24 replies to this topic

[Hauser]

Rationale

LRMs can deal an incredible amount of damage provided the target doesn't get to cover or has AMS. So the ideal range to launch LRMs from is just out of 180 meters. This limits the chance of the target finding cover and the exposure to AMS.

So I've been toying with the idea of using the HBK4-J in a lance of mediums. This means that unlike regular missile boats the mech is expected move up close to the brawl but not necessarily be in it. So the build needs to do good LRM damage, but also hold up in a brawl. The stock 4J is already fairly good at this, so I'm looking for some builds that improve on it.

I've come up with a few variations that work well, but I'd also like to see some input form other people.

Build 1

200 Standard Engine
Endosteel
1 DHS
AMS + 1T Ammo
Artemis LRM10 & LRM15 + 2T ammo
5 MLas
1 Tag.

Costs about 60k for a repair after a complete tear down, 30K of which come from reloading.

This is about the most powerful variant I could come up with. The LRMs can dump a good 50pts damage to the upper body of a mech (most of them hit!). When using tag the grouping is a bit tighter but I doubt it is worth it. I tend to keep it on for other LRM users.

You could replace tag with another ton of ammo as I do tend to run out of ammo before the match is over but by then the laser suffice for mopping up. However that would increase the cost which I would say is a big downfall. The whole installation costs about 2 million CB and with a 60k repair bill eating up quarter to half of your earnings.

If you want more speed or if you have the to save weight, you can replace the LRMS with a single LRM20 launcher or two LRM10. I'm not sure which is more cost effective yet. I do have the feeling that with Artemis you want the bigger launcher as it saves another ton, however the 4J has a maximum of 10 tubes per hardpoint.

Build 2

200 Standard Engine
Endosteel
1 DHS
AMS + 1T Ammo
LRM15 & LRM15 + 2T ammo
5 MLas
1 Tag.

Costs about 45k for a repair after a complete tear down, 15K of which come from reloading.

By the numbers this variant drops 10 damage more on target however the damage is spread out more. I haven't decided yet which is more effective but I feel the first build kills a little faster while this build tends to do economically allot better.

Again this build is low on ammo but it is sufficient for the job it has to do. Weight savings on this build are allot harder. But replacing medium lasers with smalls, gives you another 2.5 tons, either for Artemis or a bigger engine or more ammo. Though I feel this kinda shifts the build out of its intended role and puts it in the LRM boat category. As an alternative though, only replacing the torso medium lasers with smalls gives you 1.5 tons to play with.

Conclusion

I've come up with two builds, a more expensive build also hits better on target and a cheaper build that does more damage, but spreads it out more. While I feel the first build works better, I don't have the numbers to back this up. What do you think is better overall?

edit:

I suppose the question comes down to this. When using multiple launchers, is the extra accuracy from Artemis worth sacreficing 10 pts of damage and an increased rearm bill?

Edited by Hauser, 07 November 2012 - 10:44 AM.

[Raso]

I'm still in favor of the 4SP. Even as a LRM unit as the placement of the beams in arms allows for it to play the role of a brawler if it runs out of LRM ammo or if the situation changes.

The symmetrical placement of the launchers also means you have superior redundancy in that you can lose one torso but you don't lose all of your launchers. You can also use this to minimize duds by firing your left or right launcher off interdependently when in tight cover to prevent missiles from impacting on a nearby obstacle.

Also because you can disperse the missile launchers to separate torsos your launchers, lasers and possible XL engine aren't all competing for critical slots.

As it stands I'm hard pressed to find something the 4J can do that the 4SP can't do better.

Edited by Raso, 07 November 2012 - 11:12 AM.

[KosherHamSammich]

Very good build out. It seems that budget LRM boats are going to be the rage until ECM comes out, and maybe beyond that.

You can do the same with the CN9-A Chassis

Standard 170 Engine (55.1 kp/h)
13 standard heat sinks
Standard internals
2 Artemis LRM10
1 Artemis LRM5
1 Med Laser
1 Small Laser
1 AMS +1 ton ammo
5 tons LRM ammo.

[Hex Pallett]

There's nothing economic if you're running LRM, unless you go with the non-rearm 75% charity ammo.

[MagicHamsta]

Helmstif, on 07 November 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

There's nothing economic if you're running LRM, unless you go with the non-rearm 75% charity ammo.

^(O.o)^

[Raso]

Helmstif, on 07 November 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

There's nothing economic if you're running LRM, unless you go with the non-rearm 75% charity ammo.

Artemis ammo is very expensive. If you're going to use the free 75% ammo then be sure to drop with AT LEAST 3 tons of ammo. Especially if you are going to mount dual LRM15s or LRM20s.

[Star Swirls Beard]

What's this about free ammo? I've had to pay even after a match where I only fired one volley of LRMs.

[Raso]

Star Swirls Beard, on 07 November 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

What's this about free ammo? I've had to pay even after a match where I only fired one volley of LRMs.

You get your ammo refilled to 75% for free. You only need to pay for the remaining 25% of refill. You need to turn the auto reload feature off to take advantage of this as well as pack some extra tons of ammo if you go through a lot of ammo in a given match.

[MagicHamsta]

Raso, on 07 November 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

Artemis ammo is very expensive.

o_o''
No kidding.
D:

[Hauser]

Helmstif, on 07 November 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

There's nothing economic if you're running LRM, unless you go with the non-rearm 75% charity ammo.

Well yes, at first sight 30k on rearm might not be economic, however it is not 120k or 195k!

[Hauser]

Raso, on 07 November 2012 - 11:08 AM, said:

As it stands I'm hard pressed to find something the 4J can do that the 4SP can't do better.

Overwhelm AMS. The 4SP has 12 tubes, the 4J has 20.

[Mechwarrior413183]

I think this is better for LRMing but it is much more vulnerable with no AMS not tried it as I don't have a 4J just using the mechbay tool. Use the 75% free reload and don't rearm spam all your LRMs till you run out then brawl.

2 LRM10+Artemis
Endo
DHS(12)
5 ML
5 tons LRM ammo
Standard 200 engine

If an AMS is need then could drop 3 torso MLs to smalls maybe or one DHS and one ML to SL.

[Raso]

From what I've seen, actually, rearm costs with Artemis SRMs isn't terrible. I have 2 tons of ammo and have yet to break bast 65k in total repair cost with roughly 30k of that being ammo. I can't comment on LRM ammo, however.

Hauser, on 07 November 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Overwhelm AMS. The 4SP has 12 tubes, the 4J has 20.

Does that actually affect your rate of fire if you are using an LRM20? I thought they always launched 20 missiles?

[Shalune]

I can't not chime in in-favor of my beloved 4J (if my signature isn't a clue, it's my main mech.)

First and foremost to Raso. Yes it does affect it. I've played with LRM 15s on an SP and it will fire each individual launcher in 3 sets of 5 missiles. This holds true on most mechs I've used. In fact the NARC pod on the Raven 3L will space the firing of SSRM2s. This splitting barrages can be an advantage and a disadvantage. While I have no way of testing this, my assumption is splitting the volley means more missiles fall to AMS. On the other hand it spreads out cockpit shake, when cockpit shake is working at least. I play SP LRM builds specifically for that spread out shake.

So the J has the advantage of more damaging volleys using the same launchers. It's worth noting it's using 2 sets of 10 tubes. So an LRM 15 splits on the J as well firing 10 and then 5. Most people also go crazy over arm weapons, but I like the J's torso loadout which lets you skimp on arm armor to free up weight. The grouped weapons also make firing into nearby objects much more predictable.The J can use cover more effectively as a boat because it can poke its right third out and still fire all of its missiles. I like the laser grouping for this same reason, it's easier to shoot past teammates and objects reliably.

[Raso]

Shalune, on 07 November 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

I can't not chime in in-favor of my beloved 4J (if my signature isn't a clue, it's my main mech.)

First and foremost to Raso. Yes it does affect it. I've played with LRM 15s on an SP and it will fire each individual launcher in 3 sets of 5 missiles. This holds true on most mechs I've used. In fact the NARC pod on the Raven 3L will space the firing of SSRM2s. This splitting barrages can be an advantage and a disadvantage. While I have no way of testing this, my assumption is splitting the volley means more missiles fall to AMS. On the other hand it spreads out cockpit shake, when cockpit shake is working at least. I play SP LRM builds specifically for that spread out shake.

So when firing 2 LRM15s at the same time on a J is that 2 sets of 10 followed by 2 sets of 5? Huh, that's one of those things you'd think they'd tell you somewhere....

[Shalune]

Raso, on 07 November 2012 - 07:06 PM, said:

So when firing 2 LRM15s at the same time on a J is that 2 sets of 10 followed by 2 sets of 5? Huh, that's one of those things you'd think they'd tell you somewhere....

Yup. I can't wait to try an LRM20 on the Raven 3L's NARC pod or AWS-8M's SRM2 arm. In fact I'll go do that on the raven now just to see it.

EDIT:
Success! So it does indeed fire 20 missiles 1 at a time. Interesting to note it doesn't start the recycle until the last missile is fired. So if you use larger launchers than your mech can fire in a single volley you will slow your over all rate of fire slightly.

Edited by Shalune, 07 November 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[Raso]

Shalune, on 07 November 2012 - 07:09 PM, said:

Yup. I can't wait to try an LRM20 on the Raven 3L's NARC pod or AWS-8M's SRM2 arm. In fact I'll go do that on the raven now just to see it.

Yes, please share how that works out.
Also, does this effect refire time? Like, does the refire timer start only after all missiles have been launched?

[Spectre999]

I'm too testing out the Hunchie as a LRM boat, here are my observations thus far:

1) HBK 4SP is clearly superior to 4J variant when it comes to overall handling.
First of all, you can spread the LRMs evenly to left torso and right torso. Even if either is blown away, you can still provide long range support. The 4J variant often left me with nothing but one good laser arm and the AMS after the side torso was blown off.
Second of all, the 4SP has two energy slots on each arm, it allows you greater flexibility here. It's a whole world of difference if you can put the 4x MLAS on your arms and not the torso.

2) It's not worth it to struggle and fit the LRM 20 in. The extra 3 tonnes are better spent elsewhere, and honestly, I would question whether the full 20 missile package is actually effectively hitting the target. It does so on assault mechs, but you still need to apply a fair bit of damage to them anyways. Also, LRM 15 uses the ammo much more economically, imo.

3) Endo steel internals is a must to get anything done with the good ole family hatchback, I agree with you on that.

4) It's not worth it downgrading the engine. You can go down to 195, maybe 190, but anything lower is just pushing it.
For the record, I tried going down to 160, I was able to fit dual LRM 20, but it was abyssmal (not to mention some of the weight gain was lost on the additional HS required). You need to stay mobile, if only to duck incoming enemy LRMs.

5) CASE seems not to be worth it at the moment. Even if I am carrying 4 tons of LRM ammo. If you have a half ton to spare, go for it, but I never notice much of a difference with or without it.

6)XL engine is a tarp. Please don't use it on a hunchie, because it gets you killed. Your mileage may vary if your teammates are smart, but if you want to PuG, avoid it.

I am experimenting with two builds at the moment,


A ) HBK 4SP - the true boat.
200 Engine
AMS + 1x Ammo
2x LRM 15 + 4 x LRM ammo on either torso.
2x MPlas on both arms
Heat sinks : 11
Endo-steel internals
Shaved off some leg armor to make it all fit.

I have to say, I am a big fan of MPlas. It heats up a lot (EFF: 0.98,) so I have to watch out that gauge, especially on the Cinder Valley map.
Other than that, it's nice to swat pesky commandos and finish stuff your LRMs didn't kill.
It's absolutely critical to unlock the basic EXP upgrades for heat efficiency. It needs an additional HS or two without them.
It has enough LRM ammo to run the whole match on free reloads.

This build can accept lots of tweaking. You can swap out the MPlas for 4x Mediums, play with one laser only, or go full LRM boat. Your call what to do with the remaining tonnage. Artemis, bigger engine, more reloads, more heatsinks all sound fair.

It's also possible to save a ton by emptying the arms and dropping the armor to zero. You still have the cockpit slot for laser.
Of course, you have to be comfortable with torso aiming... personally I prefer the greater range of arm movement.

B ) HBK - 4J - because I spent a lot of exp on it and hate it to go to waste.

250 Engine
1x Artemis LRM 10 + 1 x LRM ammo on torso.
2x MPlas on both arms
Heat sinks : 18
Endo-steel internals
Shaved off some leg armor to make it all fit.
Looks similar, but plays differently. No longer a LRM boat, it still is long-range capable. I used it to test if the artemis really makes a difference. I haven't decided yet, but it feels right and economical on the LRM 10 package. I play it like a heavy scout, because it's pretty vigorous once I unlocked the Elite 10% speed upgrade for it. Heat Efficiency of 1.4 means I can link-fire the dual Mplas with comfort, even on cinder valley.

Lots of changes you can make here, especially if you swap it for the superior 4SP. You can go for 2x LRM 5, swapping some heatsinks for a second LRM 10, especially without artemis.
Also, if you're not a fan of the Mplas, other weapon configurations are possible.
Notice the lack of AMS, I was struggling to make room for it, but didn't want to settle for a smaller engine. It's possible to survive without it with intelligent use of cover, but it feels safer with it, especially in the current working environment.
Didn't have the $$ to test the Dual HS here. They may save some space too, although I am skeptical of it.


Happy hunting with your family hatchbacks people. This ride can take you places (:

Edited by Spectre999, 08 November 2012 - 06:56 AM.

[Hauser]

Spectre999, on 08 November 2012 - 06:50 AM, said:

(...)

Notice the lack of AMS, I was struggling to make room for it, but didn't want to settle for a smaller engine. It's possible to survive without it with intelligent use of cover, but it feels safer with it, especially in the current working environment.
Didn't have the $$ to test the Dual HS here. They may save some space too, although I am skeptical of it.

Nice builds, but I feel they are focused on single combat.

I kinda came up with my design in the context of being used in a lance. With that in mind AMS is mandatory as it contributes to the LRM shield of the whole group. That is also the reason I chose to use mediums lasers over pulse as the target will be a little further away, additionally it saves some weight for a bigger LRM launcher and makes the mech run cooler.

Now that engine heatsinks have been patched to provide a bonus, double heatsinks are worth it. You'll either run allot cooler or run at the same heat efficiency and save weight.

[Raso]

Hauser, on 08 November 2012 - 08:44 AM, said:

Nice builds, but I feel they are focused on single combat.

I kinda came up with my design in the context of being used in a lance. With that in mind AMS is mandatory as it contributes to the LRM shield of the whole group. That is also the reason I chose to use mediums lasers over pulse as the target will be a little further away, additionally it saves some weight for a bigger LRM launcher and makes the mech run cooler.

Now that engine heatsinks have been patched to provide a bonus, double heatsinks are worth it. You'll either run allot cooler or run at the same heat efficiency and save weight.

I use medium beam lasers for the same reason. I like to brawl but some times it's impossible (or ill advised) to advance and if that's the case your pulse lasers aren't of much use. You COULD mix pulse with beam so you have options but I'm also not a fan of the tonnage of the MPL and I find that 4 medium beam lasers allows me to boat more heat sinks while also initiating combat from a further distance. Using chain fire and good firing discipline helps to kep the heat down and maintain a steady stream of lasers as you advance.

If I were to use a pulse laser it would be a large pulse laser. I used them before the patch in my Hunchback 4SP to great effect but haven't touched them since they were "fixed".