88 replies to this topic

[Kylere]

I do not own an A1, but in response to all the whines here I equipped my C4 with 4SRM6+Artemis and various energy weapons.

I can kill poor players like a MADMAN, the only thing that stops me is running out of ammo or a player who is not a complete moron.

Don't be a moron and these builds are a joke.

[Franchi]

PropagandaWar, on 13 February 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

Umm the SRM cat requires aiming and "Has" big ears you can hit at. The Thundercat and Gaussapults are weak and do not suffer from what other torso cannon mechs suffer from. Yep Torsos. They are minimal easy to hide with there huge torso radius. I have stated in several forums post I only despise these mechs for cosmetic reasons that is all. Same could be said for mr PPC stalker who should have tubes all over its chassis. Streak cats were jerkwad builds. They don't require crap for aiming. I have seen to many SRM cats miss and b way less effective over 100 meters.

Don't forget the worst part of the gauss/20cat, it can't aim up or down to save its life anything with JJ's can end it's life real fast.

Edited by Franchi, 13 February 2013 - 12:28 PM.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Irvine, on 13 February 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

You mean the two good hunch variants? I mean come on the 4P and 4SP are the two most popular Hunchies for a reason. IMO the 4SP is the best hands down. Do you pilot dragons?

Ferro that is my favorite LRM setup

I didn't want to derail the thread with a detour in to the "all mediums are sub-optimal" argument. People like their hunchies and I'm OK with that.

Also... I have masted Dragons, though I haven't driven one in awhile. Why do you ask??

Also also; I too run that LRM build on my founder's cat. Agree that it is a good, balanced build.

Edited by Warrax the Chaos Warrior, 13 February 2013 - 12:30 PM.

[PropagandaWar]

Franchi, on 13 February 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

Don't forget the worst part of the gauss/20cat, it can't aim up or down to save its life anything with JJ's can end it's life real fast.

Its just the torsos. They annoy the hell out of me. I personally think with the big guns they would annoy the hell out of me. I do so like using hill on them though lol/

[Irvine]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 13 February 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

I didn't want to derail the thread with a detour in to the "all mediums are sub-optimal" argument. People like their hunchies and I'm OK with that.

Also... I have masted Dragons, though I haven't driven one in awhile. Why do you ask??

Also also; I too run that LRM build on my founder's cat. Agree that it is a good, balanced build.

I was just wondering lol. I've mastered Dragons, hunchies and Cats.

[Fergrim]

I never fight an SRM cat without blowing off its ears, usually comically early.

Seems to me that six SRMs are dangerous, not cheesy, and that the splat cat is at a huge disadvantage given HUGE low hitpoint launchers for said weapons.

My four large pulse stalker can destroy all of the weapons in one arm with one, to two bursts. My raven can circle and blow off an arm in a few circles that involve taking a little cover.

These things seem fine, and I personally wouldn't pilot one given the extreme likelyhood of getting my arms blown off. Same as with the flame, when I rock 2 larges in each arm.

I very often find myself weaponless before I die.

[sC4r]

and i thought a 30 pages long thread full of whining wasnt enough

damn i wish these threads were removed (just because)

[TungstenWall]

IMO 'Splat Cats' are OP because their Armor, Torso sizes/shapes, Able to effectively use one weapon (No multi tasking as far as weapons), Alpha damage, and Speed.

With these, Small maps create an ideal environment to use Splatcats. However, when we get 12v12 (if done right) Cats boating mostly/all SRMs will have a bad time. DFS will rip pure brawlers of heavy and assault sizes to pieces.

[Iwaslost]

Jakob Knight, on 13 February 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Your assumptions are wrong, and your choice of which forum to post in is incorrect.

I don't think the build is 'cheesy', since it is very much what the mech is supposed to be (missile carrier). I also don't see how any player can hold this opinion since they were the ones who so cried against the CPLT carrying anything else (LRMs, SSRMs) that to now say regular SRMs make it cheesy is only proving how invalid the original complaints were. If you didnt' want them to mount 6xSRMs, then -maybe- you should have thought about that before pushing the Devs to insert a system that didn't remove all other options from effective use.

And, there is a Suggestions forum. Maybe you should try posting there for a -suggestion-?

Edit: And to make this even remotely not another 'Kill the Cat' thread from a bunch of haters, you would have to apply the same rule to any weapon on any mech, regardless of if it had doors or not. If it lacked doors, chance to crit would be unavoidable at all times. If you have trouble understanding why this would be needed for fairness, remember that mechs with weapon doors have to hold their aim longer to account for the doors opening prior to firing, so making it so having weapon doors only opens you to risk mechs without doors don't share is simple bais.

Ad hominem attack, generalization. You're argument shouldn't rely on these.

And no it wouldn't have to apply to all weapons. The functional part of an AC or laser or PPC is inside the mech covered by armor. Even if the barrel is damaged they should be able to function to some degree. The functional part of a missile, warhead and fuel, is not and damage to this could cause it to explode if it's not covered thus damaging/destroying the launcher.

[Davers]

Ironbound, on 12 February 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

I'm making this thread under the assumption that you agree that 6 srm A1s are dumb, cheesy builds. If you don't agree that's fine, but in my personal experience from playing against them/piloting one I would say that they very much are. Whether or not it's overpowered is a whole different conversation.

Now I've heard rumors there is a damage bonus on open bay doors, but I feel, again from anecdotal experience from a few hundred games playing as one/ fighting them, that it is far and away not enough. I've heard 5%, if anyone has more information I'd love to hear it.

If A1's are 'dumb and cheesy' why are you trying to change their name to 'SkillCats'?

When doors are closed there is a 10% reduction in damage. I have not heard anything about them taking extra damage if they are open.

[Garth Erlam]

I'm moving this thread, under the assumption that 'suggestion' is literal.

[Franchi]

Iwaslost, on 13 February 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Ad hominem attack, generalization. You're argument shouldn't rely on these.

And no it wouldn't have to apply to all weapons. The functional part of an AC or laser or PPC is inside the mech covered by armor. Even if the barrel is damaged they should be able to function to some degree. The functional part of a missile, warhead and fuel, is not and damage to this could cause it to explode if it's not covered thus damaging/destroying the launcher.

Ever seen what happens when you fire a gun with a damaged or blocked barrel?????????????

Here let me help you


Yes ballistics and lasers would be just as susceptible IRL.

[Jakob Knight]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 13 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Those are all double or a little less on the energy weapons, none are triple, and all you could do with them is boat medium lasers (which is pretty "meh").

The extra ballistic slots on the Dragon and Hunchback are of dubious usefulness because of where they're located. Those are all examples of PGI adding hardpoints that either did end up balanced, or actually still left the mech underpowered.

Awesome, Dragon, and Cicada have always been regarded as some of the least optimal chassis. Hunchback might be the best medium, but none of your examples are close to "on par" with the Catapults.

The bonus hardpoint system was balanced for some mechs, left some still underpowered, and backfired completely for others.

Soooo....what you are saying is that it's okay to have triple hardpoints per weapon, unless it's on a mech you don't like. Or, that it's okay as long as they don't violate your own personal opinion of what a mech should be able to do. In both cases, it's not -really- a triple hardpoint because 3 isn't really triple as long as they are in the arms. Oh, wait...that would be the Catapult as well as the Dragon, wouldn't it?

Or, was your whole point about the CPLT gaining more hardpoints per weapon just a cover for actually saying 'I don't think the Catapult should be a threat to me when I fight it'? Because it seems like you are claiming no other mech gets triple weapons hardpoints for a given weapon on their chassis, and then say that it doesn't matter when you are given proof that that is a wrong statement. What, then, was your actual point?

Fact is...there are mechs in this game that get more hardpoints than the number of weapons that come with it, and the Catapult is not any different than these.

[blinkin]

i own a srm cat c4.

i like this suggestion.

i think it would help to thin out the heards of mouth breathers that build them and just charge straight at the enemy holding down the trigger.

even when armor is stripped the odds of a srm6 breaking when shot are low. i would be perfectly fine with these odds still being applied when there is still armor.

i am an ambush predator when piloting my cat. most enemies are not allowed to see me until after they are within my kill zone. players who use strategy and sneak in will be largely uneffected, while the unwashed masses who charge straight forward for a few alpha strikes would be more likely to be crippled before they get in range.

this will likely hurt my game some, but it will bring back that feeling of being an elite pilot that is one of the few that can make a srm catapult work effectively.

Edited by blinkin, 13 February 2013 - 01:43 PM.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Jakob Knight, on 13 February 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Soooo....what you are saying is that it's okay to have triple hardpoints per weapon, unless it's on a mech you don't like. Or, that it's okay as long as they don't violate your own personal opinion of what a mech should be able to do. In both cases, it's not -really- a triple hardpoint because 3 isn't really triple as long as they are in the arms. Oh, wait...that would be the Catapult as well as the Dragon, wouldn't it?

Or, was your whole point about the CPLT gaining more hardpoints per weapon just a cover for actually saying 'I don't think the Catapult should be a threat to me when I fight it'? Because it seems like you are claiming no other mech gets triple weapons hardpoints for a given weapon on their chassis, and then say that it doesn't matter when you are given proof that that is a wrong statement. What, then, was your actual point?

Fact is...there are mechs in this game that get more hardpoints than the number of weapons that come with it, and the Catapult is not any different than these.

No other mech has it's total number of hardpoints tripled. None, not any, not at all, except for the A-1. If a Dragon 1-N had 3 ballistic slots, 3 missiles, and 6 energy, it would be a really OP mech. It doesn't, so it's not.

You're putting words in my mouth because you want me to be a crybaby, because accusing people of QQ is the only way to defend your position. I get killed by splatcats maybe once out of every 15 games or so, and I see them fail in the hands of bad pilots often enough. When used poorly they suck (that's true of anything), but they can be an exploit when not used poorly (and that's not true of everything).

I'm not on a personal crusade against them. They're just the best example of how PGI's hardpoint system doesn't always work as intended. I don't want to see the SRM6 itself get nerfed, but that's what's going to happen if the devs follow their usual form for this kind of thing. It'll be the weapon, or it'll be the platform; and PGI has always chosen to nerf the weapon thus far.

[focuspark]

blinkin, on 13 February 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

i am an ambush predator when piloting my cat. most enemies are not allowed to see me until after they are within my kill zone. players who use strategy and sneak in will be largely uneffected, while the unwashed masses who charge straight forward for a few alpha strikes would be more likely to be crippled before they get in range.

I know... you likely do not remember you shoved a pack of SRMs up the backside of my Cicada about a week ago. I was all... oh a CPLT, let's go find him... oh there he is: behind me, ouch - oh it's blinkin!

[blinkin]

focuspark, on 13 February 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

I know... you likely do not remember you shoved a pack of SRMs up the backside of my Cicada about a week ago. I was all... oh a CPLT, let's go find him... oh there he is: behind me, ouch - oh it's blinkin!

i don't always succeed in surprising my opponents, but i try.

was it on frozen? oddly enough most of the time when i fight cicada it seems to happen in between the buildings on frozen.

i rarely notice pilot names during the match. too busy looking at my mechs paper doll, the enemy paper doll, randomly glancing at the minimap in an effort to spot incoming targets, and the enemy mech itself while aiming.

[Nunspa]

you all realize that in the Battle Tech technical Manuel it discusses a cat variant with all SRM 6 racks right?

It's fracking in the lore of the game... heck I used one in the table top way back in the day.

if the Crusader ever makes it into the game I would love to see the tears when you walk into the sweet spot where all of its SRMs and LRMs can rip you apart......

[FerrolupisXIII]

Iwaslost, on 13 February 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Ad hominem attack, generalization. You're argument shouldn't rely on these.

And no it wouldn't have to apply to all weapons. The functional part of an AC or laser or PPC is inside the mech covered by armor. Even if the barrel is damaged they should be able to function to some degree. The functional part of a missile, warhead and fuel, is not and damage to this could cause it to explode if it's not covered thus damaging/destroying the launcher.

yeah, you REALLY have no idea how fragile weapons are do you.

[blinkin]

FerrolupisXIII, on 13 February 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

yeah, you REALLY have no idea how fragile weapons are do you.

there is also the fact that the weapons we fire are designed to destroy any hardened armor that exists on other similar weapons. if you bend or warp any sort of gun barrel enough there is likely to be a misfire incedent. there are also considerations like: loading mechanisms, firing mechanisms or for energy weapons: power cables, focusing lenses.

imagine what could happen if a few magnets on a gauss rifle were out of alignment. instead of the shot going straight it curves off to the side and straight into your internals.

in WW2 they would spike artillary peices by dropping explosives inside to destroy the barrel. there are examples of them doing this with mere hand grenades.

there is plenty that can go wrong.

Edited by blinkin, 13 February 2013 - 04:21 PM.