You know, it is okay for a mech to have multiple engagement ranges due to its loadout. I think the important thing about the Mad Cat C is that none of its weaponry is rendered useless when ranges close, especially in TC base defense. It offers you a chance to soften them up before entering spit-from-my-cockpit-to-yours ranges.
Yes, it’s “okay” for ranges to be all over the place, but it’s not optimal. My point was that while the Madcat C is playable as it is now, it would be a lot better if it had gotten an overhaul after the CLBX20s were downgraded. The C variant is not as optimized right now as it could be because it was built around a certain engagement range (short), and then due primarily to the Loki E being the Wind of Death with its dual CUAC20s, the Madcat C’s assault pods were also downgraded (assault pods are what lets a ‘mech mount the AC20 and LBX20 sized weapons). When the range on the primary weapons of a ‘mech go suddenly from 450m (short) to 700m (medium/long) but the secondary and tertiary weapon systems remain unchanged, the philosophy behind the design of the variant has been compromised. In some cases the new design might accidentally turn out better than the original (especially if the original design was bad or the new accidental design turned out to be innovative), but I don’t see that this is the case with the current iteration of the Madcat C.
Note that I’m operating under the assumption that the developer who designed the original Madcat C with the CLBX20s knew what he was doing and had a good understanding of the concepts involved in designing a ‘mech. I think this is an alright assumption to make, because like certain other highly effective variants, the original Madcat C had a certain balanced beauty to its design. It’s only logical that if you take a highly organized and polished design, and then make a random change to the main weapon which alters its firepower and optimal range, then you no longer have the same level of polish and organization that you previously had.
There’s a saying I’ve heard on various video game forums, “anything that isn’t optimal is bad.” At first I wanted to argue with this, but after years of observing high level competitive play in all sorts of genres of video games, I have to agree with it. Basically it means that if your goal is to win and you’re not using the best possible asset for the job, whether it is a Sig in Counter-Strike instead of the AK47, or the Osiris Prime instead of the Owens C, then you’re giving yourself a disadvantage unnecessarily. If you aren’t playing to win, then this doesn’t really apply to you. You can build whatever Frankenstein ‘mech you want and call it fun if you’re goal is to just screw around with a killer robot. If you enjoy the visceral feel of the missiles leaving their launch tubes, maybe that’s why you like missiles better than lasers. But if your goal is to win, it’s more useful to discard everything that isn’t the best.
On these forums and in game I’ve noticed a lot of people let their nostalgia for classic battletech lore get in the way of optimal game play, optimal ‘mech design, and balance. This is simply wrong. I think it was sgnl05 who had one of my favorite all-time quotes on this forum, “I couldn’t care less what some 30 year old nerd tome says about a fictional science fiction space gun.” Anytime the primary reason for implementing something is “that’s the way it was in CBT” as opposed to “this is what will make the most engaging, balanced, or interesting gaming experience,” something is wrong. The best examples are the Prime variants, which generally suck due to an inferior design philosophy of mixing weapon types, but they were put into the game simply because they existed previously in CBT. These are variants that were designed under an entirely different subset of rules for a totally different type of game, so naturally it wouldn’t be logical to expect them to excel here. It definitely makes for cooler stories when all the weapons aren’t ER medium beam lasers, and it probably works fine in the tabletop game, and I can even see why some people would think it’s “cooler” to be bristling with an array of assorted weaponry. But this is a first person video game where you have to actually pilot the ‘mech, not a book or a board game.
The most successful ‘mech designs are ones that boat similarly functioning weapons with similar ranges. Good players know this, that’s why there were pages of discussion about a “boat tax” which is basically the idea to build an artificial price penalty into the ‘mech lab for variants with “boaty” setups, because some people think that mixed weapons are for some arbitrary reason more fun than boats and therefore boats should be penalized. Burst damage weapons with high damage / slow reload time (lasers, LBX, gauss rifle) are going to be generally better than “constant stream of damage” style weapons (low caliber AC, XPL). This is because you can concentrate on mitigating/spreading incoming damage between firings of burst weapons, but you must always be facing your opponent with the quicker firing weapons and therefore you are constantly leaving the same areas of your ‘mech exposed to return fire.
When designing a ‘mech, you pick a job you want the ‘mech to do (Base Defense? General Brawling? AA? Skirmishing? Hit and run? Close support? Range support? Recon?), and you then design the ‘mech to do that job as best as you can. “Versatility” and “jack of all trades” generally mean that the ‘mech isn’t actually good at anything, just mediocre at everything.
You can see how this manifests in MWLL just by looking at some of the most effective ‘mech variants right now. Madcat B – 900m / 700m long range laser boat w/synergistic heat-free gauss rifle. Novacat D “Thermal Lance” – 600m medium range laserboat. Mk2 E Siege Engine – 750/800m UAC5 boat with a pair of ATMs. Atlas A “Mr. Bubbles” – RAC5 boat 500m, “punch” with MRMs at 750m. Owens C 400/500m range laserboat. PPC Awesome 700m 4xPPCs. All of these ‘mechs have a greater synergistic philosophy behind their design that the primes and some other mixed weapons variants just don’t have. The reason that the weapons on the above ‘mechs work together well is that none of them require much aim-adjustment due to weapons with different firing patterns. There are also some other synergies at work between the weapons with their reload times, ranges, heat, and ammo use. There are also synergies between the weapons and the ‘mech chassis itself, i.e. the Awesome is a huge target but thanks to the PPC screen-shake effect, it can chain fire them and avoid a lot of the damage it would get from being such a large target. If it had 2PPCs and 2LBLs, this synergy wouldn’t be nearly as apparent. On some of the prime variants however you have to switch from dead-on aim with lasers to leading the target with Gauss to leading even further with UACs, but then you can’t lead too much because you have to maintain your missile lock – quite the opposite of synergy!
Here are a few suggestions for a better Madcat C based around keeping the CLBX10s. I have no idea if they are within the weight/size/pod restrictions, but you can grasp the idea of why they’d be better than the current hodge-podge design.
2x CLBX 10 (700m)
4x CERMBL (700m)
Some Heatsinks.
Some electronic toys or at least LAMS.
2x CLBX10 (700m)
2x CUAC10 (550m)
2x MG if they fit
A couple free ammo tons
Some e-war/LAMS (are we ever getting BAMS btw?)
If you really like the SSRMs, I think at least dropping the useless flamers would help.
2x CLBX10 (700m)
2x Dual SSRM 6 (350m)
2x CERML (700m)
A heatsink or two maybe
Ewar/LAMS if possible
All three of these designs still have weapons that are just as useful at close range as they are at longer ranges. The benefit these variants have over the current C variant is that (with the exception of the SSRMs) the opposite isn’t true – the variants don’t have weapons that are useless at ranges where the ‘mech will be engaging. That’s my problem with the flamers and missiles on the current Madcat C – you have 600m of effective engagement range in which you can’t use the flamers at all, and 350m of useless range on the missiles. The flamers suck ass now anyway, the only thing they have going for them is the blinding factor, which good players will ignore. They tend to make people suicide more than they actually kill.
