16 replies to this topic

[Sephlock]

Even with the costs, endo would still edge it out, IMO. And few mechs can spare the 14 slots for both endo and ferro (IS versions), so that means ff would stay in the dustbin, along with mgs, flamers, lbx auto cannons, ppcs, ultra jammercanons, er I mean ultra macro cannons, err I mean ultra auto cannons, ac/5s and ac/10s, pulse lasers (especially splas and maybe lplas), SRMs, possibly SSRMs,.... well, you get the idea.

[JP Josh]

hmm iv seen some build that use those but thier all very very select in what they do.

ppc's have moved to sniper commandos those bugers hunt atlases at range and are the most annoying/deadly thing to ignore next to lrms

[p00k]

ac5s, ac10s, and srm's are still pretty good

[Eltyr]

Ferro fibrous is useful for certain builds, but definitely far inferior to endosteel. A lot of those other things you mentioned though, are very useful. Ultra autocannons can be very useful even if they jam constantly, without a macro. One match, over 400 damage on a UAC (and dual ML) build, where the UAC jammed SEVEN times in an 81kph Raven. The UAC did most of the damage. SRMS give a hell of a punch for their size and weight. SSRMS are excellent light hunters, as well as being good supplementary weapons. Loss of CT hit did NOT make them useless. The lbx cannon has excellent size to damage ratio for a ballistic; srms slaughter it, of course, at the cost of an even larger spread.

[Elizander]

They should really lower the price on that LBX10.

Ferro is something you get if:

1) Already have Endo Steel (and perhaps an XL engine)
2) You still have tons of crit space
3) Need more weight freed up

[TruePoindexter]

Elizander, on 11 November 2012 - 01:36 AM, said:

They should really lower the price on that LBX10.

Ferro is something you get if:

1) Already have Endo Steel (and perhaps an XL engine)
2) You still have tons of crit space
3) Need more weight freed up

This. Mostly scouts looking to save just a little room to fit in some more tech.

[Panserbjorne]

TruePoindexter, on 11 November 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

This. Mostly scouts looking to save just a little room to fit in some more tech.

I second this. I really haven't seen another use regardless of price, especially considering how much space DHS take up.

[BloodLegacy]

No, the only real cost with FF is in the crits, and the weight savings is half of that of Endo Steel.

[Warma]

I use FF in both my Raven builds which already have Endo, XL engine and DHS. I assume you can't really fit both FF and Endo in anything larger, but in the 35-ton mechs it gives you an additional half a ton of space.

[xDark]

You guys are missing the point. The point of FF is not to save weight; it's to get more armor. FF is 12% more resilient than standard armor, giving you a tad more survivability if you don't need any more heat efficiency.

EDIT: I'm wrong.

Edited by xDark, 11 November 2012 - 02:58 AM.

[Elizander]

xDark, on 11 November 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

You guys are missing the point. The point of FF is not to save weight; it's to get more armor. FF is 12% more resilient than standard armor, giving you a tad more survivability if you don't need any more heat efficiency.

No, no, no. The maximum amount of armor you can put on your mech does not change. A mech with standard armor and a mech with Ferro armor will have the same maximum armor points. There is no difference. Ferro is just lighter so you save space. That is all it does. Using ferro does not make your mech tougher, unless you ran out of tonnage to max out your armor.

[MustrumRidcully]

Not sure. I think the installation cost are largely irrelevant in the long term, the repair cost aren't. It is probably a genuine reason to not do it even if you have the space. (And you should never upgrade if you haven't tried the other Crit-costing upgrades and changes. XL Engines, Endo-Steel, Double Heat Sinks...)

[Aquilus]

Eltyr, on 11 November 2012 - 01:02 AM, said:

Ferro fibrous is useful for certain builds, but definitely far inferior to endosteel.

FF isn't all that useful. The tonnage saving is extremely small, and it adds significant repair costs to your mech. My Jenner-D and Jenner-F both have room for FF, but its not worth "upgrading", as it would free up less than one ton while cutting deeply into my margins in each match.

I agree with the rest of your post, though

[QuantumButler]

Not really

[Voyager I]

You would only get Ferro if you already had Endo and DHS, since those are both much better ways of converting space to weight. With just that and a non-XL Engine, you have a total of 19 critical spaces remaining on the entirety of your mech. I'm sure you could come up with something that managed to spend its weight in that amount of space, but it would probably something dumb like a Commando with a 210 standard engine and a few lasers.

This is completely overlooking the fact that it jacks your repair costs way up.

Edited by Voyager I, 11 November 2012 - 05:03 AM.

[Shalune]

FF is usable on a few builds, but it's not about the cost, it's the space. Most mechs can't afford it and ES always gets you more tonnage to play with.

Sephlock, on 11 November 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

SRMs,

What?...

SRMs are better than they've been in a long time, and they were already viable. I run dual SRM6s with artemis on my main mech and it's plenty deadly.

[Sephlock]

I like SRMs but the devs seem to have it out for them. Even artemis SRMs go wild after traveling a bit, and are like chucking gold bricks at the enemy.

Also they've been getting hit by Nerf after Nerf, so while they are among the better weapons on that list, they are a pale shadow of what they once were.

I don't know where you're getting the idea that "SRMs are better than they've been in a long time"

They were indirectly nerfed with the imposition of the engine limits, their rate of fire was nerfed, then their spread was made omgwtflol.

Edited by Sephlock, 11 November 2012 - 10:08 AM.