157 replies to this topic

[Zakatak]

Dragon comes with shark teeth. Like a P-40 Warhawk.

Therefore, the Dragon is cooler.

[Mchawkeye]

Zakatak, on 27 January 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Dragon comes with shark teeth. Like a P-40 Warhawk.

Therefore, the Dragon is cooler.

Or A-10


For this reason. yes.

[Red Beard]

I also cannot see myself piloting a mech that looks like it is waiting to transform back into a Nissan Altima(2010 version with spoiler).

[Azantia]

As a House Davion loyalist, I can definately say I have fought my fair share of Dragon's. Any mechwarrior who doesnt have a healthy respect for the Dragon battlemech needs to go back to basic training and learn about the synergy between firepower, speed and armor, cause that is what makes the Dragon effective.

Most importantly, the speed of the dragon, coupled with its survivability and range make it an excellent harassment platform that can exploit even momentary gaps in enemy lines. And once it gets in there, its armor and speed give its mechwarrior the OPTION to stay and duke it out, or withdrawl to a safer distance and wait for another opportunity. Another thing worth mentioning? The Dragon can keep up with alot of 25 to 45 ton scout / shoot and scoot light fire support and harassment platforms which makes it something which any commander will worry about. Likewise, it can be the anchor for a quick raiding force of a mixed lance of 30 to 40 ton strikers.

Dragon vs Centurion? Dragon all the way. I love the centurion, its a great mech, but it has its limitations, and just doesnt have the same versatility or effectiveness (in my opinion) that the Dragon has. More firepower? Check...but speed and armor limitations are definately a problem.

Both have their place, and roles, but never under-estimate that damned drac machine they call a Dragon.

[Razed]

With the Dragon's speed it could easily fit in as a skirmisher giving a heavy punch to lances that might otherwise be all medium 'Mechs. Hit and run flanking attacks seem to fit the Dragon's profile perfectly.

[Kenyon Burguess]

thats quite a difference for a comparision...and i cant help but notice the hunchback was snubbed

i like the centurion over the dragon. I'm not a DCMS fan so that comes into play for me.

[verybad]

Geist Null, on 27 January 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

thats quite a difference for a comparision...and i cant help but notice the hunchback was snubbed

i like the centurion over the dragon. I'm not a DCMS fan so that comes into play for me.

Plenty of Feddies are voting for the Dragon over the Cent also...

Personally, I hope the Feddies get the Enforcer eventually, as I think it's a more interesting middle weight mech tactics wise. The Cent is a trooper, the Dragon is a Skirmisher/Cavalry mech, the Hunch is a Brawler. I think the next mech in will be either a light, a big heavy (70-75 ton), or a smaller Assault (80-90 ton)

While the Dragon is technically a heavy (60 tons) it plays like a medium. The Cent plays kind of like a small heavy ironically. The Cent has good firepower, but not enough speed to truly take advantage of it, or enough armor to survive in heavy pressure.

[Haydin]

Here's an excellent reason why:

[color=#000000]DRG-1G - The 1G [/color]Dragon[color=#000000] is a factory-produced variant of the 'Mech developed with the goal of reduced ammunition dependence at the expense of increased heat, replacing the Autocannon/5 with a [/color]PPC[color=#000000] and adding a third Medium Laser. The success of the so-called [/color]Grand Dragon[color=#000000] resulted in it completely replacing the original design.[/color]

F-ing sweet.

[EDMW CSN]

The Centurion getsa CN9-D "upgrade" that turns it from a light heavy to a scout hunter.
6/9 speed, LB-10X and LRM-10 with Artemis that can really put a hurt on the smaller guys.

The DRG-5K does the same damage profile at 6/9 speed with heavier armor and it has 3 medium lasers vs the Cent's 2 medium. But it's LRMs have no Artemis IV.

But of course, the Cent had an Artemis IV, if it removed it, it would be 3 medium lasers too....
Carbon copy anyone ?

Downside is both use XL engines.

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 27 January 2012 - 08:06 PM.

[revanus]

I think people are seriously overvaluing the Dragon, due to two misconceptions:

1) Speed is life

In the tabletop, this is absolutely true. The built-in evasion bonus for moving +3/+5/+7 hexes makes speed a shield, and faster mechs can utilize their speed with maximum effectiveness, to the point that a faster mech can almost always wind up with a rear firing solution--avoiding an opponents weapons entirely for that shooting turn.

But in simulation games, this is not how speed breaks down. Shooting is continuous, and it is extremely difficult to remain in the rear of a moving mech for very long. The fact that MW has traditionally made us use throttle control, rather than a more sensible standard FPS movement system, means recreating the positional advantages of the tabletop is extremely difficult under most situations, rather than to be expected.

Additionally, getting from 1000 meters to 200 meters happens pretty rapidly in real time. It's not so easy to continuously keep range on the battlefield.

2) Dragon vs. Centurion means we should pit them in head-to-head battle

MWO is not a game of 1 v. 1 encounters. Both the Centurion and the Dragon need to face a range of mechs, from scout to assault. Just because the Centurion is slower than a Dragon doesn't mean that a Dragon won't have to go toe-to-toe with a Wolfhound or a Phoenix Hawk. And conversely, just because a Dragon may be hanging back doesn't mean the Centurion is useless-- in any given match there are likely to be a bunch of close combats that the Centurion can pile in on. Speaking from experience (MW:LL in particular), the fact the magic 1000 meter mark is often rapidly traversed (with most mechs hanging around in very close proximity due to sub-1000M weapon ranges), combined with the fact that situational awareness drops in combat, means that close combat isn't particularly hard to find on the battlefield.

-------

Why I Choose the Centurion

For me, the centurion is practically the perfect medium mech, with a versatile weapon mix that is effective across all ranges. With an LRM-10, I have a substantial long-range threat. I can also take advantage of NARC beacons. Additionally, the combination of dual medium lasers and an AC-10 compliment each other over their range and gives me a substantial close-combat bite. As for speed, I've got more than enough to function in close-quarters.

As someone who prefers to either hang back and lob, or duke it out in the trenches, the Centurion fits my playstyle perfectly. The Dragon, with its 5/8 speed, gives decent mobility, and additional armor is always nice. But its weapon selection is a bit off. It has a similar standoff capacity in its LRM-10, but the AC-5 doesn't add much in terms of utility? Why? Because to use the AC-5, you have to be able to have direct LOS, but it's not powerful enough to justify a sniper's gameplay style. As a stationary marksman, you'll be exposed to units with much heavier long-range weaponry, like PPCs and ER large lasers.

Conversely, if you're in close range, you've got a decent load-out with 2 medium lasers (assuming 1 isn't rear-mounted) and an AC-5. But the AC-5 is a plinker--it doesn't change the equation in the same way that a decent SRM loadout or larger AC would. So as a brawler, the Dragon is a bit underpowered, though it can soak up a little more damage with its armor.

Given these facts, the only place a Dragon will truly shine is as a roving medium/long distance gun platform. It's only by skirting the edges of the battle and plinking away that the Dragon is able to put its weapon loadout and speed to maximum use. But long distance shots at speed are a bit of a challenge, and once you lose the LRMs (either due to damage or ammo depletion) all you really have is a lone AC-5. The Dragon can also do well with hit and runs, but this style of play is riskier given the relatively average close quarters loadout.

As such, I would usually choose the Centurion over the Dragon. With a Centurion, I have two clearly defined roles that I pull off very well--long range indirect/direct bombadier, and close range skirmisher. As these are the two playstyles I prefer, the slight armor and speed boost of the Dragon don't outweigh the AC-5/AC-10 tradeoff.

Now, if we were talking about a Grand Dragon...

Edited by revanus, 27 January 2012 - 10:40 PM.

[ice trey]

If you want a brawling 'mech, you're absolutely right - the Centurion would win the fight.

However, the Dragon is not a brawler. It's more of a skirmishy-harasser. Long ranged weapons with plenty of ammunition. You're not supposed to get up close and personal with a dragon (It's weapons don't really support that, especially when in the tabletop, one of those medium lasers is fixed in the rear arc). With the Dragon, you're trying to flank your opponent. (What else you don't see in the stats unless you know the tabletop game is that the Dragons slightly higher speed actually gives it a better evasion against weapons fire, and the AC5 and LRM mean that you can get a better chance of hitting your target at certain ranges [6 hexes for it's AC5 short ranged bracket, ideally]. In the case against the Centurion, that could be used to avoid it's AC10s' short range bracket of 5 - another modifier to your benefit) so that you can lay down harassing fire over a longer period of time. Once the enemy starts to react to your presence, you retreat and find a new firing position. That, or run-and-gun from a long range.

When it comes to the Draconis Combine, very few of it's heavies really act like heavies. Most of them are like oversized medium 'mechs (A whole lot of engine and not much else. Just look at the other DC Favorite, the Quickdraw). On the flip side, though, the DCMS has some very impressive light 'mechs it brings to the field. The Jenner and Panther are two of the most sought-after lights for their excellent striking power.

Edited by ice trey, 27 January 2012 - 11:52 PM.

[EDMW CSN]

So now what 5/8 heavy mech in 3050 does Steiner have ?
Oh they got the Zeus. 4/6 is fast enough

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 28 January 2012 - 12:27 AM.

[Dragon Lady]

revanus, on 27 January 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

I think people are seriously overvaluing the Dragon, due to two misconceptions:

1) Speed is life

In the tabletop, this is absolutely true. The built-in evasion bonus for moving +3/+5/+7 hexes makes speed a shield, and faster mechs can utilize their speed with maximum effectiveness, to the point that a faster mech can almost always wind up with a rear firing solution--avoiding an opponents weapons entirely for that shooting turn.

But in simulation games, this is not how speed breaks down. Shooting is continuous, and it is extremely difficult to remain in the rear of a moving mech for very long. The fact that MW has traditionally made us use throttle control, rather than a more sensible standard FPS movement system, means recreating the positional advantages of the tabletop is extremely difficult under most situations, rather than to be expected.

Additionally, getting from 1000 meters to 200 meters happens pretty rapidly in real time. It's not so easy to continuously keep range on the battlefield.

[snip]

I am still holding on to hope that PGI is going to fix what has always been, for me, the biggest problem with the Mechwarrior computer game series: the loss of movement as a defense, and the behavior of jump jets. I am also still holding on to hope that the maps will be big enough that maneuverability will be the primary advantage, and that missions will be more complex than simply "destroy the enemy."

I still want to be able to lure an Atlas away from what it's defending with long-range fire from medium Mechs, and then dart in with fast lights that blow the hell out of the objective, leaving that "uber-kewl assault mech" to scream in frustration that nobody's staying still to fight.

[Ceefood]

actually I would rather drive a tank than either of these 2

[trycksh0t]

The Maestro, on 27 January 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

Sure as hell looks like that hand is heavily obstructed by a medium laser in the middle of it. The PPC is a possibility, but that's impossible to infer from the images we've seen so far.

The arm-mounted medium laser on the Dragon's left arm is actually mounted on the underside of the forearm, not where the hand is. That 4-sided pyramid looking thing on the end of the arm is the Dragon's "fingers" when closed, the medium laser is the barrel that's mostly hidden behind the arm itself.

On-topic: In TT, I'd take a Dragon over a Centurion any day of the week. Yes, the Centurion has heavier close-range firepower, I won't deny that, however I like to depend on more than just weapons to deal damage in TT, and a 60-ton 'Mech that can charge with that speed is going to hurt. Combined with the heavy-hit punches from the left arm, and the Dragon isn't exactly a slouch when things are up-close and personal. In MWO, I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how things are implemented.

[Felicitatem Parco]

The Dragon can screen your Assault forces (it moves 85kph), but the Centurion isn't fast enough to scout, screen, or persue fleeing enemies. The Centurion is designed as a slow escort Mech that traded the speed you typically associate with medium Mechs for more brawling power than you'd expect. The Dragon, at the other end, uses its extra tonnage for speed instead of adding firepower. The Dragon, although a heavy Mech, can move to where he action is quickly, and retreating when it wants to.

So, you might want a Dragon if you want to dictate the terms of battle through maneuverability.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 28 January 2012 - 09:46 PM.

[chewie]

As It was used during MW4, the dragon acts not only as a first strike Heavy, but as an interceptor for scouts mechs.

You can use your (slightly) superior speed to get in to range to put the hurt on the mech that's shadowing your group and providing intel for his LRM equipped buddies for indirect fire missions.

It has good all round weaponry and not left to wait till it either gets in range or has to stay back to maintain its best range.

*edited, my stupidty, 2 heavies currently available*

If they run it like you did with MPBT (and they do with WoT) in which you have multiple mechs in your bay, then once you have the C-bills or house equivalent: K-bills, D-bills, S-bills, L-bills, M-bills but luckily now Randall Bills "cackles maniacally" to buy both if you so wish.

I'd definitely buy 1 just because I LIKE HOW IT IS, not just on what it can do.

Edited by chewie, 29 January 2012 - 11:32 AM.

[John Clavell]

I did a face palm for all the people that missed the Dragons AC arm got redesigned.

[dh crow]

Dragon Lady, on 28 January 2012 - 04:40 AM, said:

I am still holding on to hope that PGI is going to fix what has always been, for me, the biggest problem with the Mechwarrior computer game series: the loss of movement as a defense, and the behavior of jump jets. I am also still holding on to hope that the maps will be big enough that maneuverability will be the primary advantage, and that missions will be more complex than simply "destroy the enemy."

That'll be the day. From what they've been saying, all this urban warfare stuff is to reduce the importance of the range advantage, and speed was the biggest factor in keeping range. I'd very much like to be wrong - playing the range game is one of my favourite parts of Mechwarrior and I think it'd be a huge loss to the game's depth to sideline it.

Between a Dragon and a Centurion though, it's not as simple as range and speed vs. firepower. The firepower is too similar to mean much, so the Dragon really wins this quite easily. The real problem is, it's managed to outdo the Centurion with 10 extra tonnes at a 30% higher price, but it can't beat anything in its own class.

[Garret Williams]

For me, the choice would have to be based on where the mission would occur. My preference would be the Dragon though, for the maneuverability. Should the mission be in an urban environment, i'd have to make the switch.