88 replies to this topic

[kalashnikity]

updated build, last one was not enough ammo, too much heat sink.

[1453 R]

Tangential to the actual point, but: that's not how to Super Stock a CPLT-C1. You only have two launchers but they have a big fire rate boost - you should be angling to get strong, consistent locks and slamming warheads into them on cooldown. The big, slow, over-ammo'd Lurmblob is only ever halfway viable on some dirty great overburdened assault bloatboat with four hundred tubes that only needs to hit three or four times in a game to "contribute". Those are the ones that throw missiles at every sketch lock under the sun, miss with ninety percent of them, and don't care because they brought twenty frickin' tons of LRM ammo.

While I'm aware my record speaks against me, I'd say more like this: Kyatapult. Quicker, better reach on the beams, keeps most of the jump capacity, and Artemis designs better fit the CPLT-C1's fewer-but-faster launchers. Play in the second line rather than 899 meters from the fight and use ASP+Beagle for lightning fast paperdoll data you can communicate out to the team. You'll blow up more, but you'll also be generally way more impactful in fights. Also why the C1 is pretty decent with Thunderbolts, honestly - they're too heavy to be bloatboated the way LRMs always are, but the C1's hefty cooldown quirks gives it an edge when slinging a pair of mid-sized Thunderbolt launchers in medium direct-fire(ish) engagements.

Edited by 1453 R, 06 September 2024 - 02:34 PM.

[martian]

kalashnikity, on 06 September 2024 - 11:59 AM, said:

How about a middle ground?

Stock weapons, but with every tweak available, double heat sinks, endo (and ferro as applicable) ugraded engines.

As long as the specific weapons that show up in the paperdoll match perfectly with the original stock loadout.

Lots of stock weapon loadouts are fine, if you just add things like Endo and double heat sinks, and swap Standard engine for a Light, (or an XL, mostly in mech under 50 tons).

I can post numerous examples. I Can even run some matches to prove it.

This is no "middle ground".

What you described is an example of a massive customization effort.

kalashnikity, on 06 September 2024 - 02:24 PM, said:

updated build, last one was not enough ammo, too much heat sink.

You changed:

• internal structure type
  
• armor allocation
  
• engine type
  
• engine size
  
• type of heat sinks
  
• number of heat sinks
  
• amount of ammunition
  
• heavy equipment

The result is a heavily customized 'Mech. It is no stock 'Mech. It is not even close to be a stock 'Mech.

[Ttly]

kalashnikity, on 06 September 2024 - 02:24 PM, said:

-snip-

What you're describing there is a "stock+" build, it might be stock in spirit by keeping almost the same weapons loadout!
But it can't really be described as "stock" with how much changes it has, it's just significantly more durable, more ammo, more cooling, less wasted tonnage from a tabletop build that didn't take into account of MWO's quirks and gameplay, etc.

Edited by Ttly, 06 September 2024 - 08:29 PM.

[PelinalWhitestrake]

if it is to add stock, then all stock variants at sarna needs to be added.

i tried to run with a madcat with the alt config h, and it wasnt bad as a support, plus 2 heavy llg hurts for sniping, the issue will always be the team composition for both sides.

again, some of the old and new stocks for clan and mainly inner sphere mechs arent bad, but a timeline jump and is mechs finally having access to clan tech would be necessary like the atlas c and warhammer c
And now that there is a annihilator clan, other variants would be nice instead of the ol gauszilla.

Also new maps, even if pgi backports mech 5 maps or mech 4 mercs city, snow and forest maps.

Edited by PelinalWhitestrake, 07 September 2024 - 08:37 AM.

[kalashnikity]

Running an optimized Catapult C1 is not giving me any great games or terrible games It's shockingly stable, it is a weird play style to get used to riding that 270 meter line, and the 4 Jump Jets actually came in pretty useful.

It's one of the most consistent mechs I've ever seen. I did drop a bit in Tier while getting used to it, but after that break in period it's a fairly solid performer. Obvious limits of LRM are readily apparent and it's essentially the main weapon.

I started running a stock optimized Atlas-D afterwards, got consistently better games- nothing shockingly bad or good. It was a bit awkward to use the single SMR6, but I'm sure (with some practice) it is manageable. Mostly I added my LRM20 when I could, while closing, then used the 4ML and AC20 once they got in range, and tried to avoid anything but brawl situations . I didn't get much use from the SRM6 as a solo weapon group, maybe if I tied it to the AC20 and tried to ignore it, let it get random damage as happenstance allowed, I would get better use out of it.

I chose teh Atlas D and Catapult C1 two because

1. they are so iconic, and

2. they are are a bit awkward and non-meta.

After this experiment I'm very curious about some other mechs, like the Awesome 8Q, also iconic, but with something closer to a meta loadout.

I still have limited experience with this line of experimentation, but so far it looks like certain mechs, (if optimized by changing armor/engine/structure/heat management), can keep the original weapons load out (with mods to ammo amount) and still do well.

[kalashnikity]

martian, on 06 September 2024 - 08:11 PM, said:

This is no "middle ground".

What you described is an example of a massive customization effort.


You changed:

• internal structure type
  
• armor allocation
  
• engine type
  
• engine size
  
• type of heat sinks
  
• number of heat sinks
  
• amount of ammunition
  
• heavy equipment

The result is a heavily customized 'Mech. It is no stock 'Mech. It is not even close to be a stock 'Mech.

The weapons are 100% stock.

The enemy's paper doll will show a stock mech. Nobody but the builder knows what it really under the armor, aside from seeing how fast it can run, or how high it can jump.

It's universally agreed that most stock configurations are absolute fail, this is the only alternative, aside from massively weird quirking that will make everyone angry and be labor intensive.

End result is we will see at least a small baseline level of "apparently stock" mechs on the battlefield, grinding for MC (most MMORPG have grinding as a standard feature to get better gear, or in this case MC).

Would this not make everyone happy? Make it feel like you are playing the actual tabletop instead of everything being customized? Bring a new dynamic to the game?

Edited by kalashnikity, 09 September 2024 - 11:46 AM.

[kalashnikity]

Just thinking about how awkward an optimized Timberwolf Prime would be to drive.



Three weapon groups would do it.

Bracket builds are obviously not "meta". But Meta does not always win games. Unfortunately there is not much you can do with Omni Mechs.

[BlueDevilspawn]

kalashnikity, on 09 September 2024 - 11:45 AM, said:

The weapons are 100% stock.

The enemy's paper doll will show a stock mech. Nobody but the builder knows what it really under the armor, aside from seeing how fast it can run, or how high it can jump.

It's universally agreed that most stock configurations are absolute fail, this is the only alternative, aside from massively weird quirking that will make everyone angry and be labor intensive.

End result is we will see at least a small baseline level of "apparently stock" mechs on the battlefield, grinding for MC (most MMORPG have grinding as a standard feature to get better gear, or in this case MC).

Would this not make everyone happy? Make it feel like you are playing the actual tabletop instead of everything being customized? Bring a new dynamic to the game?

What you are proposing is an absolutely huge lift in a forced standardization (stock+-ing?) of mech variants and not worth the effort in my opinion.

"Would this not make everyone happy?" - you worded this in a very loaded way. No, it makes no one happy except a very small minority who as you put it wants to "feel like you are playing the actual tabletop". MWO is not tabletop, nor a tabletop simulator. It is a first person shooter, full stop.

Edited by BlueDevilspawn, 09 September 2024 - 11:51 AM.

[kalashnikity]

May or may not want to add rules like "weapons much remain in the same hard point location".

BlueDevilspawn, on 09 September 2024 - 11:51 AM, said:

What you are proposing is an absolutely huge lift in a forced standardization (stock+-ing?) of mech variants and not worth the effort in my opinion.

"Would this not make everyone happy?" - you worded this in a very loaded way. No, it makes no one happy except a very small minority who as you put it wants to "feel like you are playing the actual tabletop". MWO is not tabletop, nor a tabletop simulator. It is a first person shooter, full stop.

Oops I forgot this in an online discussion forum, and one of the whiniest groups of people I've ever seen.

you are right, nothing the devs do will make everybody happy, the whining will continue no matter what they do,

What are you so worried about? 2 or 3 MC gift for someone runnign a stock weapon load? You think that will ruin the game for everyone?

[torsie]

It is not exactly stock loadout, but this is my new awesome Awesome
And yes it can

[kalashnikity]

I just remember I have a stock weapon load out Urban, AC20 and Small Laser that does pretty well, admittedly it is heavily quirked for the AC20. I don't remember the exact engine, I think it might be an XL100 or maybe XL125, been a while since I piloted it. It's good at brawling though. For some reason that single AC20 makes an impression, especially when pop tarting.

torsie, on 09 September 2024 - 11:56 AM, said:

It is not exactly stock loadout, but this is my new awesome Awesome
And yes it can

Ouch.

I run the 8Q with 6 Snub Nose PPC, brutal war machine is brutal.

It's got that HSL +1 for PPC, comes in handy, I can fire two groups of 3 SNPPC.

Edited by kalashnikity, 09 September 2024 - 12:08 PM.

[kalashnikity]

AWS-8Q was weird to optimize. even keeping the STD engine I ended up with enough cooling to fire almost continuously, and a MK VII targeting computer.

Frankly even the bone stock configuration is not that bad either, if a bit under gunned for the tonnage.

only being able to go up to a 300 engine is the main limiting factor.

[Void Angel]

torsie, on 09 September 2024 - 11:56 AM, said:

It is not exactly stock loadout, but this is my new awesome Awesome
And yes it can

Do This Instead. Same boom, better sustainability at the cost of some convergence close-in. Or better yet, you can swap in SNPPCs for MAXIMUM BOOM!

[Void Angel]

kalashnikity, on 09 September 2024 - 01:03 PM, said:

only being able to go up to a 300 engine is the main limiting factor.

My friend, the gigantic hit boxes are its main limiting factor - that's the reason the Awesome has such amazing quirks for its tonnage, yet still doesn't see much play. It's hard to peek with, hard to brawl with, and ridiculously easy for opponents to localize damage to your 'mech.

[1453 R]

Can confirm - recently bought an AWS-8Q and playing it with a Super Stock in Spirit build of three heavy peeps and four small lasers for point defense (not because it's good, but because that's what I wanted to do with it). Despite how impenetrable the 'Mech looks, it feels about as sturdy as Grammy's antique china and absolutely cannot be a tip-of-the-spear 'Mech. I honestly kinda have to try and play it like a morbidly obese light 'Mech - carefully control my presence on the field and do my utmost to ensure I'm never in a position of being the enemy's focus target.

It is really difficult to score good games with, but man - when you're on point with those heavy peeps, in the zone and harvesting shoulders like you're a women's fashion designer, the damn thing feels invincible. Heh, too bad it's extremely not.

[kalashnikity]

Even when optimized, the AWS-8Q suffers from not having ERPPC in a game full of ERPPC and ERLL.
Not enough firepower for brawling, not enough range for sniping.
The STK-3FB however, did very well for me last night. The original stock configuration is already upgraded nicely, and has great heat management. The biggest thing my optimizing it did was allow higher top speed using endo and a 310-Lt engine, and I dropped a few heat sinks and added more ammo. The combo of ERLL and ALRM worked well together at sniping range, and the ERLL and ML worked well enough at close range.
It was not perfect at long or close range, but did not suffer greatly either, since 2/3 weapons were functional at close or long range. Sometimes I was able to bring all three weapon types to bear at the same time.When that happened, occasionally, I was wishing I left in a few more heat sinks.

Edited by kalashnikity, 10 September 2024 - 02:58 PM.

[Void Angel]

Are you really claiming that the PPC Awesome cannot mount ERPPCS?! It is literally quirked for heat, range, and velocity of all PPC types. It has more than enough firepower for close-range combat, and range quirks for ERPPCs. What it does not have is architecture that can support damage spreading.

The Stalker FB is an LRM-centric build, with all that entails, and is also a later publication in real-world chronology, for all that it is supposedly a Star League 'mech. In fact, it's the poster child for why stock mode is a bad idea. Even totally stock, the Stalker FB is far and away superior to its other variants - and numerous entire chassis.

[kalashnikity]

Void Angel, on 10 September 2024 - 03:53 PM, said:

Are you really claiming that the PPC Awesome cannot mount ERPPCS?! It is literally quirked for heat, range, and velocity of all PPC types. It has more than enough firepower for close-range combat, and range quirks for ERPPCs. What it does not have is architecture that can support damage spreading.

The Stalker FB is an LRM-centric build, with all that entails, and is also a later publication in real-world chronology, for all that it is supposedly a Star League 'mech. In fact, it's the poster child for why stock mode is a bad idea. Even totally stock, the Stalker FB is far and away superior to its other variants - and numerous entire chassis.

AWS-8Q has PPC and a small laser, not ErPPC

I'm testing stock weapons load outs, in a thread about stock weapon load outs, while tweaking the internals (and a little armor). Doing everything except altering the weapons.

It's become clear, as I play, that there are reasons meta is meta, and why "bracket builds" (which are common in lore, for reasons) are often lame in FPS and "Mech vs Mech only".

I haven't done a spread sheet on it, but I'd wager most quirks are meant for meta play anyways.

Stalker 3FB, as it walks off the assembly line, is balanced enough to do good enough, (at least with me driving it) to maintain.

[kalashnikity]

I've been honest with my assessment as I played these various builds. I also ran a Vulcan 5T, the one with ML.4, MG, Flamer. It was not an optimal experience. Not terrible, but far from great.

VL-5T was the first medium I tested.

Thinking about a stock Centurion (AC10, LMR 10, ML.2) very iconic, but probably far from optimal.

Blackjack with AC2.2 ML.4 might do ok though. Drive them crazy with sniping, but still enough ML to do some good. MAybe... maybe not.

What I've discovered is some builds, like the Awesome 8Q, are difficult to optimize, due to limits in engine size, or mediocre weapons.