50 replies to this topic

[Nightshade24]

Soul Tribunal, on 10 February 2015 - 01:48 PM, said:

The only way I could see them making a chin turret work, is if they scripted the motion in it to act like a second set of 'arms'. Thus from a coding standpoint the mech would have 4 'arms' in which to aim when they are not locked to the torso.
It is in theory something that could be done, just depends on how they are coded in the system.

-ST

Not to be a math wiz or anything but it would act as 4 Weapons (1 medium pulse : 1 medium pulse : 2 medium pulse) (1 UAC 2 : 1 UAC 2 : 2 Medium Pulse) ratio on 3 "arms".

Having 2 medium pulse lasers on 1 turret makes it act the same as 2 on 1 arm. Having more then 1 weapon on an arm doesn't mean there is a new arm, with that logic a jenner could have 6 arms

[Elkfire]

Alakan, on 09 February 2015 - 04:55 PM, said:

I really want an Uziel.

Amen, brother.

[Fate 6]

Alakan, on 09 February 2015 - 04:55 PM, said:

I really want an Uziel.

UZL-8S...mmmmm, so delicious, jumping laser boat with ECM.

[Lily from animove]

W A R K H A N, on 10 February 2015 - 01:56 PM, said:

I wish my Maddog could take a beating like that. Unfortunately Maddog side torsos in MWO are beyond Nova class.

No, you just need to lern using the destroyed Sidetorso as a shield, and then damage transfer makes your MDD supertanky.
And as long as you do have bith sidetorsi, do nto twist in 90 degree, you need to shake your mech more like, left right without twistig in very wide. this spreads damage quite reliable. It is ust very different compared to other mechs.

Edited by Lily from animove, 11 February 2015 - 02:17 AM.

[Soul Tribunal]

MauttyKoray, on 10 February 2015 - 02:32 PM, said:

I do however believe the turret would only count as 1 extra arm, for a total of 3.

Your right actually, for some reason I was thinking too symeterical. Just make it follow the movements on the arms.

-ST

[LordKnightFandragon]

The mech in the MW4 intro is not a Mad Dog, its a Vulture. The one from Mechcommander Gold is a Mad Dog, the one in Mechwarrior 2 is a Mad Dog, the one in Wizkids CMG, MW4 and all them, thats a Vulture.

[Metus regem]

strikebrch, on 09 February 2015 - 12:55 PM, said:

Which variant is the Mad Dog that appears on the MW4:vengeance intro ?

Would like to be able using that one here.

P.D: I see a medium pulse turret on his CT.....is that posible?! O_O.... 3:39 UAC2 on arms ?

[LordKnightFandragon]

strikebrch, on 09 February 2015 - 12:55 PM, said:

Which variant is the Mad Dog that appears on the MW4:vengeance intro ?

Would like to be able using that one here.

P.D: I see a medium pulse turret on his CT.....is that posible?! O_O.... 3:39 UAC2 on arms ?

I just assumed they were a series of SPL, they suck something fierce in MW4.....

I have pretty much done that and then some in my 6ML/6CSSRM6 Mad Dog in that game. Ofc, I have ammo off to make room for a few more heatsinks and armor, but yeah.....I have schooled many mechs in MW4 with the Vulture....

That pilot was a shamefur dispray...

[MauttyKoray]

Nightshade24, on 10 February 2015 - 11:57 PM, said:

The 2nd one (the one that has an image) is the "Ghost bear" one. well the one I discribed.

It's discription in game says AND I quote:

"Given the immense popularity of the Vulture mech among Clan Ghost Bear ranks, the evolution of the Vulture II mech was heralded with much enthusiasm. The larger version of the vulture has improved direct fire load outs and thus is feared for its devestating ballistic and energy capabilities/"

-Mechwarrior 4: Mercenaries 'Mekpak 3.1' version

end quote.



The "Apocryphal" Vulture II is an apocryphal alt.configeration based on the famous Mad Dog / Vulture.


I do not want to sound like an Intellectual ****** (Get that?... it's me being ironic. I said "smart ass" in an overly complicated way, thus sounding like a smart ass intentionally!.) however I think you need to check your resources for more precise data before claiming anything about it

I have solid evidence here that the Apocryphal Vulture II is a Ghost Bear mech while your evidence mearly states that the one that is more in line with the traditional Vulture looks (aka the MW4 "standard" Mad Dog / Vulture or "cannon" Vulture II / Mad Dog II.). Sadly you have no evidence stating what factories it got rolled out besides simply saying it's a IS refit. (Which kinda makes sense as all MW games with the "Vulture II" cannon is on the IS side, however it doesn't explain how Clan Wolf and Clan Jade Falcon prefers this 'worse' mad dog over there own in the same games and according to the master unit list this mech doesn't exist so far in TT?)


Anyway, sorry for being a hassle. Just stating my facts and resources.

Unless you're trying to say something else that I'm misunderstanding, what I understood from your post was that you were confusing the Vulture Mk II and Vulture II for one another. I also never stated the Vulture II was not made by Ghost Bear, only that it seemed you were saying that the mech in the intro was the Vulture II. After the Mk II refit that Ghost Bear made, the Vulture II (non-canonically) was (fan) created as the successor.

The Vulture II is a Fan Created mech by Mektek, who are the ones that made Mekpak 3.1. They were a modding team that improved and added many balances, mechs, and a few additional features to MW4 Mercenaries. Sadly the directional jumpjets they had pretty far developed never saw the light of day as they ceased development of their modifications in favor of their own Battletech Solaris themed game, which also never saw the light of day as PGI picked up the rights for MWO and they weren't allowed to continue. They are currently working on their own original Mech game which isn't looking half bad so far and is more of a Solaris style game again.

Quote

Produced by Bergan Industries for Clan Ghost Bear, the Vulture Mk. II is functionally identical to the original, but has a slightly different appearance in terms of armor, structure, engine mounting and other cosmetic areas due to being produced from factories using Spheroid tooling.

That is directly from the Sarna article, which the quote (and links) of it being confirmed as 'canonical' came from as well, the one in the video.

I also specifically stated that it even says the Vulture II (the one with the picture) is apocryphal, which it says:

Quote

While the Mad Dog II was released in an official product (specifically the MekTek Mekpack for Mechwarrior IV Mercenaries) this product and the vehicles in it are not considered to be part of the Battletech canon. As such, this design is considered to be apocryphal.

MekTek was given support by Microsoft to mod the game, therefore it was an 'official' MW4 expansion and Mech, however it is NOT part of the Battletech canon.

Unfortunately this is really screwy as it doesn't follow the standard Mk successor naming. If you look there is no ACTUAL Mk II Mad Dog/Vulture, there's a Mk III and Mk IV however. Ideally the correct naming should have had the Vulture II being the IS produced Ghost Bear 'refit' as seen in the MW4 intro, while the apocryphal mech produced by MekTek being the Mk II as it was actually a different design being 75 tons instead of the original Mad Dog's 60 Tons (Which the Vulture Mk II also shares the 60 ton weight), but this was not the case.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 11 February 2015 - 06:00 PM.

[Nightshade24]

I think we're jumping to conclusions a lot.

[MauttyKoray]

Nightshade24, on 11 February 2015 - 11:32 PM, said:

I think we're jumping to conclusions a lot.

Possibly, I only intended to clear up the difference between the Vulture Mk II seen in the MW4 intro video, created by Microsoft/FASA, but accepted into the battletech lore as Canon, and the Vulture II created by MekTek's fan modification who obtained the go ahead from Microsoft to semi-officially mod it but without technical support from them, and considered Apocryphal and while part of Mechwarrior through IP, not part of the larger Battletech lore from which Mechwarrior is based off of.

That's pretty much the entirety of the reason for my posts. Both are Clan Ghost Bear from what I understand too, so it further confused my understanding of your response.