abuse culture. posted:

One more piece of advice: the U/AC2++ is the best weapon in game, buy them every single time you see them. The medium laser++ (damage) is the second best

Taerkar posted:

CASE is functionally blow out panels and you really don't see anything like it actually fielded until the late seventies.

PMush Perfect posted:

Does anybody else name their mechs? I started with pretty basic names, but then I started to get more creative as I realized that A) nobody can judge me, and B) it's much easier to remember which of my two missile boats is LRMs and which is SRMs when one of them is named STRONGLY WORDED LETTER and the other is named SEÑOR BELTSANDER. (Well, STR WRD LETTER and SNR BELTSANDER, but y'know.)

My other main mechs right now are LASER ENVY, INEVITABILITY, GOODNIGHT KISS, and MORTAR ENEMY. Some of my favorite names from the past include FIGHT TRUCK, GUNMETAL GAY, UNFORTUNATE END, and my personal Atlas-II from my last campaign, MOTHRFUKR UNLTD.

RBA Starblade posted:

I want a Mechwarrior game with melee and a targeting reticle per gun that has to reset each shot unless you keep firing and they keep kicking more, so everything isn't laser accurate to the center of the screen.

Organ Fiend posted:

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.

PMush Perfect posted:

The real MW5 is playing MW4 again with mods.

Zurai posted:

MW4: Mercs is worth replaying every so often just for Duncan Fisher.

Booley posted:

Does anyone have good instructions for getting it working on win10? Last time I tried I could never get it to run.

Organ Fiend posted:

Star Man posted:

If you don't name your King Crab "WESLEY SNIPS", you're loving dead to me.

RBA Starblade posted:

I think I followed these instructions to mostly work for Mercs: https://www.reddit.com/r/mechwarrior/comments/7y3twy/how_to_run_all_mechwarrior_4_games_on_windows_10/

TBH I thought at the time Black Knight was kind of bad and there's no reason to really replay 4 with Mercs so I ignored that too.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

fennesz posted:

Question: why store ammo in the legs?

I feel like legs are far more prone to directional damage if I get caught out facing the wrong way. And if my CT is taking damage I'm probably already missing a torso anyway. Is it just to prevent the CT from taking an unlucky gauss round and detonating the entire mech?

PMush Perfect posted:

Mastiff's Marauders.

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

EponymousMrYar posted:

Yes. Or any structure damage for that matter. Punches can set off ammo too. Also the most embarrassing mech loss: a locust 1v wanders up into your back arc, it's lasers strip your armor and the MG's blow up your ammo (and mech.)

The only thing you lose if ammo get's blown up is the leg and whatever JJ's/Heat sinks you stuck in that leg. Also legs can have a lot of armor (although I usually budget mine close to my arm's max armor.) Compared to losing all the weapons in an arm/all the weapons, gear and such in a side torso/arm if you stick ammo in those places.

Getting legged for being caught out of position is better than losing a mech for being caught out of position. Even if it's annoying to move that mech afterwards.

fennesz posted:

Question: why store ammo in the legs?

I feel like legs are far more prone to directional damage if I get caught out facing the wrong way. And if my CT is taking damage I'm probably already missing a torso anyway. Is it just to prevent the CT from taking an unlucky gauss round and detonating the entire mech?

fennesz posted:

Question: why store ammo in the legs?

I feel like legs are far more prone to directional damage if I get caught out facing the wrong way. And if my CT is taking damage I'm probably already missing a torso anyway. Is it just to prevent the CT from taking an unlucky gauss round and detonating the entire mech?

Baron Porkface posted:

Name my company please.

Conspiratiorist posted:

Ammo in the legs, JJs in the torsos, rear armor is for fools and cowards.