19 replies to this topic

[zraven7]

Ok, so I'm saving up for my second mech. I know that my first and second mechs will likely be the ones I'm bouncing between for a while, especially if I'd like to get into the upper tiers of pilot skills (yes, I know, multiple of each type will be needed). I'm wanting a ballistic brawler for me second mech, and I'm looking at the Dragon and the Cataphract. I'm wanting Autocannons primarily, though I'm not sure what combination or configuration. I do want a couple of lasers for stretching out the ammo a bit, or when the ammo runs out. Wouldn't mind SRM or Streaks, but they are a secondary concern.

Which of the above should I be looking into? Which variant of said model?

Of particular note, is the Cataphract 3D really worth an extra 4 million just because of jump jets?

Thanks, guys. I'm working my way outta newbness, but I'm not there just yet.

[ICEFANG13]

I really like the Dragon, if you want missiles and ballistics, you're better off with one in my opnion, that being said, Dragons are fast, and usually use XL engines, Cataphracts are slow, usually more weapons, and slightly higher armor without XLs. The mechs are different, but both can do missiles/lasers/ballistics.

The Cataphract-2X and Dragon-1N are both very balanced in hardpoints, I would personally choose the 1N, but its missiles are little more limited (both being in torso, its great for SSRMs, light LRMS, or a couple SRM-4s though). I don't really care for the strange missile arm of the 2X.

All in all, how do you like to play?

[Redshift2k5]

you need to think about how fast you want to go, and what weapons you want to use when you get there.

Dragons are faster with fewer hardpoints(bu more options for missiles) and Cataphracts are slower with more potential for firepower, especially multiple large ballistics in more than one location.

The 3D is not more expensive because of jumpjets, it's more expensive because of it's more expensive stock weaponry/equipment (it comes stock with an XL engine, lbx10, and an ultra/5, not cheap!)

check out the hardpoints, top speeds, and more here: http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/

[zraven7]

ICEFANG13, on 24 January 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

I really like the Dragon, if you want missiles and ballistics, you're better off with one in my opnion, that being said, Dragons are fast, and usually use XL engines, Cataphracts are slow, usually more weapons, and slightly higher armor without XLs. The mechs are different, but both can do missiles/lasers/ballistics.

The Cataphract-2X and Dragon-1N are both very balanced in hardpoints, I would personally choose the 1N, but its missiles are little more limited (both being in torso, its great for SSRMs, light LRMS, or a couple SRM-4s though). I don't really care for the strange missile arm of the 2X.

All in all, how do you like to play?

I tend to be big on flanking, but a lot of that is my current mech, the Cicada 2A. I tend to enjoy burst damage over DPS, I'd prefer to come up on an enemies side or back as opposed to their front. Dropping 2 or 3 alphas into their back-center plate while they're trying to figure out who is shooting them gives me a warm feeling.

I wouldn't mind playing something that brings me out of my comfort zone, however. Would just force me to learn new tactics.

I'm kinda starting to lean to the CTF-4X. The ballistics being spread to both arms means I'm not as nuetered if I lose one, and the missiles and energy weapons on the chest give me something if I end up double-stumpy. Still, the Dragon's movement speed is appealing to the Flanker/Backstabber in me.

Edited by zraven7, 24 January 2013 - 11:07 AM.

[Pastor Priest]

If you want to stay in your comfort zone, I would suggest the Dragon. It can get into the 100 kph range with a sufficient engine and/or speed tweak. You can equip it to have a good up close punch or run it as a light killer. Or drop the engine down a bit and you can have a decent sniper. Just remember, speed and agility are key for this mech. I will likely try this as my next group of mechs, once I elite my hunchbacks.

[Redshift2k5]

the 4X's missile slot is it's head (limiting you to a single crit slot)

[zraven7]

Redshift2k5, on 24 January 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

the 4X's missile slot is it's head (limiting you to a single crit slot)

...you mean, you're not supposed to sit on a bunch of missiles in a firefight? I was lied to...

[Kargarok]

I really thought I'd like the CTF-2X for a brawler and while it performed well with MLs, SRMs and an AC20 it just didn't grab me. I think I just didn't like my missiles being on my arms. The DGN-1C surprised me with how well it worked and how much I liked it! MLs, SRM6 and an AC10 with decent speed works really well with my play style. So much so, it's making the 1N seem pale in comparison so far, and I have max speed on that one for now.

So if you like fast mechs go for a Dragon, if you prefer armor go for the Cataphract.

Also on the CTF-3D you aren't just paying for JJ's you get an XL280 with that.

[zraven7]

How hard do the srm6's hit? Are the comparable to an AC10? I know I can look up the damage numbers, but in combat, do the stack up in performance?

Edited by zraven7, 24 January 2013 - 12:21 PM.

[SGT Unther]

The damage potential of the SRM6 is higher than the AC10 but it is spread out over the target area. Range is also very different as well. The AC10 has an effective range of 450m IIRC and can do damage out to about 1300m, the SRM6 without artemis you would want to be on the inside of 120m to register a decent hit. Artemis tightens up the grouping so SRMs have a more effective range.

I know they say the range for an SRM is 270m but you might hit with a quarter of the missiles in that volley.

I would go with the AC10 it is a very well balanced weapon IMO.

[Firesteel]

zraven7, on 24 January 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

How hard do the srm6's hit? Are the comparable to an AC10? I know I can look up the damage numbers, but in combat, do the stack up in performance?

SRM6s do more damage, at a massive cost to accuracy and range. I would generally say an AC/10 is better, if you can afford the weight and space for ammo, but the SRM6 is a terrifying weapon when there are a few put onto a mech that goes 80+ (IE my catapult c4 brawler).

Both weapons are quite capable, and it really boils down to spread damage or pinpoint for you choices.

To answer the original question, from what I've gathered, you would probably be more comfortable in a dragon with an xl 360 (I have three that I run like this, only 1 engine cause I'm cheap). I use the 1N for brawling with a UAC5, 2 SRM4s, and 2 ML (this mech goes 97.6 kph if I recall correctly). My 1C I use with an AC/10 and 4 ML. If you want to spend real money, I would recommend the Flame, since it has a very odd set of hardpoints, all 4 energy hardpoints are on its arms and its ballistics is located on its left torso (fast AC20 anyone?) I set up mine like a grand dragon (which is why I bought it in the first place) and it does hit and run and flanking admirably (speed tweak helps a lot in this case). I put an ER PPC, 3 ML, and 1 LRM10 with 1 ton of ammo.

The only cataphract I have is the Ilya, which I run as a support brawler, std 265 engine, 3 ML, 3 AC5 for that sustained damage. It's slow but packs a punch and can keep its firepower up unlike more fragile ones using 3 UAC5s. I've experimented with them and despite the massive dps, the large amount of jamming threw me off, along with burning through my ammo supply like nothing else.

[zraven7]

SGT Unther, on 24 January 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

The damage potential of the SRM6 is higher than the AC10 but it is spread out over the target area. Range is also very different as well. The AC10 has an effective range of 450m IIRC and can do damage out to about 1300m, the SRM6 without artemis you would want to be on the inside of 120m to register a decent hit. Artemis tightens up the grouping so SRMs have a more effective range.

I know they say the range for an SRM is 270m but you might hit with a quarter of the missiles in that volley.

I would go with the AC10 it is a very well balanced weapon IMO.

I was actually gonna go with an AC10 and an SRM 6. Originally, l wanted, if possible, 2 AC10's, but if the SRM6 can match for damage, it diversifies my abilities a bit while still yielding good brawler-range burst damage.

[Kargarok]

Depends on the range absolutely. Also how well you can aim. I use the AC10 to reach out and touch someone at range, then bring in the MLs when we close to mid range and finally the SRMs. If the target is motionless or moving straight away I'll launch the SRMs at >100m. With the Latest patch they seem to be hitting more often too. Launching 6 per volley and carrying 100, I'm not too concerned about running out.

Also you won't be able to fit 2 AC10's on a dragon, unless it's the Fang maybe? I'm unsure where it's hard points are.

Edit: Just looked it up, not even a Fang. If you want a 2-AC10 Brawler I reccomend the Catapult K2. 2-AC10s, 4ML's. XL300 Fun little build.

Edited by Kargarok, 24 January 2013 - 12:54 PM.

[zraven7]

Firesteel, on 24 January 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

SRM6s do more damage, at a massive cost to accuracy and range. I would generally say an AC/10 is better, if you can afford the weight and space for ammo, but the SRM6 is a terrifying weapon when there are a few put onto a mech that goes 80+ (IE my catapult c4 brawler).

Both weapons are quite capable, and it really boils down to spread damage or pinpoint for you choices.

To answer the original question, from what I've gathered, you would probably be more comfortable in a dragon with an xl 360 (I have three that I run like this, only 1 engine cause I'm cheap). I use the 1N for brawling with a UAC5, 2 SRM4s, and 2 ML (this mech goes 97.6 kph if I recall correctly). My 1C I use with an AC/10 and 4 ML. If you want to spend real money, I would recommend the Flame, since it has a very odd set of hardpoints, all 4 energy hardpoints are on its arms and its ballistics is located on its left torso (fast AC20 anyone?) I set up mine like a grand dragon (which is why I bought it in the first place) and it does hit and run and flanking admirably (speed tweak helps a lot in this case). I put an ER PPC, 3 ML, and 1 LRM10 with 1 ton of ammo.

The only cataphract I have is the Ilya, which I run as a support brawler, std 265 engine, 3 ML, 3 AC5 for that sustained damage. It's slow but packs a punch and can keep its firepower up unlike more fragile ones using 3 UAC5s. I've experimented with them and despite the massive dps, the large amount of jamming threw me off, along with burning through my ammo supply like nothing else.

This helps put things into perspective. I am kinda used to being a speed-demon with my lil Cicada (runs 129, can do 80 something backward), so the dragon will be a better stepping stone for me, instead of jumping into something completely alien. I think I rather like the idea of running up behind an Atlas and ripping it's arm off. Alright, saving for a dragon, then!

Thanks a lot guys. This helped me, and I'm certain it'll help any other rookies who read it. The Dragon and the Cataphract are pretty popular right now.

[Corvus Antaka]

Cataphract makes an excellent sniper and supprot mech, the dragon is a better brawler imho due to how easy the cataphract is to hit and hurt.

[CitizenDick]

Im working on my heavy elite, i started with my Dragon. Just like you i like to flank and run. I used 2 large lasers on the left arm and 2 ac 5s on the right arm. not as much of a punch, but great for flanking enemies and wearing the armor off or finishuing off an enemy.

[masterojack]

cataphract is more versatile. You can make it do whatever role.

[ICEFANG13]

The 1N, to technically be better than the 1C, needs to use both of its missile slots, or both of its ballistic slots (the 1C would be better if you want to use more than 2 energy, or want 2 on the arms). I would suggest the 1N for a balance, and try to find what you enjoy about the Dragon (if anything), I also suggest you start with the XL you used on your Cicada to save some $$$ as you know, XLs are expensive, as long as your speed is 81^ you'll be find enough with the Dragon (faster is better of course). With the 1 A/C-10, a fine build, the 1C can do that well enough, and may be better for you, but I'd still consider the 1N a little more, just to try different things.

[Koniving]

I'd contribute, but the above have already solved it.

I'm told that staying away from the Dragon 1N is a good idea. So, yeah, avoid it. o.o;

Also sometimes a skilled enemy counts on the dragon having an XL engine, so sometimes running a build that doesn't need one can make all the difference in the world.

On Cataphracts, never run an XL engine. The side armor is typically very weak, and people try to disarm them by going for the shoulders.

[ElLocoMarko]

Wow, it's like me 4 months ago. I started in a hunch, moved to dragon and then cataphract with an emphasis on brawling.

I love the Dragons but some of the things you say give me pause in recommending it. Make sure to note the center torso missile hardpoints across the different variants. You will never get multiple large missle packs in there. And the ballistics in the same arm... better for convergance than the cataphract but... dual UAC5 doesn't fit and if you want to use the three ballistic model you will be mounting AC2 which can get hot.

All my Dragon's use an XL engine (320 XL I stole from a Cicada... 300XL might be better if I could afford it)
My Dragon 1C is a straight short range brawler with LB10X, 4ML and SRM6. 45 point spread damage alpha... doesn't get a lot of kills but two of those often rips off an arm.
My Dragon 1N is a light killer with dual SSRM.
My Dragon 5N was a bad chain-fire cataphract attempt using triple AC2. After I while I just put in an AC10 and ERPPC and slogged through it and then sold it.

When I moved from Dragon strikers to Cataphract brawlers my kills and damage went up quite a bit. All of the CTF (except 4x) are probably going to be running at 70 kph instead of 90 but that is plenty to get into the mix.I hated the Cataphract CTF-4X for its abysmal speed. I believe I am in the minority on this.