A sheep in wolves' clothing. Would it work?

A thought occurred to me the other day. If you look at all the builds posted on here and used online, nearly all of them (mine included) are geared towards outright maximum fire-power, or at least maximum for that chassis size. What if you you put the fire-power of say a medium mech into the chassis of a heavy mech, then optimised the builds armour, speed and heat efficiency?

I tinkered a bit with the idea, using the load-out for my Hunchback HBK-4H in a Cataphract CTF-1X, then tweaking it. Here are the improvements:

[table=width: 10cm]
[tr]
[td][/td]
[td]DOWNGRADE TO UPGRADE - TEST 1
[/td]
[td][/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td][/td]
[td]HBK-4H[/td]
[td]CTF-1X[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]TONS[/td]
[td]50[/td]
[td]70[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]ARMOUR[/td]
[td]336[/td]
[td]384[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]FIRE-POWER[/td]
[td]33[/td]
[td]33[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]SUSTAINED DPS[/td]
[td]3.29[/td]
[td]4.84[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]HEAT EFFICIENCY[/td]
[td]34%[/td]
[td]50%[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]SPEED (KPH)[/td]
[td]64.8[/td]
[td]69.4[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

Although the build has considerably less outright fire-power than other Cataphract builds, because its heat efficiency is good it can fire its weaker Alpha more often.

I'm not sure if this idea has any merit. It came about when I outfitted an STK-3F in Smurfy's with just 2 LLas, 2 MLas and 2 SSRM2s. Along with an AMS and BAP, it had a Standard 310 engine and 23 DHS, for a heat efficiency of 58% and Max. DPS of 4.90. Its probably far too underpowered to be effective, but its an interesting idea. Feel free to try it out (the general idea, not the Stalker build) and let me know if I'm on to something.

 

What are the engine speeds, weapons, and heat sinks in these two?

I've seen Mechs with a low alpha, high DHS build put out impressive numbers. I think part of it is playstyle, though. The more sustained DPS you can do, generally the more you have to remain on target to make use of that DPS. If you're more bursty and less heat efficient, you can blast the enemy with a big alpha (bigger psychological aspect) and then maneuver around to avoid or spread out incoming damage. However, in a situation where you can mercilessly wail on an enemy, the sustained build is better.

As to the general concept of your post, one thing I've seen a lot lately is that you have some builds that can be duplicated in a heavier mech at greater speed and with more tons to devote to ammo/extra weapons/DHS. Sadly, it was one of my builds that was beaten in every way (FLAME outdone by Cataphract 1X).

 

Here are the HBK-4H and CTF-1X builds for comparison:

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=9&l=4ca0cc501fee2428ea7fc2d2fcb938abb2677e90

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=41&l=dfe2f7b4fb0dba7e9c80df8377ae1cc4e28155f1

 

Yep, this is exactly what I was refering to in my post. I've touched on this in my thread in the guide section on optimal speed/weight ratios and in my post in the Hunchback discussion (in that section) regarding the fact that the larger mechs can often carry a big enough engine to match the speed of a lighter build and still have more free weight to devote to DHS and/or other weapons. In this example, you could even add another ML to the CTF-1X at the cost of a DHS, and have probably an even bigger DPS boost.

 

I like this idea really. Iv seen it in use before as well. Hunchback 4SP with a max sized standard engine, 5 small lasers, and 2 SRM6 . Lots less damage than the normal build but it can keep the firepower up when others are waiting for their mech to power back up. It is a preference thing I think. In the end what you have fun with is what will get you best results.

 

Eh, I wouldn't be too partial to small lasers. 90m isn't very much range, and they lose their efficiency when they don't deal much damage.

 

I believe this statement, or a variation of it, 100%. If you really believe something will work for you, it will. If you believe in it you will work it harder and more often, take more chances with it and learn more quickly from it as well. Whether it is a particular fishing lure, arrow head, car, girl, battlemech or whatever...if you really like it; you can win with it.

Myth.

Post Script:I have to agree with skribs about the small lasers though...anything that goes pew, pew...really stinks.

 

For me, preference means both things are equal, or both things have positives and negatives that at least somewhat balance out, and you choose what you prefer based on that.

When A is better in every way than B other than "I like B better", then while you could do good with B, you could do better with A.

 

For me it isn't so much a matter of like, it is more about how much you believe in something. Maybe I'm totally off my rocker here; but certain builds "feel" different. They seem to flow in their movement, heat management is an afterthrought, your weapons just seem to be more accurate with "this" build then any other...I dunno, maybe I've just been weaving too many myths? it just seems to me that if I really believe something is going to perform well for me, it does.

Myth.

 

Yeah, you're off your rocker. (I majored in psych).

I mean, to an extent hardpoints play into it as well. You're not going to get 9xML on a Cataphract (although now that I think about it, I'll have to look at the difference between 9xML and 5xLL...). A Death's Knell may only be able to use 4xML compared to a Jenner's 6, but the DK will be able to hit a lot easier with those four. There are a lot of subtle trade-offs. The hard part for the hunchback, IMO, is that the trebuchets provide a better missile platform, and the ballistic slot is hard to make use of that can't be done better by a bigger mech (because ballistics are so smegging heavy).

 

I know what you're getting at. It hasn't happened for me yet in MWO because my PC won't play ball, but certain load-outs I've used in Call of Duty just seem to work. Aiming is easy, ammo efficiency is good. Its often not even the best available set-up. It just works. Its hard to explain really.

 

This has already occurred to some degree. A previous Tournament Champion Stalker build uses less than the maximum number of PPCs, increases it's ability to dissipate heat and came out on top with a skilled pilot. It doesn't hit the hardest but it can stay the longest!

 

True, but that is still an Assault mech load-out in an Assault mech. My idea was to see if taking the weapons load-out from a lower class of mech (Light/Medium/Heavy) and putting it into the next class above (Medium,Heavy/Assault), then using the free tonnage to improve the speed, armour and heat efficiency would result in a better, more usable design than simply making the load-out as powerful as possible for that particular class of mech. Something I forgot to mention in the original post was to have the difference in weight between the two classes of mechs to be 20 tons, so that each mech occupies the same position in its respective class, like so:

Hunchback - 50 tons

Cataphract - 70 tons

Medium mech weights - 40,45,50,55

Heavy mech weights - 60,65,70,75

Other pairings could include a Catapult with a Stalker (65/85), a Cataphract with a Highlander (70/90) and an Awesome with an Atlas (80/100). Though that last pairing isn't quite in the spirit of the original idea, it would be interesting to see if it would have any tangible benefit.

 

I mean, hardpoints definitely come into play, and almost every build runs (or should run) max armor, minus a ton or two.

There's other things that are problematic as well - engine size restrictions, for example. A Hunchback vs. a Cataphract is a pretty bad example, because Cataphracts have a wide range of engines, and Hunchbacks don't. If you try to make a Centurion build on a Jagermech, you'll never go as fast, just because the Centurion has much wider engine options than the Hunchback (or the Jagermech, for that matter).

Packing in a ton of heatsinks instead of a PPC, for example, is totally viable, but you tend to run out of slots before you run out of weight.

It's not that interesting an experiment, IMO, because it's just speed + sustained DPS vs. burst DPS.

 

Well then, I guess we're both off our rockers, but I totally stand behind that statement.

Back in the Hero Challenge, everyone already knew the Raven was going to be the Light 'Mech Pilot's primary choice of chassis. But I took the JR7-D.

When anyone asks me, "As a Light 'Mech Pilot, what chassis is your favorite?" My reply is always "the Jenner." Which is ALWAYS followed by "Why? The Raven 3L has ECM, the Spider 5D has ECM.......", and on and on they go pointing out other chassis and their varients.

Why? To me it is totally about the "feel" of this 'Mech. To me it has a fluidity that complements MY playstyle, MY system's specs, MY bandwidth, etc. It has become my 'warm-up' 'Mech anytime I first sit down to play MWO. It is the 'Mech, that on my good days, does 'flow' through a map. It is the 'Mech that I can maneuver, fire with, and know the limitations of, without thinking. When I can weave left and right in an effortless glide, I'm in my 'groove'. To me, the Raven feels like I'm running on chicken legs. Yes, I can play it, no, it doesn't have "the feel". If you have to think more about operating your 'Mech than pay attention to your situational awareness, then you are doing it wrong.

Soooooo this!!

 

I can tell you that when I tell people ECM was an afterthought on my DDC and it was only added because I could do it without sacrificing much (I think AMS got the boot that was it) They tend not to believe me. I in truth am a horrible ECM pilot. I forget to jam enemy ECM simply because If I am that close I am concentrating on killing anyway.

 

People are getting too personal in this thread

Of course "whatever works for you" applies to MWO as much as to everything else. But I don´t think that´s what we are discussing in a build oriented forum. The question here is: is doing this or that building (reasonably) effective? Or is this one just for fun? (in the OP words: Would it work?)

As far as the original poster question go: what you are doing there, putting a "small" firepower on a bigger mech, is a trade off. You are trading off alpha damage (or burst damage) for more heat efficiency/ammo/speed/armor (although most people use max armor always). This is most of the times the same as trading alpha for stronger DPS and longer stay (if you have more ammo). This has a limit, mind you, if you go ditching weapons to the point you maxed engine and your heat efficiency is too high, then you just have a underpowered mech with little returns (and I stress, that doesnt´t mean you cannot be happy or high scoring with it, if you´re a good pilot and the mech gets you "in the zone", you´ll kick ass)

Now, on to my opinion about DPS vs Alpha.

Right now it seems to me that the game is badly skewed towards alpha. That happens because (in order of importance IMO):

(1) the heat mechanics is too forgiving, no lost speed, aiming, anything. You can pretty much get away with powering down 5 times or more in a match (anyone used to play table top tell me if that was acceptable)
(2) Jumpy-craziness is crazy. We are badly missing that -3 to hit penalty you have in TT when jumping and firing. It is just too stable a jump right now. For reference, a space shuttle is about 110 Tons. Notice the shake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFA2v05SVKs
(3) The big alpha weapons have a overlap with long range (actually, most of them having longer ranges than LRM is also odd), and the long range dominated maps seem to be still having increased probability in rotation. That might also have something to do with LB10x and also AC10 not being what they should be.
(4) The big alpha weapons have pretty decent cool-downs, so that they don´t have all that bad DPS after all.

So I would say the trade is not very promising right now. Which is a shame for guys like me who loved to go around in magine gun crammed Annihilators in MW4 (very effective in some maps). Let´s hope it gets more balanced soon, this is the kind of decision which should really boil down to taste in a balanced game (meaning that both alpha builds and DPS build should be equally effective).

 

I call setups like these 'endurance mechs'... like if you can survive the high heat/high damage alpha jockeys then you should have an advantage... you don't need to have a huge DPS # when the opponent is standing there shutdown... there are only 2 questions that really need to be asked:

1) Can you survive long enough?, and
2) Can you bring someone down in a short enough time?

The survival thing is more a function of how you drive it and what your team is doing around you. The efficiency in bringing down opponents is also affected by what the team is doing around you but it's also the build too. If you wanna drive an endurance build then at the very least you need to be able to finish things that are already wounded.

Catapult C1 Workhorse build being a prime example... not a big damage # but it survives OK and can drill holes in people in an efficient enough manner. Just depends on how long it can stay up. Sometimes it's OK, sometimes you look around and all you see are red triangles...

I think endurance builds are great. You just have to drive it with a plan and a purpose. Occasionally, it works out...

 

Basically this. A PPC does 10 (instant, pinpoint) damage every 3 seconds. A Large Laser does 9 damage (over 1 second) every 3.25 seconds. What's crazy about it is that those numbers give PPCs 3.33 DPS, with Large Lasers having 2.12 DPS. That's an extra 50% on what's meant to be a long-range sniper weapon.

For them to be equal, the PPC would have to have a reload time of 4.7 seconds. But even that's kind of a false equivalence. The DPS of a PPC should be somewhere around 50%-75% of a Large Laser, which would put it at between 6 and 9 seconds.

ER PPCs and PPCs will always beat a Large Pulse Laser in a straight up face-to-face damage fight. That's insane. ER PPCs have 1620 metres of range, 810 of which is at full damage. That's the highest range on any weapon, and it's the best DPS energy weapon?

Drop the DPS on PPCs dramatically, and we'll be looking at a much more balanced game. I suggest 5 seconds to start with.

 

Exactly. I'm far from saying that the games are a PPC fest that some people suggest, but i'd be great to see more weapon loadouts viable.