17 replies to this topic

[Greydron]

Short and clear.

Move CPLT-C4 two energy hardpoints from CT to LT and RT.

P.S. (off topic) Praying for Catapult variant with 4 energy and 4 missile hardpoints

[John MatriX82]

It would then overshadow the C1, which basically has 2 less missiles but retains the 2 energy hardpoints in the CT.. all catapults have at maximum 6 hardpoints..

I'd rather see LRMs mounting ability to be limited to those mechs that have proper amount of tubes, so that C4s would be the only ones mounting dual LRM20s, like STKs 4N and so on.

Edited by John MatriX82, 31 March 2013 - 12:02 PM.

[Space Odin]

Its possible this could essentially make it the best catapult if they ever buff missiles again. As it stands I feel the C4 is by far the worst variant of the catapults so, a buff to them would be nice.

[Greydron]

John MatriX82, on 31 March 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

It would then overshadow the C1, which basically has 2 less missiles but retains the 2 energy hardpoints in the CT.. all catapults have at maximum 6 hardpoints..

I'd rather see LRMs mounting ability to be limited to those mechs that have proper amount of tubes, so that C4s would be the only ones mounting dual LRM20s, like STKs 4N and so on.

I mean just move hardpoints from CT, not to add more.

But, if you look at Jagermech JMG-A, you'll find, that it's just better then Catapult. Same tonnage, armor, speed and maneuverability, but more harpoints. It can mount everything that Catapult can, and even more (expect 6xSRM6).

[John MatriX82]

In fact is a different mech man

The C4 is meant to be a heavy lrm boat, therefore not much backup weapons..

[Greydron]

John MatriX82, on 31 March 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

In fact is a different mech man

The C4 is meant to be a heavy lrm boat, therefore not much backup weapons..

JMG-A can be a heavy LRM boat as well. Just like CPLT-C4. They have the same number of missile hardpoints. But JMG-A have two ballistic slots in addition to energy ones. No meaning in Catapult existence any more.

[DeadlyNerd]

Short and simple, NO.

Why? I'm pretty sure you'd want to mount 2 PPCs on there. Not gonna happen, buy a C1.

Greydron, on 31 March 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

JMG-A can be a heavy LRM boat as well. Just like CPLT-C4. They have the same number of missile hardpoints. But JMG-A have two ballistic slots in addition to energy ones. No meaning in Catapult existence any more.

Jagermech has giant side torsos, and no JJs. The cat still has way better survivability and with JJs it can reach high ground or just do jump shots.

Edited by DeadlyNerd, 31 March 2013 - 01:17 PM.

[Deathlike]

I had originally thought this idea, but it would make the C4 very similar to the C1, so I doubt that would fly (plus it probably would break the "canon" build).

I'd rather have the laser hardpoints split between the head and the CT. That would allow TAG+some large laser and you still have your missiles. It still keeps the C4 distinct and doesn't make the A1 less attractive (it's already got the SRM nerf that people have long wanted).

[Sable Dove]

John MatriX82, on 31 March 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

It would then overshadow the C1, which basically has 2 less missiles but retains the 2 energy hardpoints in the CT.

Then give the C1 the same treatment, so it has 2E hardpoints in each side torso.

[DeadlyNerd]

Sable Dove, on 31 March 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Then give the C1 the same treatment, so it has 2E hardpoints in each side torso.

That's not the point.
C1 has 2 missile HP, C4 has 4. The only thing keeping them equal is the fact that C4 can't mount large energy weapons.
Imagine 4 SRM6 and 2 LL.

[Deathlike]

DeadlyNerd, on 31 March 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

That's not the point.
C1 has 2 missile HP, C4 has 4. The only thing keeping them equal is the fact that C4 can't mount large energy weapons.
Imagine 4 SRM6 and 2 LL.

I think it's more like 2 ppcs and 4 ssrm2s or 4 srm4s, or something along those lines...

[blinkin]

no, i don't need to be able to mount a pair of ERPPC AND my 4x SRM6.

built properly the thing is already a beast. as a SRM cat i have always prefered it to the catapult A1 (it is far more malleable in combat with the 2 medium lasers. the C1 and the K2 both have energy mounts in the cheaks. we don't need the C4 to have any larger weapons.

the hello kitty is already a brutal monster, it does not need any more help.

[blinkin]

Deathlike, on 31 March 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

I think it's more like 2 ppcs and 4 ssrm2s or 4 srm4s, or something along those lines...

it would not be difficult to squeeze out that extra tonnage, at the very least mounting a pair of large lasers would be easy. to mount a pair of PPC MIGHT call for a small amount of engine downsizing (from 315).

or come to think of it i could remove my 4 tons of artemis, and my 4 tons of jump jets.

Edited by blinkin, 31 March 2013 - 10:43 PM.

[Deathlike]

Technically my energy hardpoints change would actually be a negative for convergence...

[blinkin]

Deathlike, on 31 March 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

Technically my energy hardpoints change would actually be a negative for convergence...

not by much. not by enough to really matter, even against light mechs.

[XSerjo]

No, defintely no. I don't want to see "yet another quad-PPC boat". Boat with small torso, with better armor then others (no need to have armor on "ears"). No.

[Durant Carlyle]

John MatriX82, on 31 March 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

I'd rather see LRMs mounting ability to be limited to those mechs that have proper amount of tubes, so that C4s would be the only ones mounting dual LRM20s, like STKs 4N and so on.

This isn't going to happen. There are already well-known examples of mismatched tube numbers versus launcher size in the lore, like the Atlas -- an LRM-20 rapid-firing four volleys of five missiles because the Atlas only has five tubes.

[John MatriX82]

I'm not speaking of TT or differences between TT and MWO, I'm just proposing a way to address lrm boating and with the actual system I don't see anything else to avoid the 2xLRM15+2xLRM20 LRms on stalkers and such..