So when I heard the Blackjack was coming out I was very unimpressed, I really couldn't care less about an IS medium mech. Now that I've had a chance to Elite 3 Centurions though I have a better appreciation for mediums in general, and I've started looking at Blackjacks again... ...to find that they're in many ways better then the Centurion. Image taken from http://mwo.gamepedia.com/Category:Playable [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] [TR] [TD]Mech[SUP]1[/SUP][/TD] [TD]Centurion[/TD] [TD]Blackjack[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Max Armor ("Optimal"[SUP]2[/SUP])[/TD] [TD]338 (336)[/TD] [TD]306 (304)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Max Speed (Engine)[/TD] [TD]89.1 kph (275)[/TD] [TD]84.6 kph (235)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Avg Weapon Hardpoints[/TD] [TD]5.5[/TD] [TD]7[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Jump Jets?[/TD] [TD]Nada[/TD] [TD]On 2 of 4 frames[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [SUP]1[/SUP]Armor and Speed using CN9-A and BJ-1 [SUP]2[/SUP]"Optimal" armor means reducing armor to the nearest 1/2 ton, no partial; Standard, not FF Weight The advantage of the Centurion is that it has more available weight, 5 tons. Movement The CN's max speed is a misleading advantage since it requires loading a larger engine to take advantage of. Using the same engine (a 235) a BJ actually edges out the CN by 8 kph. Mounting a maxed engine in the CN (275) lets it outrun a maxed BJ (235) by 5 kph, but at the cost of 5.5 tons (2.5 tons XL engines). A BJ can match a CN's speed with a 2-3 ton lighter engine. A CN can outrun a BJ, but it has to use up its weight advantage to do so. When talking about speed it's also nice to mention jump jets, which half the BJs can use; no CN can mount JJ. Armor A BJ loses 4 armor off each arm and leg, 4 from LT and RT, and 8 from CT, it's about a 9% drop in armor which is significant. All CN variants also have a "shield" arm (LA), even without armor the structure can absorb 16 damage (assuming no crits). A BJ has to make up the armor difference with proper positioning (assisted by JJ). Weapons BJ's have more, and better placed weapon hardpoints. Unless you want missiles, since the BJs have none. BJs all have at least 4 energy points, while one model has 8. The best energy CN has 4, and 2 are on the CT which severely limits weapon selection. Every BJ has at least 1 energy point on each arm and torso, opening up nearly any weapon arrangement. BJs have better ballistic hardpoints. A CN must place all its ballistic weapons in its RA, making it vulnerable and potentially limiting larger weapon placement. BJs have ballistics in either arm and lack lower actuators, freeing up a slot to mount any weapon including the massive AC20 (the CN-Wang also shares this advantage on one arm). My conclusion? A CN must mount heavier weaponry to make up for its lack of hardpoints, this can prevent a CN from mounting larger engines. A BJ can boat energy weapons (which is very effective) and possibly move faster while having access to jump jets. I'm seriously considering picking up BJs as my next frame.
In terms of survivability, the CN9-A and AL still beat the BJ series. Too dependent on weapons in the arms, only 44 points of max armor on torsos (versus 48 for CN9), arms have a measly 28 points max of armor, no shield arms. Trust me, I am NOT a fan of the CN9 and used allot of C-Bills to buy 3 BJ's. It was an exercise in frustration. As a skirmisher it fares worse than the CN9, as a mobile fire support it fares worse than the Trenchbucket.
Blackjack DC: ac20 and 4ML. I've barely even gotten my Yen Lo out of the garage since building this one. Not as fast, not as much armor, but like a Centurion, strangely survivable if you keep moving due to small side torsos. Accurate and capable of taking down the big guys noticeably faster. I don't care much for the other Blackjacks, or non-Yen Lo Cents though.
At the speeds a BJ can go, you get more free weight on a Centurion at the same speed. The only big advantage BJ has is hardpoints, and IMO it lacks the tonnage to use them. Where the BJ is effective is if people dont attack it. It is a high damage medium (like Hunchies) but its slow and squishy. Ignore it and it will destroy you, focus it and it isnt much of a threat.
In my mind, a 'mech with no lower arm actuators should be reserved for support, AC40 Jagers/Cats being the exception.
The BJ-1/1DC are great as AC2 support. I believe comparing a Centurion and a Blackjack isn't a very good comparison as they are fundamentally different in intended roles. A BJ can do fire support great but in a brawl (or even poking your head out of cover with PPCs around) you will find your mech with a new orifice. The Centurion is substantially hardier and it's ability to move it's gun arm makes an unquantifiable difference. With the exception of the 1X the BJ is a fire support mech. It can't brawl (too light on armor even maxed and arms too fixed) it can't carry heavy arms and simply isn't as agile as a Centurion. If you are primarily a brawler you are not going to have a good time in a Blackjack. It will be a big departure for you. If you are used to support fire roles then it is perfect for you. It really is just a Jagers little brother. You have to remember that in cannon the Blackjack was a counter insurgency mech so it's designed specifically for long range sustained fire engagements. Sure you can do other things with it but just because you can never means that you should.
In a discussion on my Wang build people started making the comparison to BJs. I hadn't actually looked at the BJs in detail til then so I started looking through them last night, I came away very impressed. The Centurion is far from useless, and for many roles the CN is a superior mech; like I said, I've played and Elite'd three CNs, and they're great mechs. It's true that it's hard to compare the CN and BJ directly. The point of my OP was to show on paper where the BJ was (or appeared) superior to the CN. It would have been 2 pages longer if I had taken the time to go over all the real-world examples and role-based factors, so I kept it short and within scope. A BJ loses 4 armor off each arm and leg, 4 from LT and RT, and 8 from CT, it's about a 9% drop in armor which is very significant. Another part of the durability of the CN is that every variant has the "shield" LA, even without armor the structure can absorb 16 damage (assuming no crits). I haven't actually piloted a BJ yet, but I will say on face value I disagree with the statement that medium mechs without lower arm actuators are poor brawlers. My Wang with no actuators is one of my most piloted mechs (Hero bonus ftw) and I've found that it's torso has more than enough rotation and range to brawl with other mediums and larger, and is doable against lights. I think on a Jager or Stalker the lack of arm actuators is much more pronounced, but I don't see it as being as much of an issue on a medium. This is my speculation based on piloting my Wang not a hard opinion, yet
YLW fails for the same reason that the HBK-4P does, and that is it has one very specific locale that smart pilots aim at to effectively neuter it's damage output. The benefit of the CN9 chassis is having 2 shield arms to deflect damage. YLW only has one shield arm and needs to traverse further to lay its main weapon to bear than all other CN9 variants. I'm also a bit surprised that you started this thread as an academic exercise, having not piloted a BJ yet. Actual in game testing of a this mech will illustrate its fragility when used for anything other than mobile fire support.
The YLW is unique in that it can mount a monstrous engine and hit 106 kph (tweaked). It's kind of an outlier when looking the the CN frame. I only consider my CNs to have one shield arm. On my CN9-AL I've got either 2 LLas or ERPPCs on my RA, you can bet I'm keeping that thing as safe as possible. On my CN9-A my right arm usually mounts an AC2, which isn't critically important, but it's a good source of damage and harassment at any range. The thread is an academic exercise and a way to get more feedback on the BJ as a medium while I consider picking them up. I consider it a pretty big success and I'm happy to see all the feedback and criticism. The comparison between HBKs and BJs falls pretty hard in favor of the HBK. A Hunchback can run better loadouts at the same speeds, with more armor. The only thing a BJ arguably has in this face-off is its JJ, meh. For ballistics, you'll almost always be desperate for extra weight when dealing with heavy weapons and ammo, HBK wins easy with its extra 5 tons. Comparing HBKs and BJs boils down to, "how much are you willing to sacrifice for JJ?". The Cicada is such a vastly different mech that I decided on using the CN for comparison.
