hey i am new to this game it is alot of fun but i was always scared of buying my first mech
mostly becuase i haven't really found my play style that really fits
but now the i have x2 the amount of c bills for any mech i think i should
i have some questions
what is the diffrence bettween all the varaties of the mech
are they just diffrent starting equiment or are they diffrent in ways they cant be similar
are atals hard to pilot just wondering
so what are good fornt line combat mechs
also i heard hunchbacks are good in close combat but what are the centrion good for
1
Help Me Buying My First Mech
Started by icesea, Dec 19 2012 06:33 AM
6 replies to this topic
#2
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 1,577 posts
Member
- LocationBaltimore, MD
Posted 19 December 2012 - 06:49 AM
The differences between the mech variants primarily lay in their hard points. The stock layouts are also different, but that can all be changed to suit. Hard points can not be changed.
Example:
Stock Catapult C1 has 2 missile and 4 laser hardpoints, and starts with 2 LRM15s and 4 medium lasers. You can play with what lasers and missiles you have, but it's always capped at 2 missile and 4 lasers.
Stock Catapult K2 has 4 energy and 2 ballistic hard points, and starts with 2 PPCs, 2 medium lasers and 2 machine guns. You can swap around those weapons, mixing lasers and autocannons, but you are always capped at 4 energy and 2 ballistic.
Here's a great link that breaks down the hard point differences:
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/
And really, you should play with all the trial mechs to get a feel for style. I'm a fan of the Catapults, as they are fairly flexible. I have three - a C1 with 2 LRM15 and 4 medium lasers for support, a K2 with 2 ERPPCs and 2 medium lasers for direct support, and an A1 with 3 SRM6 and 3 SSRM2 for up close and dirty fighting.
Example:
Stock Catapult C1 has 2 missile and 4 laser hardpoints, and starts with 2 LRM15s and 4 medium lasers. You can play with what lasers and missiles you have, but it's always capped at 2 missile and 4 lasers.
Stock Catapult K2 has 4 energy and 2 ballistic hard points, and starts with 2 PPCs, 2 medium lasers and 2 machine guns. You can swap around those weapons, mixing lasers and autocannons, but you are always capped at 4 energy and 2 ballistic.
Here's a great link that breaks down the hard point differences:
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/
And really, you should play with all the trial mechs to get a feel for style. I'm a fan of the Catapults, as they are fairly flexible. I have three - a C1 with 2 LRM15 and 4 medium lasers for support, a K2 with 2 ERPPCs and 2 medium lasers for direct support, and an A1 with 3 SRM6 and 3 SSRM2 for up close and dirty fighting.
#3
-
-
- Big Brother
- 1,039 posts
Member
Posted 19 December 2012 - 07:04 AM
Great to see you getting into the Mechlab!
I'm a big fan of steering new players towards the Hunchback-4SP. It comes with 5 energy mounts and 2 missile mounts on each side of the torso. It has a ton of fire power for a medium mech and lacks the 'hump' liability of the other HBK models. It can be a fearsome close range brawler with 5 MLAS, 2 SRM6 rocket packs. With upgrades to DHS, Endo steel, and a 250 STD engine, it can boot around the battlefield and quickly flank larger mechs to deliver a big hit to their backs. The MLAS and high torso twist/arm articulation of the HBK also make it good for fending off lights - something your more sluggish teammates will appreciate.
The HBK-4SP has flexibility too. You can swap out the SRMs for SSRM streakers to really give non-ECM light mechs a headache. Or you can put in LRM10s and add a TAG to the head energy mount and provide surprisingly effective missile support - while still moving quick and able to duke it out with the remaining 4 MLAS.
All that for a fairly low investment! It can be heart breaking to spend all your money on a big giant Atlas you hate, or a LRM slinging Catapult only to find you hate sitting back and being picked on by lights. The HBK-4SP is an ideal starter mech offering a lot of options for an affordable up-front cost.
Cents are good too, but a little different. My fav is the CN9-AL configured with a 250 STD, DHS, endo, and either 2xLLAS and 2xMLAS, or 3xMLAS, TAG, and LRM15/LRM5 packs, with 3 tons LRM ammo. Great support all around.
Not to advertise, but I have some tips in the guide linked in my sig that might help ease you into the garage. Might want to check it out!
I'm a big fan of steering new players towards the Hunchback-4SP. It comes with 5 energy mounts and 2 missile mounts on each side of the torso. It has a ton of fire power for a medium mech and lacks the 'hump' liability of the other HBK models. It can be a fearsome close range brawler with 5 MLAS, 2 SRM6 rocket packs. With upgrades to DHS, Endo steel, and a 250 STD engine, it can boot around the battlefield and quickly flank larger mechs to deliver a big hit to their backs. The MLAS and high torso twist/arm articulation of the HBK also make it good for fending off lights - something your more sluggish teammates will appreciate.
The HBK-4SP has flexibility too. You can swap out the SRMs for SSRM streakers to really give non-ECM light mechs a headache. Or you can put in LRM10s and add a TAG to the head energy mount and provide surprisingly effective missile support - while still moving quick and able to duke it out with the remaining 4 MLAS.
All that for a fairly low investment! It can be heart breaking to spend all your money on a big giant Atlas you hate, or a LRM slinging Catapult only to find you hate sitting back and being picked on by lights. The HBK-4SP is an ideal starter mech offering a lot of options for an affordable up-front cost.
Cents are good too, but a little different. My fav is the CN9-AL configured with a 250 STD, DHS, endo, and either 2xLLAS and 2xMLAS, or 3xMLAS, TAG, and LRM15/LRM5 packs, with 3 tons LRM ammo. Great support all around.
Not to advertise, but I have some tips in the guide linked in my sig that might help ease you into the garage. Might want to check it out!
#4
-
- 2 posts
Rookie
Posted 19 December 2012 - 07:20 AM
that is a very nice guide
anther question is the smr 6 better then the autocannon
anther question is the smr 6 better then the autocannon
#5
-
-
- Big Brother
- 1,039 posts
Member
Posted 19 December 2012 - 07:40 AM
SRMs are short range dumb fire rockets that scatter like a shotgun. They do GREAT damage for the tonnage they cost, but you do have to get close to use them, and the damage has a tendency to spread itself out over a mech. Sometimes that spread can help though when trying to put hits on a tricky light mech, they don't all need to hit to still do big damage.
ACs tend to be heavier, but offer long range highly specific fire. They can let you stay out of the scrap and pelt enemies from a distance. They also do all their damage wherever they hit. While an single SRM6 pack can do an ideal 15 points of damage with one volley, that damage will spread itself to multiple places on a mech, some in the arm, some in the side torso, a bit on the legs, ect. An AC10 does only 10 damage, but when it hits, it puts it all where it hit. 10 damage to the core might be worth more than 15 spread out. But then, it is also harder to hit with an AC10.
They are different weapons for different purposes. You might need to experiment to find what is best for you and how you play the game.
ACs tend to be heavier, but offer long range highly specific fire. They can let you stay out of the scrap and pelt enemies from a distance. They also do all their damage wherever they hit. While an single SRM6 pack can do an ideal 15 points of damage with one volley, that damage will spread itself to multiple places on a mech, some in the arm, some in the side torso, a bit on the legs, ect. An AC10 does only 10 damage, but when it hits, it puts it all where it hit. 10 damage to the core might be worth more than 15 spread out. But then, it is also harder to hit with an AC10.
They are different weapons for different purposes. You might need to experiment to find what is best for you and how you play the game.
#6
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 1,577 posts
Member
- LocationBaltimore, MD
Posted 19 December 2012 - 07:53 AM
A lot of weapon choice is personal preference.
My one Catapult has 3 SRM6s with Artemis (which adds weight and bulk to the SRM but tightens the grouping of the missiles), and if I get up close and unleash those it is a world of hurt. It's taken out many mechs in one or two volleys, all 18 missiles hitting in a very tight pattern is nasty. That being said, it's not very useful at any sort of range. I've lost more than one match to mechs having long range weapons.
You really need to get out there and play with your options. I'm a terrible up close brawler so I tend to lean towards ranged weapons. Other people would rather get in up close, so weight required to field the longer range weapons would be wasted on them.
Edit:
Just as an aside... There is a lot of info out there on weapons, with damage, cycle time, and calculated damage per second. Take all of this stuff with a grain of salt, as those distilled numbers are based on theoretical performance, and may not represent actual game performance. Missiles scatter, lasers require time on target.
I tend to prefer weapons that fire and do damage on impact - missiles, ballistics and PPCs. They suit my play style, I just have a much better time with the aim and fire type of weapons than I do with lasers, where you need to keep your crosshairs on the target. So for me, lasers tend to be less effective, even though they may be better on paper.
My one Catapult has 3 SRM6s with Artemis (which adds weight and bulk to the SRM but tightens the grouping of the missiles), and if I get up close and unleash those it is a world of hurt. It's taken out many mechs in one or two volleys, all 18 missiles hitting in a very tight pattern is nasty. That being said, it's not very useful at any sort of range. I've lost more than one match to mechs having long range weapons.
You really need to get out there and play with your options. I'm a terrible up close brawler so I tend to lean towards ranged weapons. Other people would rather get in up close, so weight required to field the longer range weapons would be wasted on them.
Edit:
Just as an aside... There is a lot of info out there on weapons, with damage, cycle time, and calculated damage per second. Take all of this stuff with a grain of salt, as those distilled numbers are based on theoretical performance, and may not represent actual game performance. Missiles scatter, lasers require time on target.
I tend to prefer weapons that fire and do damage on impact - missiles, ballistics and PPCs. They suit my play style, I just have a much better time with the aim and fire type of weapons than I do with lasers, where you need to keep your crosshairs on the target. So for me, lasers tend to be less effective, even though they may be better on paper.
Edited by Buckminster, 19 December 2012 - 08:21 AM.
#7
Posted 19 December 2012 - 04:41 PM
I generally avoid autocannon as a whole, unless I have a lot of free weight available. Since I'm a typical brawl-in-yo-face person I would recommend Artemis SRM any time, but that's just me.
The Hunchback chassis is almost a safe bet. HBK-4SP even as a stock 'Mech is still one of the most versatile build out there, with DHS and a large engine it would be extremely fun to pilot. 4P is also a solid choice, I run my Ghetto 4P with 7xSL and 2xML which is absolutely ridiculous during late-game moshpit.
The Hunchback chassis is almost a safe bet. HBK-4SP even as a stock 'Mech is still one of the most versatile build out there, with DHS and a large engine it would be extremely fun to pilot. 4P is also a solid choice, I run my Ghetto 4P with 7xSL and 2xML which is absolutely ridiculous during late-game moshpit.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
