|
Kurita's faction store is disappointing as all hell. PPC++ and Medium Laser +++ (the wrong kind), and Heat Exchanger +++ (the 4 ton one). Pffffttttt. I survived Death to Mercenaries for this?
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
GD_American posted:Kurita's faction store is disappointing as all hell. PPC++ and Medium Laser +++ (the wrong kind), and Heat Exchanger +++ (the 4 ton one). Pffffttttt. I survived Death to Mercenaries for this? they do Snub PPCs too, and the +10 damage snub is the most broken OP weapon in the game
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 16:50
|
|
|
Klyith posted:they do Snub PPCs too, and the +10 damage snub is the most broken OP weapon in the game They are pretty drat awesome. People might hold Medium Lasers up as the gold standard, but the +10 Damage Snubs deal as much damage as five Medium Lasers for only 6 tons, and generate heat equal to only 3 MLs. When you factor in the weight of heat sinks, Snubbies have so much more bang for your buck than an equivilent number of MLs.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 17:22
|
|
|
Rorahusky posted:They are pretty drat awesome. People might hold Medium Lasers up as the gold standard, but the +10 Damage Snubs deal as much damage as five Medium Lasers for only 6 tons, and generate heat equal to only 3 MLs. When you factor in the weight of heat sinks, Snubbies have so much more bang for your buck than an equivilent number of MLs. Pretty sure massed ML++ are better for called shots though.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
Stravag posted:Number 1 is i would have canonical quirks affect their gameplay. Ie you can choose to have a reliable ac10 magazine or you can have a full ton of ammo in it I'd be fine with quirks as part of the mech construction system if there was some kind of rule system for them. Something like: -All quirks potentially available to all mechs -Mechs are limited to X number of quirks or quirks adding up to Y value (e.g. MAD's tcomp = value 10, a reliable mag quirk = 1 or 2, etc.) -Negative quirks count subtract from the quirk limit (if balanced by number) or quirk value (if balanced by quirk value) As it stands, quirks just mean that some mechs, like the ANH and MAD are just vastly superior to all other mechs. Even ones with quirks. Gwaihir posted:Yeah, the question really just depends on what type of game I want to make. A tabletop game is far more straightforward, and you can literally just have the right formula for "this unit can put out an average of this much damage at (range), while generating X defensive modifier" etc etc. As far as mech balance goes, I'm thinking more in terms of the construction system. From that standpoint that the questions are related. You can tweak weapon values, heat scale, etc between TT and PC, but history has shown that things like tonnage, crits, etc. are more set in stone. Even in MW4, the MW game that ignored TT construction the most, lights/meds were still worthless outside of a tonnage restricted environment. Basically, the question is, how do you want mechs to be balanced relative to each other at a construction level, and then design the game(s) around it. Because right now, inter-mech balance is more on a tonnage level (i.e. assuming good configs/equal tech X tons of mech is roughly equal to another X tons of mech, regardless of number), while the games are designed around limiting sides by numerber of mechs/units (TT is build around 4v4s, PC games are built around equal players per side). Sure, you can impose tonnage/BV/whatever limits on the mechs you bring, but that's part of the metagame, not the game itself. Personally, I would go with a more mech based balance scheme (i.e. 1 mech ~= 1 mech in value, but may have different roles), and use equipment quality as a progression mechanism. The whole equipment quality as progression is already built into the game. For mech based balance you'd need to narrow the gap between assaults and lights in terms of combat capability and suitability. I'd do the following: -Make size part of construction. As part of construction each mech picks a size. Different sizes are available to different ranges of tonnages. Smaller sized mechs are harder to hit (intrinsic in a PC game, can do it with to-hit mods in TT), and have fewer available crits. This is especially important in a PC game (surface area by facing needs some kind of standarization). -Scale armor/ton by size. The idea here is that smaller mechs have less surface area and can therefore get more armor coverage per ton of armor. The practical effect is to increase the survivability of smaller mechs. Scale can be tweaked for balance without altering construction -Non-linear scaling internal structure. Currently, you get 4.5 tons of free space per increase of 5 tons of mech weight. The basic idea here is to make the internal structure weight not scale linearly so that you are getting progressively less (but never <= 0) free space per increase in chassis tonnage. quote:If I were re-doing the TT game, I's probably adjust some of the tech to work more differently between weight classes, and probably change some of the armor v structure scales, but in general I think going for something balanced around the BV style system works well. I might shift lights a bit further towards structural durability vs entirely evasion tanking because I think Battletech works best as a system where things take hits and get shot up and slowly lose effectiveness compared to IM FINE IM FINE IM FINE IM FINE OOPS THERE GOES THE LEG. Obviously given the typical archetype of the light as a scout/backstabber/harasser/etc it should still rely a lot on not getting hit, but using that as a system sorta stops working and breaks when you introduce good enough Pilots or advanced tarcomps, and other such things. The survivability changes I suggest might help a little. The biggest problem, IMO, is that there isn't really a value to "scouting" or harassing in TT. If you're playing double blind, sure it helps, but the maps (even in BATTLETECH) are so small, that the value is marginal at best. Harassing (i.e. high speed, long range, poking mechs) doesn't have value because there isn't a mechanic for pilot distraction, panic/focus, or situational awareness in TT. I played in a MW4 league for way too long, and scouting and harassing did have value. For one thing, the maps, compared to TT, were huge. Having the speed to cover the map, and finding the enemy was very important (picking engagement angles/areas to your advantage, ambushes, etc). We never went in without a Raven or Loki (very fast, best electronics) if we could help it. Harassing also had a role because actual humans get distracted and lose their focus when they get shot at. We used high speed LRM/ATM-E/UAC2 Lokis to both scout and distract. We could also use high speed mediums for the same purpose. I'm not sure how to solve the map size issue in TT (mainly because larger maps = long, boring games), but there are ways to implement distraction and focus. You could have a roll against a pilot skill (say Tactics) to say whether or not the pilot shoots at the target specified or at a target that is shooting at it. You could also implement an accuracy penalty, modified by a player skill (say Guts) for being shot at. quote:For an actual Mechwarrior FPS game though you basically just have to toss out every bit of the existing TT numbers- The relative armor values, engine weights, etc. Not a bit of that works at all in a game where the player, not the dice, is aiming the guns. You don't have to drop the TT construction values for a PC game. Weapon damage and recycle values would, of course need to be changed. In addition to that ... Xarbala posted:Mapping something like that to a direct-control realtime videogame is probably a lost cause and the mechwarrior games are obsessed with the idea of mechs having pinpoint accuracy so that's a no-go. So just some background: I played MW games at a competitive/league level for like 10 years or so. In that time I put in a hell of alot of time playing TT. I have like 1500 hours in BATTLETECH or something obscene like that. The point is, I've spent way too much time thinking about this poo poo. It is absolutely possible to have a construction system that works in TT and PC. Furthermore it is possible to transfer weapons between the two, maintain the feel of the weapons if not the damage/heat values, and still be balanced. The biggest issue, you hit right on the head: convergence of weapons. First of all, you have to have some level of pinpoint accuracy. Being able to hit specific panels of mechs is a huge part of the skill in the PC games. Take it away, and you make the games very very dumb. The problem is that all of the weapons on a mech will converge to a single point with a single trigger pull, which essentially turns all of the weapons on a mech into a single, super-weapon. This has several negative consequences: -It inherently screws smaller mechs as they either will not have the armor to resist a heavy/assault alpha or they will not have enough firepower to make a dent in heavier mechs -It makes missile weapons (or any kind of shotgun weapon) inherently bad outside of boats: every ton you put into them is tonnage that could be put into making your super weapon stronger -It reduces weapon variety. There isn't anything special about AC20s/GRs having high damage since any collection of weapons converges. All that's important is damage per tonnage. The MW community's rejection of any sort of weapon divergence is idiotic. Every single modern shooter has some kind of reticule convergence limitation mechanic, either as an intrinsic part of the weapon, a response to recoil/movement, and/or as a limiter for the weapon (e.g. sniper rifles only working when scoped). The reason for their rejection is not idiotic: they're afraid of TT people taking the game and removing any sort of skill from it by making it impossible to target specific panels of the mechs. There is a way to allow players to target specific panels while preventing players from turning clusters of weapons into super weapons. Here's how I would do it: -Introduce a value called "recoil" (just "R" from here on out) that is equal to the angle of the cone into which weapons fire. -R starts at 0 (i.e. pinpoint accuracy) -All weapons have a value they add to R (just "r" from here on out) after being fired. (e.g. GR r = 5. GR fires with R = 0 and is pinpoint, global R = R + r, next weapon fires into a 5 degree cone. -Weapons fired simultaneously have cumulatively worse R values to deal with (e.g. fire 5xML simultaneously with R = 0, ML r = 5. 1st ML: R = 0, 2nd ML: R = 5, 3rd ML: R = 10, 4th ML: R= 15, 5th ML: R = 20) -R decays at a constant rate and has a maximum value -r for missile weapons and other forced shotgun/unaimable weapons is 0 and are unaffected by R (i.e. missiles don't contribute to R and can be fired with other weapons at any time) So, with this system, the way to put 3 GRs into the CT is to chain fire them (exact time between shots required for pinpoint can be tweaked by tweaking R decay rate and GR r value). There would also be a maxium amount of spread (R maximum) to prevent stupid stuff like weapons shooting to the side. I would also add functionality to allow you to chain fire groups by more than one weapon (e.g. fire a cluster of MLs by 2 MLs). You could also have it so that if a group is set to chain, and you hold the trigger, you fire the whole group. There are other ways to add to the system. You could add a modifier to the cone to make it narrower as a function of the range of the weapon (everyone is still pinpoint at R = 0). You could have movement contribute to R and/or R decay. You could also have certain weapons (PPCs, high-impact weapons) contribute to target R. This system would actually increase the skill ceiling for PC MW games. Coring a mech would take more than one aim/fire cycle. It would also make the skill of twisting/juking to spread/dodge damage more useful. This would help with the weapon/armor balance as well. Instead of balancing armor values against the biggest possible weapon cluster, you just have to balance against the biggest weapon. It makes big guns (and mechs that carry only one of them) have a point again, and allows us to make small weapons powerful again without giving big mechs death rays. All of this, without taking away the ability of the player to target individual panels.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
Klyith posted:they do Snub PPCs too, and the +10 damage snub is the most broken OP weapon in the game  750-damage alphas with the help of the Snubbie ++. gently caress blasting the head off, just leave a pair of legs standing.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
The problem with light mechs is that there aren't mission types that call for any speed. At worst you just need to be faster than an Atlas for some target acquisitions. They were made for a role in lore that's not actually used in the game so of course they don't make sense to use. anakha posted:
My favorite broken cheese builds are with Annihilators, because I like how weird they look, and with 5x UAC5++ you basically don't even need to walk anywhere to shoot everyone.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
Organ Fiend posted:snip Yeah, this is all extremely good imo. I don't hold that the literal exact crit sizes and tonnages should be remotely sacred cows as far as equipment goes (There's literally nothing reasonable to do with an AC2 to make it worth 6+1 tons, for example..), but I am very much in love with the concepts of the system as it is (Space vs weight contention, weapons that are good damage per ton vs damage per heat, etc). Stuff like the size and armor scaling (and I'd say engine scaling, too) is critical to make a wide range of stuff work in a video game context as well. Normal TT could use a bit more of it too, imo.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
Klyith posted:they do Snub PPCs too, and the +10 damage snub is the most broken OP weapon in the game Off the top of my head 12 damage shot SRM6s and +damage LBX2 are better than damage variant snubs, but snubs work with the Warhammer so they've got that going for them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Klyith posted:they do Snub PPCs too, and the +10 damage snub is the most broken OP weapon in the game Reintroduced in 3067 by the Snakes; I'm in 3030
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Is there a bugfix mod that stops the dumb thing where a convoy escort mission exits combat automatically when the convoy evacuates? This gives the enemy mechs standing right in front of me a free turn to move. (even the dude with his leg blown off stood back up) I didn't think to check, but I bet it also gives them a round of heat dissipation. (the player does not get a move or heat dissipation because they don't get a turn)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
GD_American posted:Reintroduced in 3067 by the Snakes; I'm in 3030 you really need to preface most of your complaints that you're using some mod because nobody else here is going to remember or assume you aren't playing base game + DLC
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Yeah, this is all extremely good imo. I don't hold that the literal exact crit sizes and tonnages should be remotely sacred cows as far as equipment goes (There's literally nothing reasonable to do with an AC2 to make it worth 6+1 tons, for example..), but I am very much in love with the concepts of the system as it is (Space vs weight contention, weapons that are good damage per ton vs damage per heat, etc). When I said "set in stone", I was referring to transfer between TT and PC. In a reboot of the franchise where we're changing things like structure curves, critical allocation, etc. I'd assume some things should change. The AC2 definitely needs to be changed, if not removed. Hell, I'd be in favor of completely new weapons and systems, a rethinking of the progression of lasers/ACs, etc. As for the size/armor scaling, yeah I think that could work in TT as well. BATTLETECH already adds a to-hit mod for lights and meds (what I'm talking about is different since its not tied to mass, but rather to size). A draft way to do it would be like this: code:
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
Psion posted:you really need to preface most of your complaints that you're using some mod because nobody else here is going to remember or assume you aren't playing base game + DLC Hmmm, true. Is it a pretty even smattering in here between BEXCE, 3067 and RogueTech?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:59
|
|
|
I think all three of those are distinct minority options, actually.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
How do you deal with bigger mechs being able to pack more firepower? Because that's the actual fundamental flaw of lighter mechs.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
Light mechs aren't flawed because they can't go toe to toe with assaults. Jeeps weren't a bad idea for not being Sherman tanks. They just have different uses. But the game doesn't attempt to model those uses so small mechs are just bad mechs you use until you get big mechs. It's not hard to imagine a flashpoint that opens with a counter-recon mission where you probably can't catch the enemy scouts in the time allotted without using fast mechs yourself, for instance. But the game doesn't do this because it essentially treats lights as a stepping stone on the way to literally bigger & better things. Psion posted:I think all three of those are distinct minority options, actually. Yeah, those mods are popular but I'm pretty sure the majority of the userbase is either unmodded or lightly/ad hoc modded. sean10mm fucked around with this message at 22:39 on May 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:30
|
|
|
I enjoyed vanilla but I guess the thought of playing a version with the sourcebooks and tech readouts sprayed all over it appealed to me the most. I kinda bowed out of Battletech once they moved up to the Jihad (and never hosed with Dark Age, read a book or two and didn't like them) so this timeline is perfect for me. Roguetech seemed a bit too much when I read about it; I like how the regular game handles combat and didn't wanna gently caress with it too much. Actually come to think of it, the FedCom Civil War is what lost me. Not that I was a big fan of Victor Sue, but turning his sister into a literal cackling evil witch seemed like a dumb direction to take.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
Katherine being evil was telegraphed from the moment she convinced Victor to assassinate Ryan Steiner. Victor's stupidity was on display for all to see from the exact same moment. The post-Dark Age 3150 era is shaping up to be pretty fun.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:How do you deal with bigger mechs being able to pack more firepower? The changes I'm suggesting for armor scaling by size, and a non-linear internal structure scale would mean that light mechs would be able to carry proportionally more armor and weaponry, relative to higher end mechs (EDIT: more than now, that is). The addition of accuracy/focus penalties would make tagging multiple targets with non-lethal damage have a point. This is also in the context of a reboot of the construction rules. There are a lot of other things we can do that I didn't discuss like change the shape of the engine weight curve, change the weight of more fixed equipment (cockpit, gyros), changing the heatscale in TT and PC games to be more like BATTLETECH (i.e. ability to build up more overheat without penalties) and adding more high heat/low tonnage weapons, etc. The bigger problem is that for the very smallest mechs, where speed is the main point of even having a mech so small, is that the maps in BATTLETECH and TT are too small for that speed to have an intrinsic value outside of a tonnage limited environment. The addition of the accuracy/focus penalties for taking fire would make the role of harasser a thing, but the scout role really doesn't have a point until you have larger maps ... maps large enough that choosing engagement location/angle becomes a thing. The problem in TT/BATTLETECH/any turnbased game is that large maps are boring, and in PC games the problem is one of organization. Organ Fiend fucked around with this message at 01:32 on May 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:The problem with light mechs is that there aren't mission types that call for any speed. At worst you just need to be faster than an Atlas for some target acquisitions. I've done Target Acquisition missions with all 3/5 assaults. There's basically one map where being slow is a problem: that loving Convoy Ambush lunar map where you start behind the target and they have those loving initiative 5 urban assault vehicles.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 01:17
|
|
|
The best BT is definitely clan invasion and the crusade into clan space though all the weird sexual tension and incest stuff definitely turned me off and on when i was younger.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 03:37
|
|
|
I just realized nearly all the new mechs in bexce are clan ones so I guess it's time to enter the meat grinder
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 06:53
|
|
|
I am curious, are there any mods that allow you to loot Lostech weapons off of some of the new 'Mechs/Vehicles you encounter in game with the latest patch? Cause I would sure love me some of those UAC5s the Scorpion Mk IIs are packing.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 14:31
|
|
|
Is there anything useful I can do with a 10Z Cyclops? I dropped a couple million c-bills on one because I thought the command computer perk would be awesome, and it is, but I didn’t realize it came with so little available tonnage and armor. I’m struggling to hang enough armor and firepower on it to justify using it over another Atlas or something, even with the CC boost for the lance. I even tried building around a Gauss rifle ++ and it still comes off as underwhelming and undergunned. I was thinking maybe a punchbot but it doesn’t have a lot of support weapon slots either. Is it just hopeless?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
an oddly awful oud posted:Is there anything useful I can do with a 10Z Cyclops? Gauss Rifle++ and two Inferno++ launchers. The Gauss Rifle is for long-range plinking / getting lucky ammo explosions with a breaching shot pilot, and if anything gets close 4 Inferno++ missiles will absolutely give it a bad time, letting the Cyclops help you juggle things while better 'Mechs kill them. It will never be a powerhouse, but being able to lock a 'Mech down stops it from being a dead weight. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 16:43 on May 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
an oddly awful oud posted:Is there anything useful I can do with a 10Z Cyclops? 6xML, 10xSRM, near max armor, rest is heat sinks. Run it with an outrider pilot (coolant flush and sure footing. It's an amazing brawler even without the command computer. It's one of my go to end game configs.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
Rorahusky posted:I am curious, are there any mods that allow you to loot Lostech weapons off of some of the new 'Mechs/Vehicles you encounter in game with the latest patch? Cause I would sure love me some of those UAC5s the Scorpion Mk IIs are packing. CustomComponents might? I was using that in 1.8 and it or some other mod started putting the built-in equipment into salvage. an oddly awful oud posted:Is there anything useful I can do with a 10Z Cyclops? I dropped a couple million c-bills on one because I thought the command computer perk would be awesome, and it is, but I didn’t realize it came with so little available tonnage and armor. I’m struggling to hang enough armor and firepower on it to justify using it over another Atlas or something, even with the CC boost for the lance. I even tried building around a Gauss rifle ++ and it still comes off as underwhelming and undergunned. I was thinking maybe a punchbot but it doesn’t have a lot of support weapon slots either. Is it just hopeless? I struggled with how to fit it too, it's an awkward mech that doesn't really do anything well. But the initiative boost is amazing and makes it totally worth having. I eventually settled on LRM20, SRM6 & Mlas, lots of armor. Kinda a meh multirange loadout but worked ok with a breaching shot pilot and the shortrange stuff works with the faster speed. It sucks as a sniper. But that was before LBXs & UACs and now I think I'd do something with that. Maybe a UAC10 midrange thing, the thing I didn't like about the shortrange build was that it needs assault jumpjets so it's just totally outclassed by a battlemaster doing the same thing. But if your comparison is "why not just field 4 atlases with gauss++?" then you've already won the game and don't really need to play initiative manipulation games anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
Usually by yhr time i completed a cyclops in order to bring it i was having to justify not bringing a supernova or blood asp for it so it always just became a mech i only keep one of for the pokemon scoring segments
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
Klyith posted:I struggled with how to fit it too, it's an awkward mech that doesn't really do anything well. But the initiative boost is amazing and makes it totally worth having. I eventually settled on LRM20, SRM6 & Mlas, lots of armor. Kinda a meh multirange loadout but worked ok with a breaching shot pilot and the shortrange stuff works with the faster speed. It sucks as a sniper. I mean I only have 2 Atlases at the moment, but even if I had 4, I probably wouldn’t run that lance because it would be really dull to play. Waiting around at initiative 1 for every heavy enemy mech to take their shots first, and then being unable to maneuver much with your own lance when you finally get your turn just doesn’t feel fun even when it’s effective. That’s why I was hoping to use the Cyclops to boost a mixed heavy/assault lance as I move into the endgame. I’ll give some of the suggestions here a shot. I like PTN’s idea about the Infernos, since I haven’t ever messed around with them yet.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
an oddly awful oud posted:Is there anything useful I can do with a 10Z Cyclops? 2xLRM20 on a Breaching Shot + Bulwark pilot like it was a LRM Boat heavy.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
I'd love if every contract were divided into multiple distinct engagements requiring distinct unit mixes. So like you'd get a contract with maybe a scout, diversion, and assault portion, each needing their own lance. Then the scout and diversion portions you can have objectives that require speed. Basically every contract type currently is solved by destroying everything on the field so naturally the more guns you bring the better.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
Even the current drops that require "speed" are trivially solvable on assaults with jump jets.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
I kind of wonder if they explored speed and scouting missions and worried people would think it's unfair they couldn't win even with their best biggest lance. But on the other hand the target aquisition missions are almost impossible if you don't bring enough guns despite all the text telling you it's about speed, so probably not.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 19:47
|
|
|
an oddly awful oud posted:That’s why I was hoping to use the Cyclops to boost a mixed heavy/assault lance as I move into the endgame. Ok yeah, that is the good time to use it. And I like the infernos thing too, that's another thing I didn't think about because they weren't in the game the last time I did a Cyclops. I wouldn't pair them with a gauss sniper, but it makes me like the UAC10 idea even more. Conspiratiorist posted:2xLRM20 on a Breaching Shot + Bulwark pilot like it was a LRM Boat heavy. The thing I hate about this is how the long range cyclops is just so much worse than a stalker, highlander, or even a missile awesome. It makes the 120m speed even more of a waste of space when you use it for a back line build. Best Friends posted:I kind of wonder if they explored speed and scouting missions and worried people would think it's unfair they couldn't win even with their best biggest lance. But on the other hand the target aquisition missions are almost impossible if you don't bring enough guns despite all the text telling you it's about speed, so probably not.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
Klyith posted:The thing I hate about this is how the long range cyclops is just so much worse than a stalker, highlander, or even a missile awesome. It makes the 120m speed even more of a waste of space when you use it for a back line build. Who said anything about backline? It's not going to be jumping into the fray but LRMs have long since had a 90m min range at that stage of the game. Every Mech A Frontliner.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
I was doing that flashpoint that throws a beat up Atlas at you first thing as the enemy "scout". Marauder stepped up and headcapped it as the first shot fired of the battle, lol. Doesn't get old.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
Did the second part of the Heavy Metal flashpoint. Mission reward: Medium laser+++ Woo! Let's check the additional rewards.  KINDA BURIED THE LEDE THERE, GUYS Deuce fucked around with this message at 02:29 on May 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 02:19
|
|
|
So before I could even attempt to gather the equipment to take another stab at making a good Cyclops 10Z, a five-skull mission gives me a Cyclops 10HQ by way of Marauder headshot. It’s like they saw my troubles getting a useful mech out of 23 tons and are daring me to try it with 15. I probably should’ve just salvaged the Annihilator instead.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
an oddly awful oud posted:So before I could even attempt to gather the equipment to take another stab at making a good Cyclops 10Z, a five-skull mission gives me a Cyclops 10HQ by way of Marauder headshot. It’s like they saw my troubles getting a useful mech out of 23 tons and are daring me to try it with 15. I probably should’ve just salvaged the Annihilator instead. The -HQ is somewhat useful if you don't have a Marauder, because you get the -incoming damage bonus, in addition to the +initiative bonus. It can fit a pair of Snubs, but it's probably better off with 6 medium lasers (ideally ER++) so it can fit some armor with them too. It'll never do a lot of damage, but it should at least be able to contribute.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 03:55
|
|
