35 replies to this topic

[HuskerUK]

I had an AC20 setup for my Huncie and it was a great little mech but then I got the Wang and in my opinion the Wang outshines the 4G as an AC20 mech.

I want to do something with my 4G since they just up'd the engine max so I'm looking for suggestions on builds, they don't need to be cookie cutter or meta builds just something that I can run that's different to the AC20 but is still a support brawler like the 4G is suppose to be.

I'm a semi casual player(I pug and 4 man) so I doubt my ELO is high enough to worry about only having the best build, so if you've got some crazy ideas that work send them this way.

Thanks in advance

Edit

The reason I didn't revive an old thread is because of the up'd limit on engines and I want this new build to utilize that fact.

Edited by HuskerUK, 22 August 2013 - 07:16 AM.

[Moonraven83]

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...8419c4e26c36ec3

3 MG's +2t Ammo, 2 LL and 1 ML

[HuskerUK]

Moonraven83, on 22 August 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...8419c4e26c36ec3

3 MG's +2t Ammo, 2 LL and 1 ML

I was thinking along the lines of this while at work today but I wanted LPL. Couldn't get it to work, loosing 4 tonnes would be hard to do

Edit

Or so I thought http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4e57731d7d8421c

Edited by HuskerUK, 22 August 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Garrond]

Since the LBX10 got buffed last patch, why not give it a try? In order to increase dmg, just pair it with an MLas in the head slot. The arms go with 1 MLas each - as usual.

[HuskerUK]

Garrond, on 22 August 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

Since the LBX10 got buffed last patch, why not give it a try? In order to increase dmg, just pair it with an MLas in the head slot. The arms go with 1 MLas each - as usual.

Something like this? http://mwo.smurfy-ne...dc2be2b92fe0c97

[Sasha Volkova]

Well this is not the best build out there, nor is it in anyway the strongest.
It runs an XL which is considered NOT good in a hunchback.
But if you run pugs anyway, then I guess you are aiming to have fun, right?
This build may just help with that seeing as they buffed the LBX anyway.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4435264d59b3c9c

[slayerkdm]

No offense to Ookami, but you dont really need an XL to run that build. I changed my G, which is really the only mech I run since founders, to 3ML/LBX with the 275 yesterday. I run no additional heatsinks besides the extra in the 275. It runs cooler than my standard 3ML/AC20 build. I had no heat issues on any map, though I did not play Mt Doom or Caldera. It does run cooler though, as I did at times have to watch heat on it before and didnt at all yesterday.

I found it as effective. I dont think the LBX is better than the AC20 now, but its viable and different. I think of it more as a DPS build now, than a killer build. I ran five quick games and had a K/D over 1 won 4 out of the five games. Very small sample, and what I drew from it was that its viable, and kills and damages about the same as the AC20, but playes differently.

With more ammo, I fired more often, not having to save those precious AC20 rounds.

To squeeze in the MG's you will have to make a heatsink cut and probably a ton of LBX ammo to run a standard. If I was going to run the XL to squeeze in the MG's, I would swithc the Medium Lasers to Medium Pulses.

The other option is running a Gauss build with the XL, and play at range.

The main thing is its a G. smile.

[Bishop Steiner]

HuskerUK, on 22 August 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

I had an AC20 setup for my Huncie and it was a great little mech but then I got the Wang and in my opinion the Wang outshines the 4G as an AC20 mech.

I want to do something with my 4G since they just up'd the engine max so I'm looking for suggestions on builds, they don't need to be cookie cutter or meta builds just something that I can run that's different to the AC20 but is still a support brawler like the 4G is suppose to be.

I'm a semi casual player(I pug and 4 man) so I doubt my ELO is high enough to worry about only having the best build, so if you've got some crazy ideas that work send them this way.

Thanks in advance

Edit

The reason I didn't revive an old thread is because of the up'd limit on engines and I want this new build to utilize that fact.

my 2ct?

If you don't plan on an AC20, use the 4H instead.

[heleqin]

Bishop Steiner, on 22 August 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

my 2ct?

If you don't plan on an AC20, use the 4H instead.

triple AC2 is viable in the G as well, but yeah, if you're only running 1 ballistic (and its not the AC20), the H gives you more options and a smaller hunch.

[Sh4dow78]

have FUN!:HBK-4G

[Deathlike]

Try the Gaussback first.

HBK-4G

[Sasha Volkova]

slayerkdm, on 22 August 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

No offense to Ookami, but you dont really need an XL to run that build. I changed my G, which is really the only mech I run since founders, to 3ML/LBX with the 275 yesterday. I run no additional heatsinks besides the extra in the 275. It runs cooler than my standard 3ML/AC20 build. I had no heat issues on any map, though I did not play Mt Doom or Caldera. It does run cooler though, as I did at times have to watch heat on it before and didnt at all yesterday.

I found it as effective. I dont think the LBX is better than the AC20 now, but its viable and different. I think of it more as a DPS build now, than a killer build. I ran five quick games and had a K/D over 1 won 4 out of the five games. Very small sample, and what I drew from it was that its viable, and kills and damages about the same as the AC20, but playes differently.

With more ammo, I fired more often, not having to save those precious AC20 rounds.

To squeeze in the MG's you will have to make a heatsink cut and probably a ton of LBX ammo to run a standard. If I was going to run the XL to squeeze in the MG's, I would swithc the Medium Lasers to Medium Pulses.

The other option is running a Gauss build with the XL, and play at range.

The main thing is its a G. smile.

No offense to you, but you did not build what i suggested.
the closest you can get to my build, with a standard engine, is this : http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2160b04d28b4c40

So if you want a 275 Standard with 2 machineguns, 3 M lasers and an LBX, then you will need to seriously cut back on armour to the point where you become an oversized slow jenner.

Furthermore the build with the stock engine would be lacking ammo so bad that you might aswell not bring any weapons except for the M lasers anyway...

So no... you did not make my build with a stock 275 engine and if you did it was simply not viable.

Remember, my build had 2 machineguns, 3 medium lasers and an LBX - if your standard build does not have all those weapons then it is not the same as my build.

If you retain your statement, then by all means, post a build made on smurfy.
I surely would enjoy seeing it.

Edited by 0okami, 23 August 2013 - 10:07 AM.

[Brenden]

Two AC/2s, 25 mm range. 30 seem too bounce too often.
'nuff said.

[Lugh]

Try 2 Uac5S....

[Reslin]

0okami, on 23 August 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

No offense to you, but you did not build what i suggested.
the closest you can get to my build, with a standard engine, is this : http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2160b04d28b4c40

So if you want a 275 Standard with 2 machineguns, 3 M lasers and an LBX, then you will need to seriously cut back on armour to the point where you become an oversized slow jenner.

Furthermore the build with the stock engine would be lacking ammo so bad that you might aswell not bring any weapons except for the M lasers anyway...

So no... you did not make my build with a stock 275 engine and if you did it was simply not viable.

Remember, my build had 2 machineguns, 3 medium lasers and an LBX - if your standard build does not have all those weapons then it is not the same as my build.

If you retain your statement, then by all means, post a build made on smurfy.
I surely would enjoy seeing it.

0okami, on 23 August 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

No offense to you, but you did not build what i suggested.
the closest you can get to my build, with a standard engine, is this : http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2160b04d28b4c40

So if you want a 275 Standard with 2 machineguns, 3 M lasers and an LBX, then you will need to seriously cut back on armour to the point where you become an oversized slow jenner.

Furthermore the build with the stock engine would be lacking ammo so bad that you might aswell not bring any weapons except for the M lasers anyway...

So no... you did not make my build with a stock 275 engine and if you did it was simply not viable.

Remember, my build had 2 machineguns, 3 medium lasers and an LBX - if your standard build does not have all those weapons then it is not the same as my build.

If you retain your statement, then by all means, post a build made on smurfy.
I surely would enjoy seeing it.

He implied he doesn't run machine guns and I've tested the same setup. I think he's referring to a build that looks like this and I can tell you that it works. It doesn't use an XL engine and has less dps than the typical 4G build but it makes up for that in more speed and the speed difference is enough to be viable. 25 Firepower and 4.11 dps at 96KPH (with speed tweak) is a big deal. Is it better than the STD250 35 firepower AC20 hunchie? No but it is nearly as good. It doesn't need the machine guns to be effective. I am not knocking your build just defending Slayer's.

[Sasha Volkova]

Reslin, on 23 August 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

He implied he doesn't run machine guns and I've tested the same setup. I think he's referring to a build that looks like this and I can tell you that it works. It doesn't use an XL engine and has less dps than the typical 4G build but it makes up for that in more speed and the speed difference is enough to be viable. 25 Firepower and 4.11 dps at 96KPH (with speed tweak) is a big deal. Is it better than the STD250 35 firepower AC20 hunchie? No but it is nearly as good. It doesn't need the machine guns to be effective. I am not knocking your build just defending Slayer's.

I am quite aware that is the build he has in his mind, which is why I pointed out that unless it has 2 machineguns 3 m lasers and 1 lbx then it is not the same build and he should not have stated that it was in the first place.
I see that entire point flew over your head. but there you go. the explanation you apparently needed.

[Reslin]

0okami, on 23 August 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

I am quite aware that is the build he has in his mind, which is why I pointed out that unless it has 2 machineguns 3 m lasers and 1 lbx then it is not the same build and he should not have stated that it was in the first place.
I see that entire point flew over your head. but there you go. the explanation you apparently needed.

There's no need to be snide. I don't see why the way he worded it is bothering you so much, why are you taking it so personally? One could argue it is the same build. It lacks the machine guns yes but the general concept is functionally the same. It's a variant of the same build just as each hunchback variant is still a hunchback. It's still an LB10-X AC Hunchback build regardless if it has machine guns or not. I'd recommend not constantly liking your own posts. The community kind of frowns on that.

Edited by Reslin, 23 August 2013 - 01:08 PM.

[Sasha Volkova]

Reslin, on 23 August 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

There's no need to be snide. I don't see why the way he worded it is bothering you so much, why are you taking it so personally? One could argue it is the same build. It lacks the machine guns yes but the general concept is functionally the same. It's a variant of the same build just as each hunchback variant is still a hunchback. It's still an LB10-X AC Hunchback build regardless if it has machine guns or not. I'd recommend not constantly liking your own posts. The community kind of frowns on that.

I am not trying to snap at you, I am making a point.
How you interpret it is up to you.

One can argue that a brick in red and a brick in black are the same since they are still bricks.
One can also argue that a banana and an apple are the same since they are fruits.
A more extreme case - one could argue that you and I are the same since we are both humans.

With all the above you remove any and everything that is characteristic and creates the individual.

Therefore:
My mech had machineguns his did not, that means they are not the same and should not be called the same seeing as they are clearly different.
If you still dont get it then my energy is wasted.

As for liking my own posts, I like posts that are worth liking, it just happens to be that my posts always are imo worth liking.

Edited by 0okami, 23 August 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[Reslin]

0okami, on 23 August 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

I am not trying to snap at you, I am making a point.
How you interpret it is up to you.

One can argue that a brick in red and a brick in black are the same since they are still bricks.
One can also argue that a banana and an apple are the same since they are fruits.

I am sure you dont agree with the above, so therefore:
My mech had machineguns his did not, that means they are not the same and should not be called the same seeing as they are clearly different.
If you still dont get it then my energy is wasted.

As for liking my own posts, I like posts that are worth liking, it just happens to be that my posts always are imo worth liking.

No. I get it but I don't agree. In this case his build is a red apple. Your build is a green apple. They're both LBX10 builds that look slightly different. Just as the green apple and the red apple look slightly different. A banana looks and tastes quite different than an apple. Both are fruit but are obviously different types of fruit. Your logic implies no build can be the same unless they are built 100% the same. If one build has one machine gun and the other has two they are no way remotely the same or should be called the same. If he did build your build exactly but with a different engine the fact that it has a different engine means that it technically should not be called the same type of build.

I disagree with this. Your green apple is different than his red apple but they are both apples. The problem here is this isn't a "Banana and apples are the same because they're fruit." it's more in line with your red/black brick. I'm the type that would still call it a brick without differentiating the color. Also I would agree if someone said we're both humans therefore we're the same. In a sense that is quite correct. We are human and our main difference is life experiences.

Edited by Reslin, 23 August 2013 - 01:24 PM.

[Sasha Volkova]

Reslin, on 23 August 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

No. I get it but I don't agree. In this case his build is a red apple. Your build is a green apple. They're both LBX10 builds that look slightly different. Just as the green apple and the red apple look slightly different. A banana looks and tastes quite different than an apple. Both are fruit but are obviously different types of fruit. Your logic implies no build can be the same unless they are built 100% the same. If one build has one machine gun and the other has two they are no way remotely the same or should be called the same. If he did build your build exactly but with a different engine the fact that it has a different engine means that it technically should not be called the same type of build.

I disagree with this. Your green apple is different than his red apple but they are both apples. The problem here is this isn't a "Banana and apples are the same because they're fruit." it's more in line with your red/black brick. I'm the type that would still call it a brick without differentiating the color. Also I would agree if someone said we're both humans therefore we're the same. In a sense that is quite correct. We are human and our main difference is life experiences.

A green apple and a red apple taste differently, grow differently, take different amount of time to mature, can be used to make different things that needs to taste a specific way... the list goes on.

I swear everytime I see my notifications and realize one is from you, I sigh slightly because already then I know that this is going to be an even greater waste of my time than the previous one was...

Seriously though darling you are wavering more than a flag in a storm atm....
Make up your mind, claim one thing and then stick to it.
Dont contradict yourself over and over again in the same post....

Reslin, on 23 August 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

I disagree with this. Your green apple is different than his red apple but they are both apples. The problem here is this isn't a "Banana and apples are the same because they're fruit." it's more in line with your red/black brick. I'm the type that would still call it a brick without differentiating the color. Also I would agree if someone said we're both humans therefore we're the same. In a sense that is quite correct. We are human and our main difference is life experiences.

According to this you also agree with what I said when I said:

One can also argue that a banana and an apple are the same since they are fruits.

And if so then this entire debate is a waste of time as you have already agreed with me that its not the same.

Reslin, on 23 August 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

If one build has one machine gun and the other has two they are no way remotely the same or should be called the same. If he did build your build exactly but with a different engine the fact that it has a different engine means that it technically should not be called the same type of build.

Here you are finally starting to get it. I must applaud you for getting closer to the the core of the matter and finally being if nothing else then a little bit closer to enlightenment.

Now however, with the slow progress we are making here I must admit that you are starting to get on my nerves, should you decide to reply to this, then by all means go ahead but I for one am done wasting my time trying to make you understand something that clearly went over your head to begin with.
I would say that caring was one of my virtues but I am afraid that I simply have run out of cares to give for the time being.

Still have a nice day.
-0okami