59 replies to this topic

[Mahpsy]

So for the past few months I've been growing tired of playing the same old meta builds and have been reading the rolls assaults had in Battletech. As a result have been going out of my way to run some pretty questionable mechs to say the least. Some just don't work, but others strange enough seem to be working out for me.

One example being my

BLR-1S:
2x SRM 6 w/ 2 tons
2x LRM 15 w/ 4 tons
3x Small Pulse Laser
1x Tag
1x Laser AMS
2x C.A.S.E

Artemis
Endo-steel
Light Engine 340 w/ 3 Double Heat Sinks

The inspiration came from looking at mechs that where designed to be able to apply pressure at most ranges. And with this mech I regularly pull 700+ damage and at least 3 kills per match(assuming it's not a steam roll match).

My next experiment was with the

DWF-A (all A Omni pods)
3x Large Pulse Laser
2x LRM 20 w/4 tons
Ultra AC/10 w/3 tons
7 Double Heat Sinks.

Again I got pretty good results. The ability to intimidate players with the LRM rain almost makes these builds as good as running double Air/arty.

Hell, with the build on these two mechs I often am able to bait light mech pilots into flanking me and fighting, and then try to run when they realize that I'm no LRM boat(which makes me laugh every time xD).

Aside from the fact that ECM and Radar Dep is still too strong I'm wondering why more people don't try out more flexible load outs.

[FupDup]

You seem to be talking about "bracket builds" rather than "alpha strike builds." Almost everything that isn't an MG/Flamer/RAC boat is an "alpha strike" build because of firing rates and the general necessity of taking cover/twisting between shots.

As for bracket builds, the issue is that those builds often end up being outclassed at every range, effectively getting the worst of both worlds between specialists and generalists (being bad at everything rather than decent at everything). For example, that Battlemaster you described can literally be outgunned by light mechs.

There are some exceptions though like mixing in some lasers to cover the minimum range on PPCs/Lurms or my beloved 2 ERPPC + 6 SPL Cauldron Born. Another weirdo thing I like to do is run a Veagle with 2 ERPPCs + 2 SRM6s rather than 3 ERPPCs.

Another factor is that it's just a lot harder to micromanage a bunch of totally unrelated weapon groups that have totally different mechanics. Specialized builds are usually very straightforward and user-friendly compared to a kitchen sink abomination like the stock KTO-20.


So basically, I think "bracket" builds can kind of work as long as you follow a few rules:

1. Don't have too many brackets (for example my mechs above have only 2 brackets each)

2. One of those brackets should contain most of your firepower, with the other bracket(s) being backups/supplements when needed

3. You should be able to sustain all of the brackets at the same time (in terms of heat) for at least a short while, which can help you pack a good punch when all of them are in range (for example that Cauldron Born of mine can sustain the SPLs forever and layer in the ERPPCs when heat permits for extra punch)

4. The different weapon groups should have some synergy/work well together (for example lasers combo with almost anything)

Edited by FupDup, 14 May 2022 - 03:58 PM.

[Mahpsy]

FupDup, on 14 May 2022 - 03:50 PM, said:

You seem to be talking about "bracket builds" rather than "alpha strike builds." Almost everything that isn't an MG/Flamer/RAC boat is an "alpha strike" build because of firing rates and the general necessity of taking cover/twisting between shots.

As for bracket builds, the issue is that those builds often end up being outclassed at every range, effectively getting the worst of both worlds between specialists and generalists (being bad at everything rather than decent at everything). For example, that Battlemaster you described can literally be outgunned by light mechs.

There are some exceptions though like mixing in some lasers to cover the minimum range on PPCs/Lurms or my beloved 2 ERPPC + 6 SPL Cauldron Born. Another weirdo thing I like to do is run a Veagle with 2 ERPPCs + 2 SRM6s rather than 3 ERPPCs.

Another factor is that it's just a lot harder to micromanage a bunch of totally unrelated weapon groups that have totally different mechanics. Specialized builds are usually very straightforward and user-friendly compared to a kitchen sink abomination like the stock KTO-20.

So basically, I think "bracket" builds can kind of work as long as you follow a few rules:
1. Don't have too many brackets (for example my mechs above have only 2 brackets each)
2. One of those brackets should contain most of your firepower, with the other bracket(s) being backups/supplements when needed
3. You should be able to sustain all of the brackets at the same time (in terms of heat) for at least a short while, which can help you pack a good punch when all of them are in range (for example that Cauldron Born of mine can sustain the SPLs forever and layer in the ERPPCs when heat permits for extra punch)

Yes bracket builds, the name escaped me. And I know what you mean about the worst of both sides to the coin. It goes back to why some of my experiments just out right failed.

With my BLR however it may be outgunned but never out matched against light mechs. I've been dove on by a heavy Machinegun Micro pulse Myst Lynx and a Piranha or(insert light mech here) at the same time on multiple occasions and each time I'll get the leg/side torso or seriously damage them enough to the point they just leave as I rain more LRM on their retreat and leave me alone and never come back. They never have got me to the red on armor unless there are 4 at a time. I may be out gunned, but not out matched.

Otherwise on that mech in particular I just try and get cheeky tag marks on targets at max range and let it rain until I run out of ammo. Then I swap to the anti-flank specialist or a tank to use all of my fresh armor to push a corner.

The Direwolf job is to put pressure on odd angles players don't expect with the LRM's with the occasional cheeky sniper plays looking for a good flank to mop up.

[The6thMessenger]

What would it take?

Single Player, like MW5.

There, the ranges can be varied, where individual weapons work well on their own against smaller and easier targets. Here, it's a different ball-game, you can't afford having multiple non synergistic weapons, you can't afford your investment only working at different times, you need to specialize and put yourself in situations where your specialization works wonders.

[Mahpsy]

The6thMessenger, on 14 May 2022 - 05:30 PM, said:

What would it take?

Single Player, like MW5.

There, the ranges can be varied, where individual weapons work well on their own against smaller and easier targets. Here, it's a different ball-game, you can't afford having multiple non synergistic weapons, you can't afford your investment only working at different times, you need to specialize and put yourself in situations where your specialization works wonders.

I don't completely agree though I know what you mean. What it all seems to come down to currently for any meta build is how fast can I personally deal damage with my one trick click build. Like I've personally grown to hate brawling mechs or assaults for this reason.

The thing is so many players that are not already in pre made drops don't care about team play or sharing armor. This results in the well known nascar scenario where your slow assaults(or any slow mech in general) have 2 choices. Try and keep up and hope the team stops, or hide and try not to get spotted and swarmed by lights or even the full force of the enemy team.

And IMO ECM and Radar dep only adds to this problem. LRM's should be a weapon to punish units moving out of cover but it's just too hard to keep a lock. Then there is also the issue of Arty/air strikes to ensure that both teams can never truly sit in one spot(again IMO they shouldn't be in the game and should be replaced with weapons like mech mortars, sniper arty, and long tom etc. weapons with arcs to aim over cover and do splash damage). But I digress.

I wouldn't mind tho if PGI at least gave some larger weapon quirks to the mechs that have weird hard points like 2 missile 1 ballistic, 1 energy like the Locust 1v got for its single laser.( Can't think of one off the top of my head.)

[ScrapIron Prime]

I run builds like this a lot, I call them "generalist" builds. They bring something to the table no matter the range bracket they find themselves forced to fight in. While a specialist will rack up a high score indeed if it is allowed to get in position to do what it does best, it will suffer if someone gets the jump on it outside its specialty. A generalist build does not have that weakness, so it will be able to deliver in any circumstance at the price of not getting those ultra high scores.

That said, I avoid weapon combos that are either/or weapons. In your Battlemaster example, you have small pulse lasers, SRMs, and LRMs. You can't do telling damage with all those weapons at the same time, so you're essentially EITHER using LRMs OR you're using SRMs + SPL. That design could be better. Consider MRM10's instead of SRM6's so you can fire them at the same target you direct-fire those LRMs at. Likewise, if you switch the small pulses up to medium lasers instead, you can fire them at any valid LRM target at 400m and add significant damage.

The difference... at 400m range, your Battlemaster build can do 30 damage. The one I propose does 65 for the same tonnage. At 80m, your Battlemaster does 36 damage, the one I propose does 35.

Generalists using Large Lasers are even better, with a flat damage curve. And PPCs got a boost with relaxing of that 90m minimum range, doing partial damage under that range. Example, a couple of Dragon 1G builds:

4 LL = https://mwo.nav-alph...b71831a7_DRG-1G
PPCs + MRM = https://mwo.nav-alph...872da48f_DRG-1G

[The6thMessenger]

Mahpsy, on 14 May 2022 - 06:12 PM, said:

I don't completely agree though I know what you mean. What it all seems to come down to currently for any meta build is how fast can I personally deal damage with my one trick click build. Like I've personally grown to hate brawling mechs or assaults for this reason.

Well, I don't know what to tell you, everyone else has the freedom to make use of the most-effective-tactic-available, and you're just gimping yourself by not doing the same. It does not matter whether you agree or not, that is what happens.

[Mahpsy]

ScrapIron Prime, on 14 May 2022 - 06:35 PM, said:

That said, I avoid weapon combos that are either/or weapons. In your Battlemaster example, you have small pulse lasers, SRMs, and LRMs. You can't do telling damage with all those weapons at the same time, so you're essentially EITHER using LRMs OR you're using SRMs + SPL. That design could be better. Consider MRM10's instead of SRM6's so you can fire them at the same target you direct-fire those LRMs at. Likewise, if you switch the small pulses up to medium lasers instead, you can fire them at any valid LRM target at 400m and add significant damage.

The difference... at 400m range, your Battlemaster build can do 30 damage. The one I propose does 65 for the same tonnage. At 80m, your Battlemaster does 36 damage, the one I propose does 35.

I actually did test out MRM's and Mediums, the problem I ran into was those weapons where sub par for scaring light mechs away due to the longer cycle times(and the MRM spread also means a good amount of them will miss anyways). And as an assault you tend to be the 1st thing light mechs look for. But once the light mechs take the bait seeing LRM's fly I'll rip of half or more of their armor or even get the kill on their retreat.

So I'm trading the longer range and damage for higher dps in a close brawl. Now if only I could punch.

[caravann]

LRM5 is an non alpha strike build. The reason why is because firing many LRM5 increase heat and not firing enough LRM5 won't hit the target. LRM5 doesn't work well with supporting weapons and instead the focus is on having the capability to deal damage in close range. All other weapons are direct fire and what shoots straight forward is stackable.

Streak is in the category of a weapon who doesn't stack with other weapons but is able to secure kills.
You don't get any better stacking by picking up other direct fire weapons because streak is good for other reasons.
First, a mech who uses streak has easier time to hit a slower target as your own speed makes it harder to aim, secondly streak always spread no matter what size you pick.

SRM2 are able to be chainfired into a rotary autocannon. You can stack weapons on top of it as it's just a direct firing weapon.
Streak sometimes fires indirect since they're missiles. MRM are rockets and have no tracking.

The key is to win so there's no room for skirmishers who fire a little here, drive away and fire some shots at another mech and keep on and so forth. The only mechs who can do that are mechs with enough speed to not be focus fired and since assaults, especially clan assaults are fast enough to intercept most mechs that; when asking is it possible to use a non alpha? Yes if you want to have each battle to be a defeat while still gaining ranks. The issue is how to keep alive until time runs out for the opponent.

[Curccu]

Nothing can make bracket builds (as your example) popular because those just don't work in MWO, it doesn't have enough of anything to be good at any range...
An assault mech that have medium mechs long range firepower and light mechs knife fighting firepower, those weapons overlap by 90 meters where you can do damage with all of them.

[Gagis]

Bracket builds are strictly bad.

Bracket builds are bad in all other battletech games too, including the board game. In the board game you just sometimes can't afford to choose something optimal instead. In MWO and all other videogames you get to enjoy customization, which means you will just handicap yourself by running bracket builds.

[Weeny Machine]

The problem is not the alpha strike. The problem is just lasers...

Due to the extreme range bracket lasers can punch quite hard above their (intended) range and are hitscan weapons. Heck, an ERLL can shoot across a substantial part of the map and still do ok damage. The lack of velocity means you hit the enemy.
Now a certain pro will chime in and yell "but the damage is spread". Well, true, but usually you can hold the beams on the torsi. The damage simply adds up. And once you ge close you will have lost quite some armour.

That's also the reason why there is so much supression in the game that often teams murderball and camp somewhere then trade shots for minutes

[LordNothing]

Weeny Machine, on 15 May 2022 - 05:29 AM, said:

The problem is not the alpha strike. The problem is just lasers...

Due to the extreme range bracket lasers can punch quite hard above their (intended) range and are hitscan weapons. Heck, an ERLL can shoot across a substantial part of the map and still do ok damage. The lack of velocity means you hit the enemy.
Now a certain pro will chime in and yell "but the damage is spread". Well, true, but usually you can hold the beams on the torsi. The damage simply adds up. And once you ge close you will have lost quite some armour.

That's also the reason why there is so much supression in the game that often teams murderball and camp somewhere then trade shots for minutes

at that range you just have your mouse settings cranked down so low that you cant miss. getting a mouse that lets me very accurately control dpi is probibly one thing that got me to t2.

i always figured that erll should start at about half damage and ramp up to full damage at about 0.5 x optimal range. if you want range on your laser you need a wider aperture on your beam, and that means less focus close in. this would make ranged builds more vulnerable to brawlers and squirrels. of course that kind of thing will only hurt weaker players with poor positioning skills.

i dont mind range trading i just wish it came with some bigger disadvantages. ppcs have lead and heat, ac2s have lead and ammo, gauss has lead, charge and low dps, and lerms have all the counters. what do er lasers have again? they seem to be the least disadvantaged ranged weapon which is why they are meta.

Edited by LordNothing, 15 May 2022 - 06:09 AM.

[ThreeStooges]

God tier quirks for the lamest weapon location/type a mech has. Like the head missile slot that only fits a srm2 or if lucky a lrm 5. -50% srm 2/lrm 5 cool down. God tier armor on mechs that store 90% of their weapons in a single easy to shoot off location like pnts. RT armor+30. Too simple for pgi I know. If only an idiot like me could do quirks for mechs like mg rof on assults or velocity buffs for ballistics on energy only mech variants.

[Hobbles v]

There is no universe in which firing all your weapons at one spot at the same time would be less effective than a bunch of weapons fire at different velocities hitting different areas.

The only way possible to make bracket builds of any real valuable use would be to just completely limit or destroy the ability to alpha strike. Which is one of the dumbest moves anybody could ever do.

[Sawk]

LOL wow guys learn to build a 2 weapons system, i know some can use 3 weapons, but you hit so muchy more with 2 weapons systems,--- that is why LAZER VOMIT works so well, hmm clan side 2 large 3 or 4 med, and IS side can use 3 large and 3 med, of course at much reduced range, but it puts in 40+ alpha hit.

SAWK PS and always look to have a wing man, clanner

[LordNothing]

im not against 2 or 3 weapon systems. you can also do quite a bit of range sync across completely weapon types. one of the advantages of mixed builds is you can run ghost heat free and still put considerable firepower down range.

also if your minimum range weapon goes far enough out (say 400m), then bracketing really doesn't matter. you just need to realize that you are not as good as a dedicated erll boat and that you cant out trade one at erll ranges, just use em for pop shots against helpless targets. there is probibly a better weapon, large lasers for example, but sometimes that early harassment capability can be useful in a match. you want to do actual fighting closer to your maximum damage range. you are often going to find yourself fighting at ranges less than erll optimal anyway.

[foamyesque]

I've had decent success with bracket builds, but it's no lie that they're more complex to pilot, and the more decisions a pilot has to make the more likely it is they'll make a bad one.

The thing is, you can leverage the versatility so's you're always contributing, and be able to force engagements that a specialist machine may not want to take.

PPCs in particular are a very useful option for adding range to an otherwise up-close build, since you can contribute to long-range trading with snappy peeks and ECM disablement. The fact that you don't have a lot of those guns is mitigated at least somewhat by ghost heat limits, and it means you're not completely handcuffed by a sniper.

[VeeOt Dragon]

you know i always say **** meta and just have fun. as for bracket builds and mixed weapons they can work and work well though try to stick to two such as LRMs with some MLs (or mrm/srm if you are running one of the rare mechs with only missile hardpoints.). hell MRMs pair nicely with AC/10s and with some lasers as backup. i never use a build that is purely ammo dependent. even my Catapult has a pair of MLs for backup.

now it is always advisable that your two weapon types have some overlap in effective range such as say the LRM and ML example (ER MLs are better but have more heat and longer cycle time.). 3 weapon types can be managed in the right mix (like my Stalker-3FB that runs 2 ER-LLs, 2 MLs, and 2 LRM-15.) but they must have overlap. take my Stalker build i use the LLs when i have direct sight and am waiting for a lock or the mech is outside my targeting range due to radar dep and ECM. when things get closer and a bit more dicey for an LRM mech i cycle in the MLs for a bit of add punch. oh i could strip the MLs out lower the engine and run larger missile launchers or switch to say ER-MLs in all energy slots (i think that Stalker has 6 but not sure off hand) and again larger launchers but i like it as it is. for me its more fun as is while still effective. i used to run that mech with MRM-30s and ER-LLs but switch to LRM when the mech got some quirk love.

honestly in a match i don't care what my teammates' builds are as long as they are doing decent (or trying at least). hell i love seeing odd builds on the field. it adds spice to the boredom of same 3 builds on the same 4 mechs over and over again. i think if more people just made fun builds instead of caring about the damn meta the game would a Lot more interesting. (hell i have an assault that runs RAC/5s paired with AC/2s and ML backup that does really well. i have hand tremors so i rarely use the AC/2s at their max effective range but i do sometimes. its a fun build not a meta one)

so yeah just have fun, though i recommend not having any more than than 4 fire groups, 3 is better (i often push for 2 main groups and then maybe a 3rd that is one of those set to chain fire for when things get toasty but i can't withdraw to cool right away) for an example using the Stalker mentioned above the LLS are on 1, the MLs on 2 and the LRM on 4 (group 4 is easier to press on my mouse than 3 as both are side buttons) the big trouble is range management and having fewer things you have to concentrate on.

above all its a game so have fun

as much as i love the lore and the lore builds (in lore many mechs have rear facing weapons or the ability to flip their arms 180 to shoot behind them. PGI moved the dedicated rear hardpoints to front facing and eliminated the arm flip when making their version for ease of play and programing. the only mech in the game that can shoot behind itself is the Urbie but that is because they kept the full 360 torso rotation the mech had in Lore.) sadly many just don't work well in the FPS environment of MWO.

Edited by VeeOt Dragon, 16 May 2022 - 03:11 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

LordNothing, on 15 May 2022 - 06:03 AM, said:

at that range you just have your mouse settings cranked down so low that you cant miss. getting a mouse that lets me very accurately control dpi is probibly one thing that got me to t2.

i always figured that erll should start at about half damage and ramp up to full damage at about 0.5 x optimal range. if you want range on your laser you need a wider aperture on your beam, and that means less focus close in. this would make ranged builds more vulnerable to brawlers and squirrels. of course that kind of thing will only hurt weaker players with poor positioning skills.

i dont mind range trading i just wish it came with some bigger disadvantages. ppcs have lead and heat, ac2s have lead and ammo, gauss has lead, charge and low dps, and lerms have all the counters. what do er lasers have again? they seem to be the least disadvantaged ranged weapon which is why they are meta.

Nice sum up of the whole problem and I like your solution. It would really give long range builds a drawback

Edited by Weeny Machine, 16 May 2022 - 07:38 AM.