167 replies to this topic

[Mr 144]

Vlad Ward, on 27 January 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

The STK-5S loses a ton of torso twist range over the basic STK-3F for that extra AMS.

The 3F is the exception, not the rule. (positive)

The K is the exception, not the rule. (negative)

See the difference?

Mr 144

[Bren McGuire]

GhostFacedNinja, on 27 January 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

Or simply add in weapon inaccuracy/convergence. As the main problem is that people can accurately place all their weapons fire in one location in a system based on spreading damage over the entire body of a mech.

It's alot simpler to just add another 50% armour to the current 200% making it 300%. I don't forsee many disagreeing. It would certainly help against the current alpha strike trend.

Durability is part of the mythos with big walking tanks. Being two shotted is not.

[Sir Wulfrick]

Before I'll offer an oppinion on this topic I'll just say that I've been an Atlas pilot for years (since MW2) and have not piloted anything else since joining the ranks of Mechwarriors in MWO. So, I feel able to offer a valid perspective as solely an Atlas driver.

An Atlas with a skilled pilot at the controls is fearsome. It is however very unforgiving and, for inexperienced players, is difficult to deploy correctly. The principal difficulty piloting the ATL7 is it's lack of speed. Assuming a 300 engine (normal or XL) the mech is sufficiently slow to make disengaging from the enemy nearly impossible. The job of the skilled Atlas pilot is to very carefully judge when to bring the mech's considerable firepower and longevity to the fight in order to make a decisive difference. Making this decission correctly comes only from experience.

Charging ahead in an Atlas - any variant or "build" - is suicide. There are very, very few situations in which this is a sensible tactic as an Atlas pilot and those few that do exist demand that the Atlas pilot must have a significant level of support - something that seems to be largely absent in most PUGs. I have a feeling that many new players see the walking wall of armour and believe that it will protect them from anything. Obviously this is not true. The Atlas demands a very refined skill set in order to be employed successfully and absolutely mandates an understanding of tactics and the ability to maintain situational awareness.

As far as the Atlases themselves go, obviously the ATL7-D-DC with it's dual ballistic slots and ECM is currently predominant. Some of this is due to the currently OP ECM effects but the DDC is inherently a good design as it has many hard points, and a good mixture of them, to choose from.

I disagree with the accepted wisdome that the ATL7-K is useless. There are a number of long range direct-fire builds that work extremely well provided that the pilot does not under any circumstances engage in brawling. Obviously with the small maps and extreme focus on DPS rather than longevity this does limit the effectiveness of the K variant in a typical 5 minute match, but it can be effective.

The ATL7-D is, in my oppinion, one of the weaker variants. I piloted the ATL7-D(f) for a long time and had a pretty stable build of 2xER-LL, 1 x LL, 1 x GR, AMS, a pile of ammunition and around 29 SHS. Unfortunately the nerfing of the gauss rifle made this build barely viable as the design more or less required an XL engine. Replacing the GR with an AC didn't really improve matters. True, the ATL7-D is one of two Atlas variants that can carry two ballistic weapons, but doing so makes too many compromises in other areas to be as viable as the -D-DC variant.

The ATL7-RS is an interesting beast. I suspect that if and when the larger energy weapons get some sort of stat buff then I foresee the -RS becoming a very viable and popular variant. This variant has a good mixture of energy, missile and ballistic slots and a wide variety of very viable builds are possible.

If I were to make changes to the Atlases in general, they would be:

1. Make the ATL7-K or -D the ECM carrying variant. The -DDC is sufficiently powerful without this additional buff.
2. Give the ATL7-K an extra missile slot or extra energy hard points. Obviously it's designed for longer range engagements, something for which it's not best suited with current weapons stats and components behaving as they are.
3. All variants must come with a training manual on how to best employ the mech

Edited for clarity & spelling.

Edited by Sir Wulfrick, 27 January 2013 - 03:45 PM.

[Sheraf]

Atlas is fine. Most Atlases died due to soloing. An Atlas with proper support follow is very dangerous. It is funny to see an atlas think it can walk in the open, alone, and can tank multiple LRM salvo with artemis in the face

[M0rpHeu5]

Atlas is srtong but since the SRM are op so mechs with more missile hardpoints stand out more

Edited by M0rpHeu5, 27 January 2013 - 11:05 PM.

[Wolfways]

Khobai, on 27 January 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

I totally get where you're coming from. I just want to say that the issue isn't necessarily the hardpoint system but rather the fact that Ballistic hardpoints are blatantly inferior to Energy and Missile hardpoints. Ballistic weapons consume a tremendous amount of tonnage and crits for both the weapon itself as well as the ammo. Because of the ******** heatscale in this game its much more efficient to pack on as many "small" weapons as possible and then boat as many heatsinks as you can. That is the reason the game has devolved into lasers and srms.

Not sure what you're playing. I see more ballistics than lasers, and ballistics are way more powerful than lasers. All their damage is done to the section you hit, not spread out like lasers. Plus energy weapons produce a crapload more heat.

[Elder Thorn]

the only thing that is weak when it comes to an Atlas are players who are afraid of a fight and stay waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in their LRM + PPC Atlases.
I'm ok with that in Stalkers, but the Atlas should be up front and at least take damage for his teammates so they can kill stuff

[Deathwatch]

Wolfways, on 27 January 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

Not sure what you're playing. I see more ballistics than lasers, and ballistics are way more powerful than lasers. All their damage is done to the section you hit, not spread out like lasers. Plus energy weapons produce a crapload more heat.

m-Lasers and SRM+Artemis are by far the most damaging and versatile combo you can put into any mech, to make it an exceptional cqb brawler, and the Atlas just does not have the hardpoints to do that.






I dont understand why ppl try to justify the crappy hardpoint setup and the countless drawbacks of the Atlas with their player skill. Its nice that they are successfull with it, but they would be more successfull with other mechs, just try to see it that way.

Only the DDC in the brawler setup is the exception, but if you gave an 3F the ecm option i would instantly choose the 3F.

Edited by Deathwatch, 27 January 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[p00k]

Deathwatch, on 27 January 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

m-Lasers and SRM+Artemis are by far the most damaging and versatile combo you can put into any mech, to make it an exceptional cqb brawler, and the Atlas just does not have the hardpoints to do that.






I dont understand why ppl try to justify the crappy hardpoint setup and the countless drawbacks of the Atlas with their player skill. Its nice that they are successfull with it, but they would be more successfull with other mechs, just try to see it that way.

Only the DDC in the brawler setup is the exception, but if you gave an 3F the ecm option i would instantly choose the 3F.

because mlas & srm+artemis is not the most damaging and versatile combo

by the way, srm+artemis is a waste, since any serious fight will have ecm's everywhere which negate artemis. sure you can pug and reap the rewards, but hell, you can pugstomp in anything

again, ballistics are not a weakness. they easily outdamage energy weapons ton for ton when you consider the heatsinks needed to run them, and concentrate their damage much better than energy or missile weapons. take any of the atlases, and make them symmetric, and the ballistic is always better (i.e. as7-d with 2 ballistics in each torso vs 2 missiles in each torso).

there's more to a mech than what hardpoints it has. once you get over that hump of "i must stare at the target at all times" the atlas clearly trumps the stalker in its ability to shield its torsos with its arms. that detail is not trivial. nor is the added torso twist and arm rotation. certainly if all you did was drop both mechs ~500m apart, and both of them just ran directly at the other guy in a straight line, yes the stalker wins. but that's not what happens

Edited by p00k, 27 January 2013 - 05:48 PM.

[Solis Obscuri]

A good Atlas pilot can be devastating. Good hardpoint selections, plenty of weight for weapons, and it's armor outclasses anything else in the I.S. The only downside is you tend to wind up with everyone on the enemy team targeting you - because you're a huge obvious threat. But if your mediums and heavies are doing their jobs, that can work to your advantage, too.

[Solis Obscuri]

Deathwatch, on 27 January 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

m-Lasers and SRM+Artemis are by far the most damaging and versatile combo you can put into any mech, to make it an exceptional cqb brawler, and the Atlas just does not have the hardpoints to do that.

You are vastly underestimating the usefulness of ballistics, particularly in terms of heat efficiency.

[Haniwa]

Khobai, on 26 January 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

Atlas' got weaker when Level 2 tech was added. They just don't benefit as much from XL engines or DHS as they should. I will explain why.

In tabletop the chance to hit an Atlas in the side torso was exactly the same as the chance to hit a Commando in the side torso. For that reason, an XL engine was worth using on an Atlas in TT. However in MWO, the Atlas' side torso was scaled up in size significantly. Combine that with the fact players can pinpoint specific locations and there's basically no reason to use an XL engine on an Atlas anymore. So the Atlas just doesn't really benefit from having an XL engine while lights benefit from them tremendously.

And as far as DHS go, PGI has it completely backwards. By having engine heatsinks be 2.0 theyve given light mechs a huge boost. The light mechs don't suffer the penalty of 1.4 DHS because they generally don't mount heatsinks outside their engines. It's the Assaults that suffer the most from 1.4 DHS and they don't get nearly as much heat dissipation as they should have.

and dont forget you cant put Endo or Ferro into Heavy/Assaultmechs, because you dont have enough critslots to mount enough weapons and get the upgrades. You can do in light/medium mechs though.
MWO is pretty unbalanced towards light mechs atm.

[Khanahar]

OneEyed Jack, on 27 January 2013 - 09:15 AM, said:

I took the liberty of editing to enhance the operative word here. Component is referring to the missile launchers, not the entire body section. If your doors are closed and an AC10 crits your launcher, it will reduce the damage to 9 and not destroy it.

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 24 January 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

It's not 10% extra armor, it's 10% damage resistance for that component.

That includes damage from weapon fire and other sources like ammo explosions.

Actually, Tom D here seems to be saying that the damage resistance is not JUST in the form of armor, that is, he is expanding the range of the effect, not limiting it.

[p00k]

Haniwa, on 27 January 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

and dont forget you cant put Endo or Ferro into Heavy/Assaultmechs, because you dont have enough critslots to mount enough weapons and get the upgrades. You can do in light/medium mechs though.

there's actually several ddc builds that use endo, just search the forums (i don't like em, but plenty of people use it)
and heavies, well, gausscat, ac20cat, srm6cat are 3 of the most popular builds for catapults, and all use endo.

ferro really only lights get to use, few mediums and really no heavy/assaults will have another 14 free after endo, but ferro only buys light mechs like half a ton. not a huge boost really



assaults benefited a lot from level 2 tech. i wouldn't run an xl engine in any assault except a pugging atlas (i.e. i wouldn't run an xl in 8man) and the 9m awesome (only because that's the whole point of the 9m, to go fast).

but where smaller, faster mechs could get away with xl engines and using the tonnage savings for more firepower, assaults can instead keep the standard and use dhs to offset what you lack by not taking xl

and where smaller mechs can now take an xl AND dhs, they don't benefit as much since they pay a bigger crit space price in their inability to cram more DHS into the engine slots

[Grey Ghost]

Sir Wulfrick, on 27 January 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

I disagree with the accepted wisdome that the ATL7-K is useless. There are a number of long range direct-fire builds that work extremely well provided that the pilot does not under any circumstances engage in brawling. Obviously with the small maps and extreme focus on DPS rather than longevity this does limit the effectiveness of the K variant in a typical 5 minute match, but it can be effective.

It's not that it is useless, it's that it might as well be. Every other Atlas has the potential to fulfill the role you mention above, and be better at it than the -K.

Sir Wulfrick, on 27 January 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

If I were to make changes to the Atlases in general, they would be:

1. Make the ATL7-K or -D the ECM carrying variant. The -DDC is sufficiently powerful without this additional buff.
2. Give the ATL7-K an extra missile slot or extra energy hard points. Obviously it's designed for longer range engagements, something for which it's not best suited with current weapons stats and components behaving as they are.

I certainly hope they consider reconsidering the AS7-K. Though hopefully not just sticking ECM on it.

[Karl Streiger]

I'am a Atlas Pilot...for 6 months i have driven other mechs but most experience i earned on a Atlas.
Most kills i earned were other Atlas... well that fact is simple because the Atlas is still common.
Second idea about that is that people think stock mechs are bad...so they start to modify them without idea what they are doing.
I have seen Atlas with machine guns and streak srm 2 and dual Ultra 5s and dual LBX and more and more. In my opinion the AS7-K gives you everything you need.
Do you need two LRM slots? Do you need two or more ballistic slots?
Ever seen what a LRM 20 in combination with a Gauss is able to do?
Have you ever seen what two large laser in combination with a Gauss is able to do?

[Moonsavage]

I agree with OP, whilie Atlai can punch, their armour gives them like 5 seconds more before they die than any other mech - easily offset by their poor maneuvrability.

Queue "L2P Atlas" responses.

[Tarriss Halcyon]

I pilot a so-called (and self-admittedly) underarmed Dragon. I love seeing Atlases AND Cataphracts, because both of them have nice big squishy centerpoints that are easy to hit at 600m. Stalkers, I take off each side torso, then if I don't core it, a teammate does. Awesome...well, first I have to FIND one, then hit it. Those things typically have the most skilled pilots, because only a skilled pilot can get the Awesome to work well.

However, that's beside the point. My point is that in anything, if I walk around the corner and find an Atlas in closer than 400m, no matter what mech I'm in, I try to run away straight away. The only other time I do that is if I'm immediately in front of a Stalker (pro tip: Stalker has the narrowest field of fire of all mechs, due to it's slow and restricted torso twist and lack of arms. Even Catapult has a wider field of fire to work with) or I see a Catapult that hasn't been targeted before - I like to know if it has SRMs and can one-shot any mech, or LRMs that I can make the most of and kill.

[Ravennus]

Karl Streiger, on 28 January 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

I'am a Atlas Pilot...for 6 months i have driven other mechs but most experience i earned on a Atlas.
Most kills i earned were other Atlas... well that fact is simple because the Atlas is still common.
Second idea about that is that people think stock mechs are bad...so they start to modify them without idea what they are doing.
I have seen Atlas with machine guns and streak srm 2 and dual Ultra 5s and dual LBX and more and more. In my opinion the AS7-K gives you everything you need.
Do you need two LRM slots? Do you need two or more ballistic slots?
Ever seen what a LRM 20 in combination with a Gauss is able to do?
Have you ever seen what two large laser in combination with a Gauss is able to do?

Have you ever seen what 2 Large Lasers plus 2 UAC5s in a DDC can do? With 3 additional SSRMS for close range punch and easily shoeing away pesky ECM lights?

You like 2 Large Lasers and a Gauss Rifle? Try 4 Large Lasers and a Gauss Rifle on an RS. Sexy.

Edited by Ravennus, 28 January 2013 - 04:53 AM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Haniwa, on 27 January 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

and dont forget you cant put Endo or Ferro into Heavy/Assaultmechs, because you dont have enough critslots to mount enough weapons and get the upgrades. You can do in light/medium mechs though.
MWO is pretty unbalanced towards light mechs atm.

I use Endo in my Atlas and it works out quite nicely.

Khanahar, on 27 January 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:

Actually, Tom D here seems to be saying that the damage resistance is not JUST in the form of armor, that is, he is expanding the range of the effect, not limiting it.

What part of "not extra armor" has you so confused? These are not ambiguous words. There is no extra armor, and the damage reduction is only for the component which, them being missile bay doors, seems pretty self-explanatory to which component he refers.