20517 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Odanan, on 12 May 2018 - 02:02 PM, said:

Offtopic (or not).

Well, since the release of HBS' Battltech, I didn't play anything else. Looking at the source files, I was disapointed with how few variants there were of each chassis and decided to change this.

The mod is at its very infancy, but you can find 5 new totally playable canonical variants: Battletech Arsenal.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed they will add more in, in time as updates.

As an aside, my current lance:

Battlemaster laser boat legging monster
Highlander 732b
Highlander 733
Stalker 3F mobile artillery platform (LRM/50 with +2STAB launchers)

[Ovion]

updated my signature image with the 'primary' of each mech I have, which is currently everything other than the Vulcan, Hellfire, Flea, Blood Asp and Black Lanner atm.

There's a common theme there.

Edited by Ovion, 13 May 2018 - 05:46 PM.

[Odanan]

Odanan, on 12 May 2018 - 02:02 PM, said:

Offtopic (or not).

Well, since the release of HBS' Battltech, I didn't play anything else. Looking at the source files, I was disapointed with how few variants there were of each chassis and decided to change this.

The mod is at its very infancy, but you can find 5 new totally playable canonical variants: Battletech Arsenal.

Forget my mod. I just found out this: JK Variants.

57 new variants?!?! God dammit Justin Kase!

[Virlutris]

Hey folks, this seems like a thread where folks are pretty familiar with BT resources, so I'm requesting assistance

Over at CGL's MUL pages, they've got listings of mechs by faction and era (and much, much more).

I was looking at them, and noticed that they'd assigned stars to some variants in a given list, but not others.

Example, Civil War era Davion:
http://www.masteruni...Id=29&EraId=247

Best I can figure, the ones with stars are the most common or most likely variants for a given chassis, given the faction and era.

Trouble is, they don't label the column, and don't seem to explain it anywhere (or I haven't blundered into it yet). Anybody here got the right expertise to clarify this? I'd appreciate it, thanks!

[Sereglach]

Virlutris, on 14 May 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

Hey folks, this seems like a thread where folks are pretty familiar with BT resources, so I'm requesting assistance

Over at CGL's MUL pages, they've got listings of mechs by faction and era (and much, much more).

I was looking at them, and noticed that they'd assigned stars to some variants in a given list, but not others.

Example, Civil War era Davion:
http://www.masteruni...Id=29&EraId=247

Best I can figure, the ones with stars are the most common or most likely variants for a given chassis, given the faction and era.

Trouble is, they don't label the column, and don't seem to explain it anywhere (or I haven't blundered into it yet). Anybody here got the right expertise to clarify this? I'd appreciate it, thanks!

If you hover over the star, it tells you where the unit was featured in a TRO. Units without stars were a variant listed under the main TRO feature article for a given mech. For example, the starred Wasp 1A was featured in TRO 3039, but the other variants -like the 1D- listed in your link don't have a star, because they were just listed variants of the mech within the main feature article.

Now, yes, the "feature" variant is the most common of its type, which is why it is the feature mech in the first place, but that doesn't mean other variants weren't reasonably common or popular.

Edited by Sereglach, 14 May 2018 - 10:04 AM.

[Metus regem]

Virlutris, on 14 May 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

Hey folks, this seems like a thread where folks are pretty familiar with BT resources, so I'm requesting assistance

Over at CGL's MUL pages, they've got listings of mechs by faction and era (and much, much more).

I was looking at them, and noticed that they'd assigned stars to some variants in a given list, but not others.

Example, Civil War era Davion:
http://www.masteruni...Id=29&EraId=247

Best I can figure, the ones with stars are the most common or most likely variants for a given chassis, given the faction and era.

Trouble is, they don't label the column, and don't seem to explain it anywhere (or I haven't blundered into it yet). Anybody here got the right expertise to clarify this? I'd appreciate it, thanks!

Just mousing over those stars, tells me what TRO they are found in, for example the Stinger STG-3R's star says "This unit is featured in TRO 3039"

My guess is that it's not about most common variant, but rather telling you where that unit is featured, either as an alternate unit or with special lore for it.

[Virlutris]

Sereglach, on 14 May 2018 - 10:02 AM, said:

If you hover over the star, it tells you where the unit was featured in a TRO. Units without stars were a variant listed under the main TRO feature article for a given mech. For example, the starred Wasp 1A was featured in TRO 3039, but the other variants -like the 1D- listed in your link don't have a star, because they were just listed variants of the mech within the main feature article.

Now, yes, the "feature" variant is the most common of its type, which is why it is the feature mech in the first place, but that doesn't mean other variants weren't reasonably common or popular.

Metus regem, on 14 May 2018 - 10:03 AM, said:

Just mousing over those stars, tells me what TRO they are found in, for example the Stinger STG-3R's star says "This unit is featured in TRO 3039"

My guess is that it's not about most common variant, but rather telling you where that unit is featured, either as an alternate unit or with special lore for it.

Huh. I'm going to have to try that again, because I don't think the mouseover functionality was behaving when I tried that.

Hmmmm. Oh well, sometimes bugs happen.

Thanks to you both!

[Jay Leon Hart]

Odanan, on 13 May 2018 - 07:10 PM, said:

Forget my mod. I just found out this: JK Variants.

57 new variants?!?! God dammit Justin Kase!

From that mod;

Quote

• Binary Laser Cannon (an experiment in fusing 2 LL cores together. Generates as much heat as 2 LL, but only does 75% of that total damage. I added in a +10% to crit bonus as well, to represent the tandem fire. There is a STOCK and + version in the mod - found on the Zeus ZEU-6Y)

I do miss having a Blazer

[Metus regem]

Jay Leon Hart, on 14 May 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

From that mod;

I do miss having a Blazer

The Blazer is a ton of fun on the MAD-4X Marauder... that thing is about the only stock Marauder I actually like...

[FLG 01]

Odanan, on 12 May 2018 - 02:34 AM, said:

I didn't like this cockpit, but I would love to see this mech in MWO.

Since the viewport is usually redesigned by PGI I don't that would be a problem. It would probably be closer to the original TRO artworks.

Jay Leon Hart, on 14 May 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

I do miss having a Blazer

I do miss it in MWO, too, even though I understand why it was not chosen. (I disagree with the reasoning but at least I understand it).

Metus regem, on 14 May 2018 - 11:32 AM, said:

The Blazer is a ton of fun on the MAD-4X Marauder... that thing is about the only stock Marauder I actually like...

Funny enough, in real life the MAD-4X is kind of a reverse engineered MAD-9M. The designer looked at the -9M and created a variant of that using blazers.
In-universe it is supposed the other way around, of course, the MAD-4X being the spiritual predecessor of the 9M. And that makes sense.

I have a soft spot for the ZEU-6Y myself... It is a really nice SW-era unit. Shame that this concept never came up a again. A Zeus with Blazer, Gauss, and LRM for example would be awesome.

[Odanan]

9 days to the Fire Falcon?

[Virlutris]

Conjurer what?

[Odanan]

Virlutris, on 23 May 2018 - 09:56 PM, said:

Conjurer what?

You mean the totally-not-Wolverine-IIC-but-MW4's-Hellhound?

Edited by Odanan, 25 May 2018 - 03:37 AM.

[CK16]

Make the Hellhound real cannon....

[Sereglach]

Odanan, on 25 May 2018 - 03:34 AM, said:

You mean the totally-not-Wolverine-IIC-but-MW4's-Hellhound?

CK16, on 25 May 2018 - 04:31 AM, said:

Make the Hellhound real cannon....

I'm all for this . . . well, except for the cannon part instead of canon. It's like taking the ridiculously bland and uninspiring Wolverine IIC, updating it using Coyotl engineering philosophy (since there's at least a modicum of similarity between the MW4 Hellhound and Coyotl), and making a new and wholly superior mech. It's like the Clans' final wiping of the shall-not-be-named clan out of existence.

They should go for it and put the non-canon bickering to rest. After all, just about everything else from MW4 has been made canon. That, and it's one of the only MW4 mechs left that I wouldn't mind seeing in MWO . . . especially depending on what PGI variants they'd create.

Edited by Sereglach, 25 May 2018 - 08:01 AM.

[Odanan]

CK16, on 25 May 2018 - 04:31 AM, said:

Make the Hellhound real cannon....

Like the Hollander?

[Juodas Varnas]

Odanan, on 25 May 2018 - 08:39 AM, said:

Like the Hollander?

You call THAT a cannon?

THIS is a cannon!

[Odanan]

Juodas Varnas, on 25 May 2018 - 09:11 AM, said:

You call THAT a cannon?

THIS is a cannon!

Why only one cannon?

[Odanan]

Guys, each day I look at the Vulcan concept art, the more I like it.

Those shoulder/upper arms are quite unique.

Which other weird designs would you like to see the Alex Iglesias rendition?

[Haipyng]

Odanan, on 25 May 2018 - 09:23 AM, said:

Guys, each day I look at the Vulcan concept art, the more I like it.

Those shoulder/upper arms are quite unique.

Which other weird designs would you like to see the Alex Iglesias rendition?

Just needs some pointed antenna ears on the Vulcan. It would look perfect then.