41 replies to this topic

[Mighty Spike]

Athom83, on 09 August 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

Yes. If you like how the Shadowhawk plays, then you'll really enjoy the Roughneck as hardpoints and hitboxes are pretty similar.

Hm okay thx. I ill give it a try
greets o7

[Dee Eight]

Thats a reasonable comparison. The Roughnecks are heavier, jump jet-less Shadow Hawks. That can run multiple large bulky ACs, LBs, RACs, UACs, etc.

Edited by Dee Eight, 09 August 2017 - 07:52 PM.

[Aramuside]

Dee Eight, on 09 August 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

Thats a reasonable comparison. The Roughnecks are heavier, jump jet-less Shadow Hawks. That can run multiple large bulky ACs, LBs, RACs, UACs, etc.

Just to add - Shadowhawks with very good protective quirks.

[D V Devnull]

Felbombling, on 08 August 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

I've gone from 140 million C-Bills down to about 20 million since the new tech dropped. So much to try out, now the Roughneck becomes available for C-Bills. [expletive deleted] my life.

You sound to me like someone who purchases the Mechs before they try to design a loadout. I learned quickly to always have a working design before even thinking of purchasing. Try using the "View in MechLab" Button (click on a Mech picture, NOT the 'Add to Cart' Button, then you'll find it hiding in the bottom right corner) in the Store. In the following display, you can then prototype a loadout. Once you have something you think you'll like, pull up Smurfy's MWO MechLab @ http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab in your browser and copy the data across. After copying it over, you can then use the "Save & Share Loadout" link to make the Address Bar provide something you can BookMark to pull up the design any time you want. After that, enjoy bringing Mech designs to life any time you wish, without taking the proverbial gun to your foot.

~D. V. "I remind myself of 'ClapTrap a.k.a. CL4P-TP' from 'BorderLands' right now. Talking like that actually sucks." Devnull

[Felbombling]

D V Devnull, on 10 August 2017 - 01:09 AM, said:

You sound to me like someone who purchases the Mechs before they try to design a loadout.

Thanks for the sound advice, but I'm fully aware of that feature. I've depleted my savings due to owning a handful of new Mechs, which I have thoroughly enjoyed playing. Added to my inventory since the new tech dropped... a Night Gyr, a Timber Wolf, an Assassin, a Locust, a Blackjack and the Roughneck.

Add to those expenses the needed internal/double heat sink upgrades where required, and a bevy of new Light Fusion engines for already owned Inner Sphere Mechs that see a lot of action. Then there is all the new tech I've tried out, both Clan and Inner Sphere.

I've probably modified builds for 50 Mechs with new tech. 120 million... *poof*.

[D V Devnull]

Felbombling, on 10 August 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

I've probably modified builds for 50 Mechs with new tech. 120 million... *poof*.

Yikes... Thanks for the note of caution! I'll have to watch my own (C-Bill) Wallet!

~D. V. "That's a pitfall I've got to avoid!" Devnull

[Felbombling]

D V Devnull, on 10 August 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

Yikes... Thanks for the note of caution! I'll have to watch my own (C-Bill) Wallet!

All I need at this point are the C-Bills necessary to replenish my consumables post-match. I'm good to go until the next interesting Mech becomes available for C-Bills. All my pilots are maxed out and my builds are set in stone.

Edited by Felbombling, 10 August 2017 - 10:11 AM.

[ShootterMcGavin]

The Roughneck is a tough mech.

[Dee Eight]

ShootterMcGavin, on 10 August 2017 - 02:10 PM, said:

The Roughneck is a tough mech.

INDEED.

[Smedlee]

Pariah Devalis, on 09 August 2017 - 06:51 AM, said:

Surprised how few of you are interested in the Javvy. Pretty good little light mech, honestly. Energy and missile varieties, too!

I bought a 'Hi There' mostly for the ridiculous name. I think I need to trade some firepower for speed. It's at about 97 kph now. I get hit alot. I have a long way to go with the skill tree also.

[Koniving]

Opinion on the Javelin?

I have three of them, I just haven't taken them for a spin.

[STEF_]

The sad part of this news....... I still have to wait 1 month to have my javs.
Theoricrafting them since pgi announced it.....

Koniving, on 13 August 2017 - 03:02 PM, said:

Opinion on the Javelin?

I have three of them, I just haven't taken them for a spin.

they are wonderful.

[Koniving]

This was my first experience.

The lack of thought to realism, i.e. thinking about the space inside of these things... had been quite a bit of a turnoff. (Ignore that these are Streak 2s and a bug, I'm talking about the sheer number of missile tubes that can be put on this thing; I'd rather have volley after volley of small numbers of missiles than this...this...walking rocket launcher; there's no room to conceive of where the ammo would be carried let alone trying to imagine where the reloading mechanisms are and how the hell they fill so many tubes).



Apparently the shoulders run directly through missile launchers.

[stealthraccoon]

Koniving, on 13 August 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

Apparently the shoulders run directly through missile launchers.

I'm just gonna leave this right here...
[smurfy]http://mwo.smurfy-ne...973b2cac4b7ce03[/smurfy]
I mean you could do SRM6's or ASRM4's, but that wouldn't give you 60 tubes to play with!

[Aramuside]

Koniving, on 13 August 2017 - 03:02 PM, said:

Opinion on the Javelin?

I have three of them, I just haven't taken them for a spin.

Very effective but ammo is at a premium. Agile, tough, high firepower.

[Aramuside]

Koniving, on 13 August 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

This was my first experience. The lack of thought to realism, i.e. thinking about the space inside of these things... had been quite a bit of a turnoff. (Ignore that these are Streak 2s and a bug, I'm talking about the sheer number of missile tubes that can be put on this thing; I'd rather have volley after volley of small numbers of missiles than this...this...walking rocket launcher; there's no room to conceive of where the ammo would be carried let alone trying to imagine where the reloading mechanisms are and how the hell they fill so many tubes). Apparently the shoulders run directly through missile launchers.

Not even sure how you're getting it to do that as none of my Javelins look like that.

[Koniving]

stealthraccoon, on 13 August 2017 - 07:19 PM, said:

I'm just gonna leave this right here...
[smurfy]http://mwo.smurfy-ne...973b2cac4b7ce03[/smurfy]
I mean you could do SRM6's or ASRM4's, but that wouldn't give you 60 tubes to play with!

According to Smurfy you'd get 40 + 12 so 52 tubes.

Yeah. That's the thing I'm not super happy with. I know PGI's idea of realism is really, really....slight of hand... but I'd at least expect there to be some room around the launchers for the machine's parts.

(Also fewer tubes means more volleys, with SRMs that means less spread. Single SRM fires straight like a bullet, didja know that? 2 tubes for an SRM-6 means the spread of an SRM-2 OR LESS, and a cool 'RAC' style firing sequence without the wind up).

Also I miss missile doors.

Don't get me wrong, all those tubes can be fun. But I'm not some 65 ton walking launcher.
In Battletech, the biggest walking missile boat only had 80 tubes,

Some of the biggest LRM boats (and some boats of interest.)
Ha Otoko (60 tubes) 65 tons
Long Bow (most tube-intensive artwork depicts 32 tubes per arm for 64 tubes). 85 tons.
Mandrill (40 tubes) 30 tons. But look at this thing's SIZE!
Naginata (45 tubes.) 95 tons.
Salamander (60 tubes) 80 tons.
Viking 90 tons dedicated LRM boat (70 tubes). IIC version also has 70 tubes.
Whitworth 40 tons (marked as an LRM boat by Sarna)... 5 tubes per LRM-10. (Is scaled to a similar size to the Javelin).
YEOMAN

(60 tons, only 50 tubes. Walking missile launcher. Guess that means no mech in Battletech even has 80 tubes.)
So I think 60 tubes, or even 52 tubes, is a bit too much for a little 30 tonner.

I mean I wouldn't want single tube launchers, but even this from back in the day was very useful.
(I'd like to think the "first" launcher of each side could go up to 20 tubes on some variants or 10 tubes on others, and the other ones might do somewhere between 2 to 6 tubes; could even create some variety between them by varying how many tubes they can get).

Since the update on the Cicadas, I haven't used the X-5 much because it became a single volley firing mech. Against AMS that's great, but the spread sucks and it isn't as cool.

Edited by Koniving, 14 August 2017 - 07:14 AM.

[Koniving]

Aramuside, on 14 August 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

Not even sure how you're getting it to do that as none of my Javelins look like that.

Did they reduce the tube number?

There's 10 tubes, 10 tubes and 6 tubes per side according to Smurfy. Granted most people don't put that many launchers in, but uh... yeah.

(Was I the only one that liked the Victor's missile tube setup? Well the last launcher being 2 tubes was ********, but 10, 6 was pretty nice. Now you can just plaster the whole left side with 50 tubes. Now what sets an Awesome missile boat apart from it? Nothing.)

[Aramuside]

Koniving, on 14 August 2017 - 07:21 AM, said:

Did they reduce the tube number?

There's 10 tubes, 10 tubes and 6 tubes per side according to Smurfy. Granted most people don't put that many launchers in, but uh... yeah.

(Was I the only one that liked the Victor's missile tube setup? Well the last launcher being 2 tubes was ********, but 10, 6 was pretty nice. Now you can just plaster the whole left side with 50 tubes. Now what sets an Awesome missile boat apart from it? Nothing.)

It certainly changes the play dynamics once you're not tube limited - if I think how many mechs were disadvantaged with spread out fire rather than a volley. Not sure if thats good or bad as it did push us to dedicated missile chassis or just make some missile based mechs quite ineffective but on the other hand it provided differentiation.

Can't pretend I've tried rockets outside PTS so that would be why I've not noticed the tube number issue.

[Mercarryn]

Question: Wasn`t the Javelin supposed to be released for C-Bills on 5th of september?

Link