game. BUT MWO is a PvP game, where balance is the most important thing. It start by not pissing on the least used and overall worst mech class.
Agility is the key to make light mechs good. Fast heavies just need to fast compared to other heavies, not to everything.

Ps. Meta is still pretty much the same, except kodiak and almost all good IS mechs. Night Gyr is still a god among mere mortals.

[S p a n i a r d]

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

How do you get to oxide from adder or FS9, just how? Cause you seem to cherry pick to "justify" your rant.

How, oh, how? Common sense. Because you said that if a heavy (a 92 kph fatazz) is more agile than a light, then there is zero reason to use a light. Is Oxide a light?

You figure.

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

You lost you creditably when you said no one needs to care for adder, that means you don't give damn about balance.
Even that bad mech needs to be made useful and you cant do that, if heavies are more agile than it. Literally the only think you can give to a light except tonnage.
.

No, **you lost credibility in my eyes by saying that if a Linebacker is more agile than a light mech, then there is zero reason to use lights. Linebacker is more agile than light mechs right now. Are there zero lights in CW? QP? Are Linebackers the only pic for Heavy Clan Mechs right now?

Obviously, no.

My point in saying that the Adder was trash, was not to never care about it, but that it was not an adequate example for the balance issues post-patch since that mech has been avoided like a plague even before all this. By using a long-time low quality mech and stating it as if the latest patch caused it, you were actually the one who's doing the cherry picking. Few people using Adder is a different balance issue.

Hopeasusi, on 25 May 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

Ps. Meta is still pretty much the same, except kodiak and almost all good IS mechs. Night Gyr is still a god among mere mortals.

still pretty much the same? Not really from what I've seen. And you claim that your solution will give the cure for all these balance woes? I doubt that.

Edited by S p a n i a r d, 25 May 2017 - 06:38 PM.

[Athom83]

Xetelian, on 25 May 2017 - 03:56 AM, said:

Why does the HGN get 22 accel while the Atlas gets 6 and the Stalker gets 13?
Why does the EXE (95t) get 24? When the 100t spirit bear gets 6?
Going to spread this around a few times.

I've said this before in another thread;

Athom83, on 25 May 2017 - 01:28 PM, said:

People keep using the Banshee and Executioner as examples of PGI messing up their own values for 95 ton mechs. However that is somewhat unfounded for two reasons. 1) They are the only 95 ton mechs in the game. 2) They were both designed, lore wise, as exceptionally fast and maneuverable mechs for their size. When looking at 90 and 85 ton mechs, like the Mauler and Stalker, you can see they actually did somewhat align their values properly. I will agree they may have been a bit extreme in cases, both high and low, but give it some time before the final set values actually arrive. And before anybody counters with "Look at the Cyclops/Highlander", again both of those were designed to be extra mobile to keep up with smaller units.

Quite simply; The Atlas, King Crab, and Kodiak were all "average/low" mobility mechs while mechs like the Highlander, Banshee, Cyclops, and Executioner were all designed as "high" mobility in lore. If the Banshee had a "average" mobility in lore, you would see its performance halfway between the Atlas and Stalker, at about 9. The reason it seems so weird on the surface is that in some weight classes (95 ton class, 85 ton class, etc) we only have the mechs built lore wise as "mobile" while the class above an/or bellow only have the "average" and "low" mobility mechs in that class. The best way to actually visualize the desync actually working is to have more mechs of various mobilities in every weightclass.

[Tincan Nightmare]

James The Fox Dixon, on 25 May 2017 - 02:48 AM, said:

I never said it was more durable. I said it was more agile and the TRO bears this point out, especially 3050, as that was part of the fluff for the Marauder. This was also in many of the 3050 novels that covered the clan invasion. When I said it was more robust, I was specifically referring to the electrical components and myomar bundles that comprises the things that alters pitch, yaw, and twisting. Yes, those components are more robust for that particular mech.

I'd counter that the Timber Wolf is more akin to the F22 and the Marauder with the original Star League components being the F16 latest version. They're close, with the Timber Wolf having a slight edge. I also never claimed that the Marauder had superior tech, so please refrain from putting words into my mouth.

Higher speed does not mean greater agility. It only means that you can go faster due to bigger engine sizes. Yes, the Timber Wolf is faster than the Marauder, but it is not as agile.

As for the fluff surrounding the Marauder and the Clans they did not have the schematics to the mech. Clan scientists reversed engineered a Marauder and created the base IIC variant. They used Clan weapons, armor, and electronics to be superior to the original Marauder, but it was 10 tons heavier that was empty weight. As I said, they didn't have the specs when they left the IS for the original Marauder.

All of this information is in the TROs and in the novels so it is canon. Just because you don't believe it to be canon is on you.

Please cite your source material, because no TRO ever written states that the Marauder is more nimble than a Timber. TRO 3050 pg. 174 explains how the various successor states upgraded their Marauders with recovered tech, no where on that page does it say that the 400 year old Marauder was more agile or nimble than a modern state of the art Omnimech. Thanks to issues with the unseen, Marauders didn't pop back up until TRO Project Phoenix on pg. 48, and again no reference to any agility or 'nimbleness' greater to a Timber.

And again which novel. It wasn't in any of the Blood of Kerensky trilogy books, none of the characters piloted (or on the clan side faced) a Marauder. Pretty sure it was never mentioned at all in any of the later books like Assumption of Risk, Natural Selection, Wolf Pack, or Blood of Heroes.

Something isn't 'canon' because you claim it is. I've got pretty much every single sourcebook or TRO or novel uploaded on my computer, so please enlighten me to which book you are getting this 'information' from that is so 'canon'.

Hell here is a copy off the Sarna website for the IIC page.
One of the most notable IIC BattleMechs, the Marauder IIC is based upon one of the most iconic 'Mechs in existence, the Marauder.
Touted as one of the most effective 'Mechs of all time, the Marauder saw wide usage during the Star League era by all the Great Houses. The design was also much favored by both the Star League Defense Force's Regular and Royal unit as well as its famed Gunslingers, with many examples taken on Operation EXODUS. The belief that the Marauder was a precursor to a new 'Mech design paradigm disappeared in the Inner Sphere as the Succession Wars dragged on; however, in the same year as the Second Succession War broke out the Clans developed an advanced refit of the venerable design later dubbed the Marauder IIC, utilizing technology already far in advance of that rapidly disappearing in the Successor States.^[4]
It is to the credit of its original engineers that no production variants of the Marauder IIC appeared until a wellspring of new technology emerged in the 3050s and '60s, with Clan Star Adder introducing a visually refreshed model carrying the then-newly developed Heavy Lasers that quickly spread to the Cloud Cobras, Goliath Scorpions, Snow Ravens, Blood Spirits and Diamond Sharks. ^[5] The efforts of the mercantile Sharks would result in the further spread of the design to the Inner Sphere-based Invading Clans, followed by Clans Jade Falcon and Ghost Bear introducing new Marauder IIC variants and constructing new productions lines for them on Sudeten and Satalice respectively during the Word of Blake Jihad.^[1]
Weapons and Equipment[edit]

As with the Warhammer IIC, the Marauder IIC is ten-tons heavier than its Inner Sphere progenitor, pushing it into the assault weight class, but otherwise the design matches the original's ground speed through the use of a 340-rated standard Fusion Engine. Though both designs carry eleven and half tons of armor, the Marauder IIC's use of more advanced Ferro-Fibrous plating gives it superior protection, with an Endo Steel frame freeing up weight. While structurally the Marauder IIC appears to offer little advantage over the LosTech refitted Marauders introduced by the Successor States, the blatant superiority of Clan weaponry allows the design to pound its opponents to pieces in short order.^[4]
Built around the Extended Range Particle Projector Cannon, one of the most powerful weapons in the Clan arsenal, the Marauder IIC's weapon layout is typical of the standard Marauder, each pod-like forearm carrying an ER PPC paired with Medium Pulse Lasers. Where the Marauder IIC differs is with its torso weaponry, replacing the top-mounted autocannon and its vulnerable ammunition-feed linkage with another ER PPC, and adding a set of four ER Small Lasers. Twenty-one double heat sinks keep heat levels manageable, with an enterprising MechWarrior able to use volley fire to keep up a steady barrage of fire.^[

And heres the standard Marauder page from Sarna.
The Marauder was first built by General Motors in 2612 for use as an attack and direct fire support BattleMech. The first 'Mech to diverge from the traditional humanoid shape of previous machines, the Marauder was one of the most well-known 'Mechs in existence and originally meant to usher in a new generation of 'Mechs. Unfortunately, with the fall of the Star League, this new generation never quite materialized. On its own merits though the Marauder was a devastatingly powerful 'Mech, outclassed only by larger machines like the Stalker and BattleMaster.^[6][7]
During the years of the Star League the Marauder was a favorite in the Gunslinger Program thanks to its tremendous firepower, while its advanced electronics endeared it to many battalion and regimental commanders. On the hellish battlefields of the Succession Wars, massed formations of Marauders proved devastating as shock units in breaking through enemy lines. However, the rarity of these 'Mechs (House Liao only fielded several hundred Marauders total in 2828) often meant they had to be paired with other, similar 'Mechs such as the Warhammer and Thunderbolt.^[6][7]
When the Helm Memory Core was recovered, the Marauder was an obvious candidate for lostech upgrades. House Davion were among the first to field an updated variant, but their eagerness backfired when House Kurita captured Quentin - and its Marauder factory - in the War of 3039. With the Kuritans in possession of this first variant, the Federated Commonwealth decided to build a second using a different configuration. Other lostech-inspired variants were also built in time for the Clan Invasion.^[8]
A second revitalization of the Marauder occurred at the hands of the Capellan Confederation, though notably they had never before built the 'Mech themselves. On behalf of Ceres Metals Industries, the Chancellor himself, Sun-Tzu Liao, negotiated a deal to acquire the design from General Motors in exchange for allowing HildCo Interplanetary to resume exporting its products to the Federated Suns. While a success, disturbing rumors from the Periphery reported a number of these seemingly backwater realms fielding updated Marauders of their own, with origins suspected to be of a sinister nature.^[9]
Weapons and Equipment[edit]

The Marauder carried a payload dedicated to long-range firepower in the form of two Magna Hellstar PPCs and a GM Whirlwind Autocannon/5. These three weapons all had similar range profiles that allowed the Marauder use them to their maximum effect at long ranges. The PPCs were carried in armored gauntlets, matching the same configuration as the Warhammer, but the arms' versatile ball-and-socket joints provided a faster traverse rate and superior field of fire. Compact enough to be carried in the arms the Hellstar PPCs were also durable enough to withstand heavy hand-to-hand combat, allowing the Marauder to bludgeon opponents into scrap. The autocannon was mounted atop the right torso and fed by one ton of ammunition in the left torso. Added as an afterthought, its connection to the main chassis was tenuous and a successful hit could easily disable the system, while the gun itself was often temperamental. If the enemy was able to close the range, the Marauder could rely on its two Magna Mk II Medium Lasers, also mounted in the gauntlets, which provided adequate defense against other 'Mechs.^[6][7]
The once-unique silhouette of the Marauder made it much harder to target than the more common humanoid models. It also originally carried eleven and a half tons of special Valiant Lamellor armor which was less massive and superior at distributing kinetic and thermal energy than other standard armor types. As the knowledge for its manufacture was lost though, many Marauders became a patchwork quilt as sections were damaged and had to be replaced. Sixteen heat sinks easily allowed a competent MechWarrior to keep their waste heat under control, while a powerful nineteen-ton fusion engine gave it a decent cruising speed of 43.2 km/h.^[6][7]
The Marauder was not without its flaws, potent though it was. In addition to the weak linkage between its autocannon and chassis, the rotation rings connecting the chassis with the leg assemblies was a similar weak point in the design. Many Marauder pilots took to mounting improvised armoring around these points in an attempt to protect these vulnerabilities. The powerful HiRez tracking system, located in the forward section of the 'Mech, was also known for impeding the pilot's field of view.^[6]
So where in there does it state anything about this agility of a Marauder. I'm not even saying yay or nay about the issue of engine desync, I'm just tired of people using 'lore' incorrectly to argue points.

[justcallme A S H]

Hopeasusi, on 23 May 2017 - 08:45 AM, said:

So that there is a reason for having a BIG engine. Now big engine isn't really worth it, cause you only gain max speed for massive weight. Of course turning and twist would not be in any relation to the engine size.

Not quite correct.

You also get acceleration as it's calc'd at a percentage of max speed. So having a lower engine means accell is also less. This was noted down in the patch notes from memory so it's not *just* top speed alone.

[Shifty McSwift]

Reading through this it has become apparent to me that quite a few people don't really want balance at all, they want what amounts a mess of classes and weight distinctions that can vary from a light with assault armor to an assault with light speeds.

I guess this explains a lot really and why we have such a mixed bag. There are people who actually want an unbalanced and very slim meta game, where only 2 or 3 mechs out of the hundreds are usable. I do hope the developers ignore these folks honestly.

[Chound]

Hopeasusi, on 23 May 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

Or a 65tonner being more agile than 35 tonners.

We don't have this consistancy I am proposing, we only got a promise for one.

Ps. No offense, but Exard3k don't talk BS if you have no idea what you are talking about.

The formulas you gave are the same that are the base values implemented with te may patch. some of these are modified by skill nodes so a fully skilled mech compared to an unskilled mech would have a difference. PGI did a big nerf on anything that would be using the skill tree so normal performance would require all the nodes.

[Chound]

S p a n i a r d, on 25 May 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

How, oh, how? Common sense. Because you said that if a heavy (a 92 kph fatazz) is more agile than a light, then there is zero reason to use a light. Is Oxide a light?

the oxide is the IS Jenner hero, ti's a light mech 35T just like the firestarter the oxide is a little faster due to a larger engine

[S p a n i a r d]

Chound, on 26 May 2017 - 01:21 AM, said:

the oxide is the IS Jenner hero, ti's a light mech 35T just like the firestarter the oxide is a little faster due to a larger engine

minor mixup. Of course I was trying to refer to the Clan light mech

Edited by S p a n i a r d, 26 May 2017 - 01:52 AM.