478 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

I follow rule 1 subsection A: ''Hide behind the fracking Atlas.''

[Void Angel]

Heh; just don't stay there too long.

[1453 R]

VOID.

You and I should totally drop together some time. I'll bring my Okuu, you bring your Atlas. We'll make such sweet C-bills together. Or better yet, I'll run one of my Cicadas and feel warm and secure in the knowledge that when I yell "Contacts E5" in the chat, somebody out there will actually listen.

There needs to be a guide about what to do in the Fracking Atlas. Or a guide on How Not to Ignore Your Scouts in a PUG.

[Major Derps]

1453 R, on 10 May 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

VOID.

You and I should totally drop together some time. I'll bring my Okuu, you bring your Atlas. We'll make such sweet C-bills together. Or better yet, I'll run one of my Cicadas and feel warm and secure in the knowledge that when I yell "Contacts E5" in the chat, somebody out there will actually listen.

There needs to be a guide about what to do in the Fracking Atlas. Or a guide on How Not to Ignore Your Scouts in a PUG.

First of, I'm an Atlas pilot (not solely, but I specialise in them), and I do agree with you here. There are too many pilots that don't know what they are doing in assaults, and unfortunately the rest of the team suffers. But I concur with the OP, as there are just as many non assault pilots, who just see them as the big, stupid, lumbering hunks of metal that are there only to distract the enemy whilst they buggerise (aussie term, google it) around on the flanks avoiding any damage. The happy medium needs to be learned, where assaults can be allowed to fill their roll and work effectively for the team; Hence why this thread should be the first thing any pilot should read and learn.

[Void Angel]

Damage is like water - you can drown in the ocean, but a little bit won't kill you.

[Just wanna play]

Void Angel, on 11 May 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

Damage is like water - you can drown in the ocean, but a little bit won't kill you.

well in that case im H2O intolerant :/

[1453 R]

You're not a Cicada pilot. You don't know the meaning of H2O intolerant

[Just wanna play]

1453 R, on 12 May 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

You're not a Cicada pilot. You don't know the meaning of H2O intolerant

LOL maybe i should go find one and ask

[Gen0]

Taizan, on 03 January 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

As a medium pilot, I never follow the Atlas or Stalker, maybe with an Awesome because they employ similar battlefield tactics and speed. I will sometimes hang around slow assault mechs to aid them against other harassing units or to benefit from AMS/ECM cover, but binding myself to such a slow mech really makes me vulnerable, this is something for heavies or other slow mechs.

Follow does not literally mean tailgating them. It means maintaining a vicinity so that you can move with them and concentrate fire with them. As a hunchie pilot myself, I know that one of my most effective methods of play is back burning, and one of my most effective distractions (to expose said target's back) is a big *** Assault mech in front of them.

Should I have more mediums with me, and the terrain for it then I can scrap and play hit n run with their main force, but right now, your description of how you play makes you sound vulnerable, as a lone hunchback is certainly easier food than a Hunchback, at least two others and an Atlas.

[JigglyMoobs]

As I guy who plays DDC the most I prefer to have my lights and mediums in FRONT of me, but within 180 m so that they are under ecm cover. This way they won't interfere with my furious +backing (I do this alot) and can map out the enemy team without getting prolonged exposure to enemy fire or come under LRM fire.

Also, I prefer to use the terrain to keep out of sight of the enemy team until I'm ready to strike. It doesn't always work, but when it does, it can misdirect the enemy by giving them a false impression of how my teams' fire power is distributed.

Finally when I attack I prefer to attack after the mediums and lights so that I can mop up the distracted mechs quickly. This sounds like a bad deal for the lighter mechs attacking up ahead but what I find usually is that with so much fire power available to an Atlas I can take down or crit enemy medium and heavy mechs within seconds from almost any angle. The assaults are more of a problem, but they'll have a harder time hiting the faster guys anyways.

[Void Angel]

You should certainly use terrain to approach the enemy - however, your supporting 'mechs generally should not be in front of you under your ECM umbrella. The reason for this is that they are better targets than you are.

Toughness scales directly with size: my 70 Ton Cataphract is exactly 70% as tough as my 100 ton Atlas. However, due to a number of factors (such as increasing engine weight, torso hitboxes, and critical slot limitations) my Atlas will reasonably be using a smaller proportion of his tonnage on weaponry than my Cataphract. My Cataphract currently uses a Gauss Rifle, an ERPPC, and an UAC/5; 31 tons of weaponry - 38 tons including ammo. That's 44.28% of my combat weight devoted to killing people. The Atlas, on the other hand, currently uses 32.5% of its total tonnage (39.5 tons with ammo.) Of course, your mileage may vary, but the Atlas simply does not have enough hardpoints in the right spots to field the raw firepower. This means that, given the choice, you should shoot at the Cataphract, not the Atlas. Even if the proportions were the same, you'd still probably want to kill the Cataphract first, since it'll be easier to chew through his armor and reduce my team's firepower by destroying my weaponry.

An Atlas isn't a truly heavy hitter - it hits hard, but for true "like a truck" damage, you want a Stalker. A Stalker pilot, especially if he's some kind of insane gunbunny, can put upwards of 60% of his mass into killing things. That's what having a ton of dispersed hardpoints does for you. An Atlas can't do that - not unless he wants to be horribly underarmored, heat inefficient, or just plain suicidally slow. What an Atlas does do, better than anything else, is take a hit while still dishing out a good deal of damage. It's a devil's bargain - because they WANT to kill the Cataphract, but the Cataphract is hiding (possibly literally) behind you. An Atlas truly shines in line-of-sight, direct combat where they can force the enemy to make inefficient choices so the team can win.

[Just wanna play]

Void Angel, on 08 July 2013 - 01:12 AM, said:

You should certainly use terrain to approach the enemy - however, your supporting 'mechs generally should not be in front of you under your ECM umbrella. The reason for this is that they are better targets than you are.

Toughness scales directly with size: my 70 Ton Cataphract is exactly 70% as tough as my 100 ton Atlas. However, due to a number of factors (such as increasing engine weight, torso hitboxes, and critical slot limitations) my Atlas will reasonably be using a smaller proportion of his tonnage on weaponry than my Cataphract. My Cataphract currently uses a Gauss Rifle, an ERPPC, and an UAC/5; 31 tons of weaponry - 38 tons including ammo. That's 44.28% of my combat weight devoted to killing people. The Atlas, on the other hand, currently uses 32.5% of its total tonnage (39.5 tons with ammo.) Of course, your mileage may vary, but the Atlas simply does not have enough hardpoints in the right spots to field the raw firepower. This means that, given the choice, you should shoot at the Cataphract, not the Atlas. Even if the proportions were the same, you'd still probably want to kill the Cataphract first, since it'll be easier to chew through his armor and reduce my team's firepower by destroying my weaponry.

An Atlas isn't a truly heavy hitter - it hits hard, but for true "like a truck" damage, you want a Stalker. A Stalker pilot, especially if he's some kind of insane gunbunny, can put upwards of 60% of his mass into killing things. That's what having a ton of dispersed hardpoints does for you. An Atlas can't do that - not unless he wants to be horribly underarmored, heat inefficient, or just plain suicidally slow. What an Atlas does do, better than anything else, is take a hit while still dishing out a good deal of damage. It's a devil's bargain - because they WANT to kill the Cataphract, but the Cataphract is hiding (possibly literally) behind you. An Atlas truly shines in line-of-sight, direct combat where they can force the enemy to make inefficient choices so the team can win.

well it might not hit as hard for its weight as a stalker, but still nothing weighs as much as it so it can still definitely hit like a truck, but yeah, they can take tons of punishment

[Void Angel]

The point is that while an Atlas does hit hard (unless you do something stupid, like two LRM20s and a Medium Laser,) Lighter assaults typically have as much or more firepower - and even some heavies. The one thing the Atlas does better than any other 'mech is take punishment; whenever you're not taking advantage of that, you're not getting the most out of your Atlas.

[Just wanna play]

Void Angel, on 08 July 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

The point is that while an Atlas does hit hard (unless you do something stupid, like two LRM20s and a Medium Laser,) Lighter assaults typically have as much or more firepower - and even some heavies. The one thing the Atlas does better than any other 'mech is take punishment; whenever you're not taking advantage of that, you're not getting the most out of your Atlas.

i dont really see what makes you say this but main reason i guess is probably pgi wants all mechs in same weight class to be similar when it comes to firepower since mm only pays attention to class, but i wouldn't say light mechs hit harder, imagine an atlas set-up for firepower with the armor of a stalker, that would be interesting

[Wired]

Have you ever thought of the alternative? bring the fight TO the atlas? plenty of hotshots out there will see you withdraw and go after you...right into the open arms of the Atlas.

[Void Angel]

Of course I have; and I've done that, too. I believe my exact words were, "bring him to me." but as I've explained here before, this is not a grand treatise on comprehensive tactics. The purpose of this mini-guide is to establish a common baseline so that Pugs can better cooperate.

Just wanna play, on 08 July 2013 - 06:32 PM, said:

i dont really see what makes you say this but main reason i guess is probably pgi wants all mechs in same weight class to be similar when it comes to firepower since mm only pays attention to class, but i wouldn't say light mechs hit harder, imagine an atlas set-up for firepower with the armor of a stalker, that would be interesting

It'd be a poor substitute for the real thing - and it's going to be difficult (if not impossible) for the Atlas to match the raw firepower of many Stalker builds. The reason is both the larger number of hardpoints the Stalker has and the locations of those points. Plus, even if you could turn an Atlas into a Stalker with extra internal structure points, why would you? It'd still be slower at any engine rating than a Stalker, and its arm placement is not convenient for sniping and the like

Regardless, I doubt PGI wants equivalent firepower, I think they want equivalent utility. A Stalker can devote a LOT more of its tonnage to weaponry, and hit like a truck - the Atlas can't hit as hard, but is a great deal tougher. If you're not taking advantage of your Atlas' toughness in some way, you're in the wrong Battlemech.

[Just wanna play]

Void Angel, on 09 July 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

Of course I have; and I've done that, too. I believe my exact words were, "bring him to me." but as I've explained here before, this is not a grand treatise on comprehensive tactics. The purpose of this mini-guide is to establish a common baseline so that Pugs can better cooperate.


It'd be a poor substitute for the real thing - and it's going to be difficult (if not impossible) for the Atlas to match the raw firepower of many Stalker builds. The reason is both the larger number of hardpoints the Stalker has and the locations of those points. Plus, even if you could turn an Atlas into a Stalker with extra internal structure points, why would you? It'd still be slower at any engine rating than a Stalker, and its arm placement is not convenient for sniping and the like

Regardless, I doubt PGI wants equivalent firepower, I think they want equivalent utility. A Stalker can devote a LOT more of its tonnage to weaponry, and hit like a truck - the Atlas can't hit as hard, but is a great deal tougher. If you're not taking advantage of your Atlas' toughness in some way, you're in the wrong Battlemech.

probably because, oh i dont know, sniping isnt the only use of large amounts of firepower
im pretty sure lots of things in this game arent yet how pgi wants them......
and last time i checked wonky hit boxes on stalkers made them more durable then atlases because not only can you cover the ct with the armor on the side torsos but also even after the side torsos are gone they can cause the ct to only take 50% damage while atlases really arent hard to kill with the current ppc abundance
to be completely honest the atlas really isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when i think "durability"

[Void Angel]

It should be. The Stalker's body type makes it very hard to target the center torso from the side; but I'm not sold on the idea that they're taking reduced damage once the torso is gone... I'll have to do some testing. Regardless, the Stalker is STILL less durable than an Atlas; because in addition to the simple armor disparity, an Atlas can block shots with its arms. Additionally, the Atlas can field a substantially higher engine tonnage, making torso twisting and close-in melee brawling easier - and it has a much larger range of motion on its arms. Not to mention more/better options for ballistic weaponry. But none of this makes the Atlas a competitive 'mech if you're not actually using the Atlas' armor capacity.

Because the Stalker has so many hardpoints, scattered all over its chassis, it can mount weapons much more efficiently than the Atlas. As an example, the D-DC cannot mount three Artemis LRM20s, or even 3 Artemis LRM15s if it wants to keep ECM - but several Stalkers can. In the end, tonnage is not the only important limiting factor in determining my weapons loadout.

[Just wanna play]

Void Angel, on 11 July 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

Additionally, the Atlas can field a substantially higher engine tonnage, making torso twisting and close-in melee brawling easier

actually the bigger engines torso twisting boost is negated by it being heavier so they are kind of even when it comes to twist speed, but id much rather block my ct with y side torso then my arm

[1453 R]

So you'd much rather lose two missile launchers and three energy hardpoints (STK-3F) than one beam? (AS7-D-DC)?

Anyways. Bringing this back a bit because I have made a discovery of note, as a mostly-skirmisher pilot recently playing around in his first (and only) assault 'Mech Namely: I no longer have any respect for assault pilots who try and demand that their flankers and skirmishers hit the line first. I understand and completely agree that nobody and nothing, not even a Fracking Atlas, can tolerate being the only thing an entire enemy lance or two sees for an extended period of time (except maybe Spiders and their negative-spacetime armor), and there are things scouts/fast response need to do before the main line of battle forms and engages, but if my Victors have taught me anything, it's that even strike-configured assault 'Mechs with giant XL engines (SHUT UP IT'S A DAMN VICTOR NOT AN ATLAS) can take enormously more punishment than anything else can.

Fatty pilots? It is your job to be right up there in the vanguard taking it on the chin for your little guys. Those little guys have a responsibility to be right there helping you, but you can sustain a few seconds of concentrated fire from the enemy while your team picks targets and lays into them. That Trebuchet you just threw out in front of you? He totally can't do that. That Boomjag you're counting on for the finishing blow? He can't really do it either. You can do it. Stop telling us skirmishers to fix the enemy in place for you and GO DO IT YOURSELF. I'll help, I'll be right there behind you, but you can take it and I can't. Unless I'm Victoring that day, in which case I'll be right in front of you showing you how this works.

If a guy who's pathologically allergic to incoming fire can force himself into the teeth of it when the time comes to push, you can too. Don't be that guy. Don't be that guy who throws his light units under the bus just to earn himself a few extra seconds of targeting time. We don't appreciate it, and it doesn't do you any real good.