Angel of Annihilation, on 09 January 2019 - 07:06 PM, said:
Seriously though, lets look at the other IS 100 ton mechs. The Annihilator huge and all its weapons sit kinda low making it very easy to target. Also the Anny can only roll with a max 300 engine. Then there is the King Crab which is exceptionally wide which makes the hit boxes huge and vulnerable from any angles. Also a good portion of its firepower is down low in the arms. Then we have the Fafnir which again has huge, easy to target hitboxes and like the Anny a relatively small sized engine at max of 325. Finally there is the Atlas which while having decent tankability, has all its weapons located very low around the waste for the most part.
1. Engine size really doesn't matter, evidenced by how well Fafnirs and Annihilators perform on just a 300 engine. I can almost guarantee that many of the best MAD-II builds will also be running 300-rated engines and it's not like a 325 is much faster; it's just 3.8 kph. That is
not the difference between life and death or even hot and cold. If the MAD-4A were allowed to fit up to a 375, the story would be different, but as-is it will just boat SHS on a small-ish engine with Heavy-grade firepower so it can fire all day.
2. The low mounts also don't really seem to matter; none of these gigantic, slow IS Assault 'Mechs trade well because they can't reverse down hills or around corners quickly and because the ones with high mounts have their cockpits too low relative to those mounts (MAD-II is no exception, especially with the dorsal gun, see also NSR). All of them are full-expose, big-d**k 'Mechs that control long firing lanes, punish more agile pokers, or crash through battle lines. The MAD-II will be no different unless they give it generous mobility for its class (and I hope they do).
3. The MAD has easier hitboxes to target than the ANH, especially the IIC; most people just don't aim at them and keep trying to hit CT instead of the fins on the back end. KGC is super wide, but it's also fairly hard to hit CT from the side, so that's a trade-off. Convergence is a larger issue.
Quote
Then look at the Marauder II. Its front profile is very narrow and compact comparatively and has the egg shape to it that makes it easy just to wiggle the nose and spread damage across all three torso facings.
This is not a 75 ton Marauder, this is a 100 ton Marauder with all that implies. The 95-ton Nightstar has a similar narrow nose, but it also has similar gigantic vents at the rear. It is plagued by garbage agility and garbage durability, both of which basically relegate it to long-range fire support roles. The advantages the MAD-II has over the NSR are no hand actuators and much better convergence from arm weapons.
And even the 75-ton Marauder has its weaknesses. The central ridge that the cockpit is installed into is all CT and it cannot be shielded. When you have big guns in the RT, that cannot be shielded. All types of Marauder have gigantic vents that can be targeted unless you twist off at a more aggressive angle and render you extremely vulnerable from top and side angles. The MAD-II in particular has outboard wings which add additional targets for hitting the ST, to say nothing of that massive cannon up top providing a giant, unshieldable bulls-eye for your RT.
Quote
Additionally most of its weapons mounts are around cockpit level and it allows for a somewhat higher engine cap giving it the option to put on a bit more speed. I don't know but at least at first glance, it seems there is a ton of potential for the Marauder being "best in class" 100 ton IS Assault mech if you ask me which would make it better than just an "Ok" mech.
All of that also applies to the Nightstar but then you notice, just like on the Nightstar, that there is a ton of mass above the cockpit that becomes targetable before your view clears the ridge. The MAD-II will be much better around a corner than the NSR, since it doesn't have those hilariously wide arms, but over a hill it's not going to be at all better. All Marauders are mediocre at hill-peaking and much better at cornering.
Quote
On the other hand, I guess maybe a better way to look at it would be that there is probably at least a 90% chance it will be at the worst and Ok mech which is better odds than normal because PGI has really came up with some lemons from time to time. That is a good starting point if you ask me because that probably means there is at least a 50% chance it will actually be above average to good.
What makes the MAD-II potentially really strong is the fact that the 4HP has 13 offensive hardpoints, all of which are tonnage efficient types and the most of
any IS 'Mech to date with only the ANH-1X coming close at 11. Barring some interesting quirks, the rest of the variants are all doing things you can do way more efficiently with a lighter 'Mechs. I mean, shoot, they should have given the MAD-4A a full set of 9 energy hardpoints so it could at least mount the best possible mid-range IS vomit combo, 3x LPL+6x ERML, but no. Instead, it will do what can be much better done on a BLR-3M or 1G or even an STK-5S, or you have to get crazy with some ultra-hot combos.
Having lower arm actuators across the board is also not helping anything.
This 'Mech will need to be some combination of smaller, more agile, or better armored than I am expecting for it to really shine over what we have in the game as of this post.