32 replies to this topic

[Inatu Elimor]

Shifty McSwift, on 07 October 2017 - 03:15 AM, said:

Well yeah in the very fundamental sense of it all, every mech has a point where it excels and/or has deficiencies, but there are a lot of mechs that minimise that to the point where they just outright perform better than others, when properly utilising their setup.

The meta in that sense tends to focus around mechs with well synergising hardpoint numbers and locations, a mechs basic frame shape and toughness, and an "acceptable" mobility rate, that allows decent combat results vs most to all targets. Some mechs can and do tick all those boxes, and some (most) just don't.

A bit off topic but can you list your top 10 of favorite mechs? Thx.

[N0ni]

Bombast, on 07 October 2017 - 03:46 AM, said:

The T-34 was superior because it wasn't a colossal boondoggle that broke down every 5 minutes.

Not to mention the cost just to produce Tiger IIs. The T-34 was superior because it was cheaper to produce and maintain, for the 492 Tiger IIs produced, the Russians made over 35 thousand T-34s.

Also, if it did break down alot... that's alot better than what the Porsche design would have been. Henschel and Porsche both competed for the contract for the design of both the Tiger I and Tiger II, in which Henschel won. The Porsche design featured an experimental transmission system which later would be put on the Ferdinand tank destroyer and the flaw with that system is that it would catch fire easily, so it later got the nickname the "tinder box".

Sidenote: That long 88 was something to be feared though, i'll give them that.

[YueFei]

Khobai, on 07 October 2017 - 02:40 AM, said:

yeah and tanks are also on their way out.

unmanned drones are the future.

tanks are too expensive to build, maintain, and transport. the USA has to maintain bases all over the world because its cheaper to do that than to keep shipping tanks overseas.

drones eliminate the human crew and are disposable, so they dont need the weight of all that armor, which eliminates most of the logistical costs too.

the future is going to be like an AWACs type aircraft controlling 4-6 aerial drones to provide air cover. the drones will defeat any conventional aircraft/ground vehicles simply through pure aggression and overwhelming numbers.

MWO should have flying attack drones. give the UAV an AC2 or something to make it more useful.

It's difficult to predict future developments, but the reason drones aren't armored isn't because they are necessarily disposable, but because it's impractical to armor them.

A setting like the Bolo-verse with excellent point-defense and basically aimbot laser systems is a nightmare for any aerial vehicles to deal with, because they just get swatted from the sky in droves. One could easily imagine future weapons developments along such lines actually giving ground-based platforms dominance, since they would be able to carry the necessary armor to shrug off air-based laser systems, while also being capable of swatting down incoming missiles, rockets, and shells.

As an aside, I'd also note how frakking awesome it is in the Bolo-verse that their tanks will blow a hole through a hill to drive through it rather than driving over the hill in order to avoid exposing their underbellies.

[Bombast]

YueFei, on 07 October 2017 - 12:38 PM, said:

As an aside, I'd also note how frakking awesome it is in the Bolo-verse that their tanks will blow a hole through a hill to drive through it rather than driving over the hill in order to avoid exposing their underbellies.

Pfft, that's nothing. The Adeptus Mechanicus will drill through entire mountain ranges (The long way through) just so they don't have to bother flanking.

Bolos are pretty damn neat though. Especially the latter models that can take on orbiting space ships.

[Shifty McSwift]

Inatu Elimor, on 07 October 2017 - 05:10 AM, said:

A bit off topic but can you list your top 10 of favorite mechs? Thx.

My particular favourites would probably be ranked pretty lowly on the current meta, if what you are really asking is, "what are these mechs shifty?" Watch the top end competition matches and see which mechs most commonly appear and perform their role amazingly, repeatedly.

If you just wanted to know what my "favourites" are out of curiosity currently my favourite mech is an Orion with 4xSRM6 and an LB20x, which is a very task specific kind of mech, that a number of other mechs can achieve similar results with much more reliably, but I a mostly solo QP player and the build is fun and reliable for that.

If you look into my mech stats it becomes pretty obvious that my favourite for a very long time was the KDK 5, which is like the least meta KDK in the bunch, so these aren't principles I live by to the letter, but the meta speaks for itself in both in theory and play, my input toward it as some noob is minimal at best, but its pretty easy to observe.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Khobai, on 07 October 2017 - 02:40 AM, said:

yeah and tanks are also on their way out.

unmanned drones are the future.

tanks are too expensive to build, maintain, and transport. the USA has to maintain bases all over the world because its cheaper to do that than to keep shipping tanks overseas.

drones eliminate the human crew and are disposable, so they dont need the weight of all that armor, which eliminates most of the logistical costs too.

the future is going to be like an AWACs type aircraft controlling 4-6 aerial drones to provide air cover. the drones will defeat any conventional aircraft/ground vehicles simply through pure aggression and overwhelming numbers.

MWO should have flying attack drones. give the UAV an AC2 or something to make it more useful.

Only thought I have on this, is that unmanned systems are effective, but if you go up against someone with a similar tech base they could be susceptible to things like ECM jamming or even potential hacking. A well placed spy that gained access to encryption keys could turn your whole robotic army against you, be pretty sad to see that AWAC get shot down by its own drones who were suddenly 'hacked'. Having a machine that is geared to operate by receiving external transmissions makes that machine vulnerable to anything that disrupts or even suborns that transmission.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Tincan Nightmare, on 07 October 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

Only thought I have on this, is that unmanned systems are effective, but if you go up against someone with a similar tech base they could be susceptible to things like ECM jamming or even potential hacking. A well placed spy that gained access to encryption keys could turn your whole robotic army against you, be pretty sad to see that AWAC get shot down by its own drones who were suddenly 'hacked'. Having a machine that is geared to operate by receiving external transmissions makes that machine vulnerable to anything that disrupts or even suborns that transmission.

We have cyber warfare branches of the military for a reason.

[Shifty McSwift]

Tincan Nightmare, on 07 October 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

Only thought I have on this, is that unmanned systems are effective, but if you go up against someone with a similar tech base they could be susceptible to things like ECM jamming or even potential hacking. A well placed spy that gained access to encryption keys could turn your whole robotic army against you, be pretty sad to see that AWAC get shot down by its own drones who were suddenly 'hacked'. Having a machine that is geared to operate by receiving external transmissions makes that machine vulnerable to anything that disrupts or even suborns that transmission.

Well, yeah, I would say a more concerning aspect is the idea that militaries may be fine to use weapons considered criminal to use on humans in war, on unmanned vehicles, as we all know collateral damage is a thing.

Well that and the idea that we are dangerously close to removing humans from the process of attack entirely, through pre programmed unmanned vehicle like drones. Along with all the potential implications that could bring with opposing militaries intelligence/disinformation/propaganda arms.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Dakota1000, on 07 October 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

We have cyber warfare branches of the military for a reason.

Yes, but my point was hopefully they will stay ahead of the other guys, due to the cost if they don't (especially if you are fielding large numbers of remote control systems.)

[Tincan Nightmare]

Shifty McSwift, on 07 October 2017 - 01:45 PM, said:

Well, yeah, I would say a more concerning aspect is the idea that militaries may be fine to use weapons considered criminal to use on humans in war, on unmanned vehicles, as we all know collateral damage is a thing.

Well that and the idea that we are dangerously close to removing humans from the process of attack entirely, through pre programmed unmanned vehicle like drones. Along with all the potential implications that could bring with opposing militaries intelligence/disinformation/propaganda arms.

Not to mention the potential for things like terrorist groups getting their hands on such systems and committing atrocities via satellite from a continent away. Don't need to convince some poor fool to die for paradise if you can get a robotic 'suicide' bomber instead.

[Shifty McSwift]

Tincan Nightmare, on 07 October 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

Not to mention the potential for things like terrorist groups getting their hands on such systems and committing atrocities via satellite from a continent away. Don't need to convince some poor fool to die for paradise if you can get a robotic 'suicide' bomber instead.

I wrote out a sizable response to this loaded notion, but this probably isn't the place for such a discussion, the topic has become derailed enough.

I will just say, in the right circumstances it doesn't require convincing some poor fool to die and kill for a cause if that poor fool's life is reason enough for him to find himself in such a position of consideration in the first place, and try to leave it there.

I am not defending anything here, just pointing out that if you take from a man everything, you leave him with nothing to lose.

[FupDup]

I take almost max survival (32/35) and a pretty good chunk of firepower (always max heat gen at minimum) at the same time on every single mech with every single build. They're not mutually exclusive at all, you've got a plentiful 91 skill nodes to spend.

Edited by FupDup, 07 October 2017 - 02:33 PM.

[Cloves]

Build to strength for victory, unless there is a glaring weakness in your mech that is otherwise good, at which point you can patch. My key example would be mobility on assaults.