42 replies to this topic

[Noth]

Diemos, on 22 January 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

What ECM issue? the fact it WORKS! It does exactly what ECM is suppose to do! ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURE!!!

Sooooo tired of people cyring about this. ADAPT to your battlefield. It only covers an area of 180 meters, only really effects mechs that don't have long range weapons. Sure you can't "target" them unless someone gets in there and spots them, but that's what lights are suppose to be doing anyway. Carry a TAG... NARC... There ARE options.

NARC does nothing against ECM. You cannot target anything With ECM unless you in a 20 meter window. Too close, you are cut off from your team mates, to far, you can't target. TAG only counters ECM on players that like to stand still.

[Mr 144]

Banky, on 22 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

I'm surprised there's not more love for the trenchbucket here. You're essentially talking about what could be a faster HBK-4SP / CN9-AL equivalent. Around 50pts of firepower moving at 115ish kph? It's going to be a heavy/assault pilot's worst nightmare.

It's going to be hard to de-throne the 4SP due to perfect hardpoints and their locations plus insane mobility. I don't see how the trebuchet can do it, but I haven't spent THAT much time in the lab planning. I don't see how it will be able to do both 115kph and retain the 4SPs firepower. Choices yes, but it can't do both at once. The 4SP with it's superior twist and arm range coupled with perfect 4x energy in the arms + 1 each torso + 1 optional TAG in the head will remain on top.

The sole fact it can mount JJs makes it unique, but at the cost of substantial tonnage. Tonnage will still be the main restriction in speed vs. firepower. I want to love it, but sadly, I can't seem to find a use for it. Even SSRMs in place of SRMs to save weight for a larger engine has the downside of a ginormous 15-tube hitbox in the arm, where an extra energy hardpoint would be nicer (like the 4SP)

Mr 144

[Vaneshi SnowCrash]

Diemos, on 22 January 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

What ECM issue? the fact it WORKS! It does exactly what ECM is suppose to do! ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURE!!!

Stop crying because they nerfed the Falcon. They're going to nerf ECM here as well. Your tears are not a Mech compatible fuel source.

[Thirdstar]

Diemos, on 22 January 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

What ECM issue? the fact it WORKS! It does exactly what ECM is suppose to do! ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURE!!!

Sooooo tired of people cyring about this. ADAPT to your battlefield. It only covers an area of 180 meters, only really effects mechs that don't have long range weapons. Sure you can't "target" them unless someone gets in there and spots them, but that's what lights are suppose to be doing anyway. Carry a TAG... NARC... There ARE options.

ECM makes the netcode issues worse, it makes the matchmaking issues worse, it makes the teams vs unteamed issue worse. To argue otherwise is silly.

I know I'm guilty here but do we really need to have THIS discussion in every thread?

Edited by Thirdstar, 22 January 2013 - 09:00 AM.

[Der BruzZzler von Wiesndoof]

IMO, PGI's version of the Treb is the most ugliest of all MWO Mechs. Even the TRO art looks better, but i'm still looking foward to pilot one of these things. It's a nice Mech in all respects.

[Khanahar]

Mr 144, on 22 January 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

How do you think having a missle hardpoint in the arm effects the ability to gain lock? The arm reticule is always used to attain lock, regardless of the missle locations. The sole benefit of arm-based missle hardpoints is standard SRMs. Sadly, every variant only has 1 missle hardpoint in the arm, so 1xSRM6 is the most you can do with it. All I see is a waste of Tubes that would be more useful in a torso.

I played around some with missle tajectory of LRMs in arm-based hardpoints (AWS-9M & CTF-2X) and saw no distinct advantage to it's location. Moreso now that the "shoot around corners" trick is gone.

Mr 144

As a technicality, locking missiles do always use arm reticles, but they are limited by the range of motion thus provided. To a Jenner will lock worse than a Commando not because the COM has SSRMs in its arms but because the Jenner's arms don't go sideways.

Also, I'd be very surprised if they only put one missile hardpoint in the arm. Remember, no CN9 has more than 1 missile in the stock, but the D, AH, AL, and A all got their hardpoints upgraded to 2s or a 3.

Edit: On Topic!

I'm really looking forward to this guy. I'm a hardcore CN9 pilot, and this seems like a very similar 'mech. Pretty sure that once this is out and I'm learning its tricks I won't be too worried about new 'mechs. I'll have everything I need. :-)

Edited by Khanahar, 22 January 2013 - 09:12 AM.

[101011]

vettie, on 22 January 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Looking at the artist concept (above in this post) the body shape is very similar to the Centurion.

That would be because they were designed, IIRC, to be used together.

sarna said:

The Centurion was originally designed to compliment the Trebuchet fire support BattleMech.

[Carrioncrows]

The numbers are a bit off -

The Trebuchet packs a STD 250 engine.

In MWO that would only make the Treb go 81 KPH.

To achieve the 86 KPH the Trebuchet would need a 265 to get 85.9 or a 270 to get 87.5

Just FYI

[Mr 144]

Khanahar, on 22 January 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

As a technicality, locking missiles do always use arm reticles, but they are limited by the range of motion thus provided. To a Jenner will lock worse than a Commando not because the COM has SSRMs in its arms but because the Jenner's arms don't go sideways.

Yep, but that's due to having arms, not the type of hardpoint located in them. That's part of my point, especially comparing to the 4SP, as that chassis has the absolute best in game at 120 degree torso + an additional 40 degree arm. It remains to be seen what twist the trebuchet has, but I highly doubt it will be as high as the HBKs.

If in fact a variant of the trebuchet gets 2xmissle hardpoints in an arm, that would be worth consideration for 2xSRM6 utilizing all those tubes and range of motion. A 'phract 2X has this, but only 4-tubes. Shotgun-Blast SRMs would be something unique, and the only use I can think of.

Mr 144

[Elandyll]

A TBT-3C w/ 2xLRM15+ 4xML is probably as close as I'll get to a Vulture or an Archer for the time being, so ... Bring it!

[CDLord HHGD]

Termius, on 22 January 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

Slow? My Hunchy pulls 82 km/h, how is that slow?

I'm at 87.3 in my 4G

[Tremendous Upside]

Mr 144, on 22 January 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

It's going to be hard to de-throne the 4SP due to perfect hardpoints and their locations plus insane mobility. I don't see how the trebuchet can do it, but I haven't spent THAT much time in the lab planning. I don't see how it will be able to do both 115kph and retain the 4SPs firepower. Choices yes, but it can't do both at once. The 4SP with it's superior twist and arm range coupled with perfect 4x energy in the arms + 1 each torso + 1 optional TAG in the head will remain on top.

The sole fact it can mount JJs makes it unique, but at the cost of substantial tonnage. Tonnage will still be the main restriction in speed vs. firepower. I want to love it, but sadly, I can't seem to find a use for it. Even SSRMs in place of SRMs to save weight for a larger engine has the downside of a ginormous 15-tube hitbox in the arm, where an extra energy hardpoint would be nicer (like the 4SP)

Mr 144

115kph is a big boost over 92kph...

I've done a bit of tinkering based off the CN9-D... At 10 tons of armor on that, you can fit an XL325 in with 2MLs, 2xSRM6's (3 tons) and 12 DHS (after endo steel) with 5 tons left over for a third energy hardpoint (just enough for a large laser). And that's working from 336pts of armor (which the trebuchet might not be able to do). That's a nasty combo any way you look at it -regardless where the hardpoints are. You're not going to have to circle face to face with other mediums when you're 25kph faster. You'll be able to drop damage and then move to cover, find another target, rinse/repeat... Non "D" CN9s and HBKs just won't be able to keep up. They can't keep up with my 105kph DRGs right now... much less if I added another 10kph to my speed.

[Carrioncrows]

Elandyll, on 22 January 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

A TBT-3C w/ 2xLRM15+ 4xML is probably as close as I'll get to a Vulture or an Archer for the time being, so ... Bring it!

Catapult 1 C.

2 LRM15's, x4 medium lasers.....I think that is a bit closer than the trebuchet.

[Bagheera]

Banky, on 22 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

I'm surprised there's not more love for the trenchbucket here. You're essentially talking about what could be a faster HBK-4SP / CN9-AL equivalent. Around 50pts of firepower moving at 115ish kph? It's going to be a heavy/assault pilot's worst nightmare.

I have been saying exactly this since the limitation on engines that based max rating off the stock engine rating of a given mech.

Everyone cried bitter tears about fast mediums, and I warned people that when the Cent-D and the Treb were introduced they would easily achieve those speeds and there would be no viable argument against it. I, for one, cannot wait to rebuild my 113kph SRM (not streak) boat. The 4SP was always superior to the 4P, but it was harder to pilot so everyone ran laserbacks in those days. Trololololol indeed.

TBT-3C will have a max rating of 390, same as the Cent-D
The others will have a max rating of 325. Same as I used in my 4SP before engine restrictions. Oh, what's that? It appears I have a shiny shiny XL325 sitting unused in my garage...

I cannot pancaking wait for the Trenchbucket.

[Ngamok]

Darvaza, on 22 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

I want the Trebuchet to be released.

No complaints or QQ or anything... just wanting another mech. (One of many more mechs I would like to see)

Be patient, there are more coming (waiting for Highlander).

[Kasiagora]

Maybe with some endosteel and an XL I can make a Dervish out of one. Yeah... Dervish ftmfw.

[One Medic Army]

stjobe, on 22 January 2013 - 03:57 AM, said:

The variants officially announced are

TBT-3C
TBT-5J
TBT-5N
TBT-7K
TBT-7M

So I guess you're in luck

Wait....
They're giving us the 3C extinct Royal variant?!?

[jper4]

cdlord, on 22 January 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

I'm at 87.3 in my 4G

yeah (along with the previous quote in your post) was looking for a 80s- low 90s range and don't want to cut down my firepower with bigger engine (i don't trust xl engines). mine maxes in the low 70s

[Ngamok]

Elandyll, on 22 January 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

A TBT-3C w/ 2xLRM15+ 4xML is probably as close as I'll get to a Vulture or an Archer for the time being, so ... Bring it!

My HBK-4SP has 5x ML and 2x LRm15. Just saying. Just has the standard 200 engine in it.

[Roland]

Diemos, on 22 January 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

What ECM issue? the fact it WORKS! It does exactly what ECM is suppose to do! ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURE!!!

Sooooo tired of people cyring about this. ADAPT to your battlefield. It only covers an area of 180 meters, only really effects mechs that don't have long range weapons. Sure you can't "target" them unless someone gets in there and spots them, but that's what lights are suppose to be doing anyway. Carry a TAG... NARC... There ARE options.

Your post here leads me to believe that you don't actually understand how ECM works.

For instance, what do you think NARC is going to do against ECM? Because it doesn't actually do anything. A NARC beacon is jammed by ECM.

EDIT: Doublepost

Edited by Roland, 22 January 2013 - 11:47 AM.