10 replies to this topic

[Kanatta Jing]

So... The Centurion really will be gunning down Mechs with it's AC 10 when it can't bring it's Medium Lasers to bare.

The Awesome has one PPC on it's arm. That's why it's Awesome. And two on the torso, but who really cares about those when you can't use them most of the time?

When looking at a Mech's weapon package we may soon find the first thing we ask is...

But what does it have on the arms?

What are your thoughts and/or concerns in this matter?

[Redshift2k5]

The Dragon and Centurion both do it right, with their autocannon mounted on an arm to make use of the more mobile arm for aid in aiming, with their LRM rack torso mounted. Ditto for the PPC variant Catapult, putting those burst damage energy weapons on arms where they can lead targets... also mounted very high on the chassis

Bit of a problem for the Cicada which seems to have no arm weaponry at all!

[Cold3y3s]

if the Cicada has no arm weapons it would probably be worth it to pull the actuators, the one problem with arm weapons is that they have a tendency to get removed. I'll probably try to keep most used weapons in torso for protection for example, everyone has a preference.

[Redshift2k5]

Always two sides to a coin. Arms gives you faster weapon seek time, but are more vulnerable to removal than a torso weapon!

[MechRaccoon]

Hawk3y394, on 11 May 2012 - 05:00 PM, said:

if the Cicada has no arm weapons it would probably be worth it to pull the actuators, the one problem with arm weapons is that they have a tendency to get removed. I'll probably try to keep most used weapons in torso for protection for example, everyone has a preference.

You're right. In MechWarrior 2, the arms of your Mech tended to come off easily. If you had all your weapons in the arms and they got blown off, you would be up Mech creek without a paddle. However, the arms are also hard to target, (especially if your mech is moving) so it's kind of like Soviet tanks: (at least, in World of Tanks) There isn't as much armor, but the slopes and curves mean shots can easily bounce off. Except, in this case, the arm has a greater chance of not getting hit at all.

Also, there are more interesting places to put your weapons on the arms: Put 'em on the shoulder, beside the hands, IN the hands,



or below the hands, like a Terminator



Wait, WHAT!?

Anyway, putting weapons on the arms has advantages. Like the ones I mentioned earlier.

[Kanatta Jing]

So an Atlas has an SRM 6, AC 20 and 2 of 4 medium lasers in the Torso.

If it can't reliably use the majority of it's close range arsenal against medium and light mechs, then is it really a brawler?

[Major Tom]

If you have ever played TT you know putting arms on your arms (err weapons on you arms) is a good way to have them blown off. This carries over to the MechWarrior series.

Now in MWO your arms target faster, everyone must put their weapons on the arms!!!
Not necessarily so:
1. your arms will also get thrown off target easier. Thats right, when you get hit and your targeting reticule shakes, you are more likely to stay on target with your torso weapons.
2. Slow moving targets will stay under your crosshairs. Once you get an Atlas in your crosshairs, keeping it there will be much easier than keeping a Jenner under you thumb.
3. Long range targets move proportionately less in your crosshairs, meaning the further way you are, the less you are affected.
3. Most enemies have to shoot through you arms to get to your torso mounted weapons. The whole point of mounting weapons there in TT and MW is stillt valid, your torso's are more protected.

However,
1. The devs have already stated that arm mounted weapons are much better at tracking fast targets.
2. arm mounted weapons are able to get "on target" faster, so you can theoretically fire them faster, and since weapons are on a recycle time instead of a fixed turn, that will means a significant increase in DPS.

[Magnificent Bastard]

Redshift2k5, on 11 May 2012 - 05:03 PM, said:

Always two sides to a coin. Arms gives you faster weapon seek time, but are more vulnerable to removal than a torso weapon!

Exactly. I was just discussing this over teamspeak actually. "PVP Research" for MWO tactics will likely involve analysing where certain weapons are typically located so you know what areas of a mech are your primary targets (the Hunchback's shoulder is an obvious target for example). So instead of keeping up with the latest PVP builds/trees like you do in other games you'll be asking yourself "Which arm does the Dragon have it's PPC in." etc.

[Redshift2k5]

Kanatta Jing, on 11 May 2012 - 10:46 PM, said:

So an Atlas has an SRM 6, AC 20 and 2 of 4 medium lasers in the Torso.

If it can't reliably use the majority of it's close range arsenal against medium and light mechs, then is it really a brawler?

Well, it will be easier for the Atlas to slug other slower targets, hitting fast targets with your torso guns will take more skill, patience, and probably XP( torso twist speed was mntioned a one of the skills one will upgrade on a chassis). Hopefully you have a Dragon in your lance, since the devs said the Dragon is a 'Jenner killer'

There won't be a right or wrong answer to placing guns in torso or arms, there are different reasons for each approach and it will depend on how you want to play.

[Xaks]

Plus, there's the whole arm flipping thing to consider, but I don't think PGI is including that.

There was a thread on it a while back, but I don't think anyone ever got word directly from the devs....

[zzzuk]

It will depend on the torso twist speed of your Mech´s chassis and on your playstyle. If you want to play more like FPS with fast-moving reticule, you will find yourself mounting the weapons in arms (and having them destroyed more often thou). If you want to have more simulator-like feeling, you will mount the weapons in torsos and use vulnerable arms as an ammo storage, where it´s possible explosion can´t damage weapons. But the best solution will propably be a combination of these two extremes.