SawzAll

If you remove the rank lock it would be even worse for low ranks bruv, tat would increase smurfing by thousandfold, cus then you'll have smurfs from rank 3-5 all the way down in Rank 15, making it completely impossible for new players to get any higher, and if you can't handle 3v3, you should grind more to get 3 stable mechs, and practice in said format, think about the low rankers before yourself.

Here are some of the best mech builds in the world.
 

I made this.

Huh, I also made something like this.


❄️❄️❄️❄️

All,
     I'm opening up a recent topic of conversation on the Balance Team (or what's left of it) and a recent thread:
https://community.supermechs.com/topic/1768-the-rank-5-lock/#comment-22444
    The conversation centers around increased protection against smurfs for lower (under 10) ranks.  I would propose that we add a rank 10 lock, similar to the current rank 5, so that it takes would-be smurfs 2 seasons, not 1, to drop in rank to reach those.  Please vote accordingly.
     This should not prevent those who like to de-rank prior to top ranks 3v3, so that won't change.
     As a side note, smurfing is not limited to just rank 10.  It's just that I think the majority of smurfing is under rank 10.  If it's been a while, try making an alt and then playing it for a week to a month.  Note all the smurfs.  I think this smurfing hurts the game and may cause players to quit.
     But I say this noting that some people are smurfing in top ranks.  What they do is stay at rank 4-5, even though their account could reach 1-3, in order to get "easier wins."  This makes it a royal pain for someone who accidentally makes rank 5 before they're ready: now they're fighting people who should be rank 1-3 but are rank 5, and it takes them over an hour just to get their 5 daily wins.  I'm not going to call out names, but you know who you are.
     So even though all smurfing can't be stopped, I think at least a rank 10 lock would help prevent people from smurfing the low ranks.
     I would like to give credit to whoever on the "Balance Team" suggested this first.  I can't recall if it was @Lord Gorgon or @Kurt or who.

All,
     I'm opening up a recent topic of conversation on the Balance Team (or what's left of it) and a recent thread:
https://community.supermechs.com/topic/1768-the-rank-5-lock/#comment-22444
    The conversation centers around increased protection against smurfs for lower (under 10) ranks.  I would propose that we add a rank 10 lock, similar to the current rank 5, so that it takes would-be smurfs 2 seasons, not 1, to drop in rank to reach those.  Please vote accordingly.
     This should not prevent those who like to de-rank prior to top ranks 3v3, so that won't change.
     As a side note, smurfing is not limited to just rank 10.  It's just that I think the majority of smurfing is under rank 10.  If it's been a while, try making an alt and then playing it for a week to a month.  Note all the smurfs.  I think this smurfing hurts the game and may cause players to quit.
     But I say this noting that some people are smurfing in top ranks.  What they do is stay at rank 4-5, even though their account could reach 1-3, in order to get "easier wins."  This makes it a royal pain for someone who accidentally makes rank 5 before they're ready: now they're fighting people who should be rank 1-3 but are rank 5, and it takes them over an hour just to get their 5 daily wins.  I'm not going to call out names, but you know who you are.
     So even though all smurfing can't be stopped, I think at least a rank 10 lock would help prevent people from smurfing the low ranks.
     I would like to give credit to whoever on the "Balance Team" suggested this first.  I can't recall if it was @Lord Gorgon or @Kurt or who.

All,
     I'm opening up a recent topic of conversation on the Balance Team (or what's left of it) and a recent thread:
https://community.supermechs.com/topic/1768-the-rank-5-lock/#comment-22444
    The conversation centers around increased protection against smurfs for lower (under 10) ranks.  I would propose that we add a rank 10 lock, similar to the current rank 5, so that it takes would-be smurfs 2 seasons, not 1, to drop in rank to reach those.  Please vote accordingly.
     This should not prevent those who like to de-rank prior to top ranks 3v3, so that won't change.
     As a side note, smurfing is not limited to just rank 10.  It's just that I think the majority of smurfing is under rank 10.  If it's been a while, try making an alt and then playing it for a week to a month.  Note all the smurfs.  I think this smurfing hurts the game and may cause players to quit.
     But I say this noting that some people are smurfing in top ranks.  What they do is stay at rank 4-5, even though their account could reach 1-3, in order to get "easier wins."  This makes it a royal pain for someone who accidentally makes rank 5 before they're ready: now they're fighting people who should be rank 1-3 but are rank 5, and it takes them over an hour just to get their 5 daily wins.  I'm not going to call out names, but you know who you are.
     So even though all smurfing can't be stopped, I think at least a rank 10 lock would help prevent people from smurfing the low ranks.
     I would like to give credit to whoever on the "Balance Team" suggested this first.  I can't recall if it was @Lord Gorgon or @Kurt or who.

All,
     I'm opening up a recent topic of conversation on the Balance Team (or what's left of it) and a recent thread:
https://community.supermechs.com/topic/1768-the-rank-5-lock/#comment-22444
    The conversation centers around increased protection against smurfs for lower (under 10) ranks.  I would propose that we add a rank 10 lock, similar to the current rank 5, so that it takes would-be smurfs 2 seasons, not 1, to drop in rank to reach those.  Please vote accordingly.
     This should not prevent those who like to de-rank prior to top ranks 3v3, so that won't change.
     As a side note, smurfing is not limited to just rank 10.  It's just that I think the majority of smurfing is under rank 10.  If it's been a while, try making an alt and then playing it for a week to a month.  Note all the smurfs.  I think this smurfing hurts the game and may cause players to quit.
     But I say this noting that some people are smurfing in top ranks.  What they do is stay at rank 4-5, even though their account could reach 1-3, in order to get "easier wins."  This makes it a royal pain for someone who accidentally makes rank 5 before they're ready: now they're fighting people who should be rank 1-3 but are rank 5, and it takes them over an hour just to get their 5 daily wins.  I'm not going to call out names, but you know who you are.
     So even though all smurfing can't be stopped, I think at least a rank 10 lock would help prevent people from smurfing the low ranks.
     I would like to give credit to whoever on the "Balance Team" suggested this first.  I can't recall if it was @Lord Gorgon or @Kurt or who.

Smurfing is not related to rank 5 block.
I propose to block rank 1 too. 

I would argue that people smurf for reasons other than the rank 5 limit, even if they try unsuccessfully to blame it on the rank 5 limit.
I didn't decide to smurf after i got locked into rank 5 the first time.
In my own opinion, smurfing is an intentional unethical behavior.  Call it cowardice, pretending to be weak, sadism, delusions of grandeur, being controlling, or whatever you want, it's still intentional and dishonorable.
For example, known smurfs like Dewastator harm the game by annoying or demoralizing people. 
I don't think smurfs can blame their smurfing on the game.  But people who could be rank 5 aren't smurfing as hard as people like Dewastator if they avoid rank 5.  I don't see the "could be rank 5" smurfs as being that serious a problem.
And with how many people hate smurfs, why are we doing something "for" the smurfs?
OH and please (original poster) don't use "make votes public."  I'm not scared to vote, but some might not want to vote if their vote is public.  That way you're more likely to get a better vote result.

BLUF: Please buff Hysteria by reducing weight to 51 kg (-4) and increasing max energy damage to 30 (+6) like Savagery.

LONG STORY: Due to the way energy works, it suffers from a systemic disadvantage.  While one loses turns to cooling their mech, or can make a voluntary shut down, energy gets regenerated automatically at every turn without costing a turn.  As such, if for example the average META mech has about 295 in regen, the energy player must do this much energy damage or higher every turn.  This requires high-drain configurations like dual malice beam,  at least one valiant sniper, etc.  And energy drained foes can still stomp you, fire energy-free weapons, grapple, and charge.
I believe therefore that bringing energy weapons to at least equal footing with heat will help level the playing field and make energy more viable.  I'm not requesting for stats that are higher than heat because I don't want to accidentally over-buff any items.  Truth be told, energy should have roughly 25% higher stats, but this request is for more or less equal stats.
I do not want to nerf any items because that's both unpopular and harmful to the game.
I'm suggesting only equal stats in the areas I mentioned to hopefully prevent an over-buff.  But feel free to disagree with me.
Please reply to this thread.

Why would you want to be in a relationship with a woman who DOES NOT LIKE YOU FOR WHO YOU ARE?
Sorry, but still, why?
Anything based on looks, relationships or careers, will eventually fall apart, just like your looks and your body.
Trust me, you want a relationship with someone who values you for who you are, no matter what you look like, because looks ALWAYS fade.  Ever seen Ms America reunions?  Looks fade.  We will all lose to the enemy of entropy.

My clan and I have completed the first part of the research on this (i.e. 40 data points).  I'm really busy in class, but very soon I will put out the rates.

Alright, thanks. I'll try to make those builds if i ever get the items.

I would use at least the equivalent of 3 QCBs and 1 OLP (3 heat engines, 3 energy engines, 1 mass cooling booster, 1 mass regen booster, etc.).  Then I would put at least a defense matrix, or a max protector and 1 platinum, on it, if not more.  The defense matrix / 1 MP + 1 PP is the minimum.  Even better: 3 fortresses and 1 platinum, if it fits.
Here are some ideas I would use if it was me:

 

 
By the way, ideally you want 2 physical resistance drainers.  Two for physical because top ranks has people with 180 physical resistance.  So the above two screenshots are the most ideal (#1) versus barely good enough (#2).
 
 
 
 

Ideally they would all be equal, but right now heat is the #1 element, then physical, and energy sort of needs help.  But it really depends on what you want.  Really, you can beat the entire 1v1 campaign with an Avatar-style boiler (heat mech), so it just depends on what you want.  I'd say try to play what the game gives you.  If you get a bunch of nice energy premium items, try to play energy first.
Another tip for progressing that's going to sound counter-intuitive, but it's true: do NOT food all your items.  Keep at least one of every epic-to-divine and one of every premium item.  If you can't transform something to legendary or mythical, wait.  Don't push forward and sacrifice a good item just to transform another item.
I have recently created an SM padawan clan specifically for helping new players.  Send me a message if you're interested.