93 replies to this topic

[NimoStar]

This was proposed before back in 2015 but people said we needed the new weapons.

https://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/209202-marauder-ii/
Well, we HAVE the new weapons now!

This is a 100 tonner with everything one could ever wish.

Plus aesthetically beautiful, I remember designing like 10 versions of it in Mechwarrior 4 mercs with all mechpacks.



It's probably the best looking mech of the entire franchise bar none, and it's also very strong and versatile.

And in canon it was already built in 3012


Gib.

LOTS of Jumpjets specially for 100 tonner (probably quirked due to the plane-like design; it even had little "wings" in the original published Battletech pictures

), all three weapons types represented on official variants (Imagine the hardpoints on the one with tons of Rocket Launchers!), profile perfect for spreading damage, huge frigging guns... up to an XL400 rated engine, tons of cannon variants and configurations...
PLUS really cool lore, an unit of purely Marauders II, a hero Marauder II, AND a mercenary bounty hunter Marauder II. See more: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marauder_II

There's even a clan version! (yes, of the 100 tons one) - Arguably this was the original and first one made, since it was produced for Wolf's Dragoons mercenary unit exclusively at first and fully with clan tech. (So there's even a justification for making it a clan assault instead, not that I'm proposing that... but I would be up for that as well!)

Need another reason why this 'mech is unique and different?
The design philosophy is not the same as other IS 100-tonners.
Atlas, Fafnir, King Crab, Anhilator... all existing IS tops are built for durability first. Ingame their armor and structure quirks reflect that. They are slow and cumbersome.
The Marauder II however is more built for agility and firepower. It would not need armor quirks since it can compensate with offensive power (much like the Dire Wolf for clans), jumping, and high-mounted weapons (the ones in and above cockpit height). It's quirks would be on mobility and attack, not so much in structure and armor.
It also features prominently and very consistently ERPPCs/PPCs/Heavy PPCs as main weapons rather than gauss, heavy gauss or heavy ACs like the other IS assaults (Fafnir and Anhi) or missles and lasers (Atlas).

There is no valid reason why this 'mech isn't out yet. If you want to avoid confusion with the IIC version, just call it "Marauder 2" instead of "Marauder II", or go for "Marauder Mk II". Really it shoudn't even be an issue due to how obviously different they are, and the fact this would be an IS mech.

Really, people have been asking about this for years. It even was the most voted option when PGI itself did an opinion pool on what mech to introduce.

Edited by NimoStar, 07 May 2018 - 05:43 AM.

[El Bandito]

I know for sure that huge gun is gonna get scaled down to 1/5 its size, so aesthetically a MAD II is gonna look very different than your pics. Especially since PGI is trying to avoid further lawsuits by Harmony Crap.

[NimoStar]

I woudn't mind the gun being like in the pic of the poriginal battletech, it was only huge in the MW 4 version because it was suppossed to represent a Railgun which was not for 'mechs in the original game and we don't have yet.

In MWO it will probably appear or disappear based on what we have on torso mounts, much like the Mad Cat "Ears" with LRMs.

AC20? Gun.
double AC20? Two guns.
No ballistic on torso? No gun.

That alone would be ground enpugh for "no lawsuit" since it is not on the mech chassis design, it just appears with the weapon.

[Captain Wolfsburg]

El Bandito, on 07 May 2018 - 04:55 AM, said:

I know for sure that huge gun is gonna get scaled down to 1/5 its size, so aesthetically a MAD II is gonna look very different than your pics. Especially since PGI is trying to avoid further lawsuits by Harmony Crap.

Harmony gold lost the rights to Macross/Robotech, so as far as any designs derived from that IP, PGI is safe.

[Battlemaster56]

It be nice to add to my Marauder/Marauder related collection and it seems all the variants can be added but I think we can ait a bit on marauder/marauder related mechs we have 5 marauder related mechs in the game surely we can wait before added the sixth family into the game.

But then again I really want to see the art for this thing from Alex.

Decisions Decisions.

[Y E O N N E]

Payload-wise, this 'Mech has nothing worthwhile to offer.

[El Bandito]

Yeonne Greene, on 07 May 2018 - 06:46 AM, said:

Payload-wise, this 'Mech has nothing worthwhile to offer.

If only PGI can be more creative with their custom variants.

[TheArisen]

Yeonne Greene, on 07 May 2018 - 06:46 AM, said:

Payload-wise, this 'Mech has nothing worthwhile to offer.

Well there is a missile bomber variant with like 10 or so missiles but yeah I agree there are better mechs out there easily.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Yeonne Greene, on 07 May 2018 - 06:46 AM, said:

Payload-wise, this 'Mech has nothing worthwhile to offer.

But hitbox-wise, we already know it will be tanky as hell without quirks and it would be nice to have a mobile 100-tonner for the IS side, that could actually compete with the existing IS 100 tonners. Also as a Marauder fan, even if the payload was a bit stale, I would likely still buy it just to complete my Marauder collection.

Edit: I decided I should also add that with the amount of mechs currently in game, there is nothing really radically new as far as hard points of unique builds anyway so most of the time now it really comes down to either aesthetics or hit boxes as far as if a mech is worth buying or not.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 07 May 2018 - 08:21 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

El Bandito, on 07 May 2018 - 08:04 AM, said:

If only PGI can be more creative with their custom variants.

One Mech Pack says they invent another Hero with 2M torsos & 2E arms

[Metus regem]

Meh, sure why not...

Still the only Marauder I actually want in game is the MAD-4X...





Two Blazers and 2 SRM/6's... she's a beast in TT...

[Jay Leon Hart]

TheArisen, on 07 May 2018 - 08:11 AM, said:

Well there is a missile bomber variant with like 10 or so missiles but yeah I agree there are better mechs out there easily.

11M, 4E?

Not likely, since they already altered the Thanatos Hero (5M, 5E instead of 9M, 4E) and Fafnir Hero (4M, 1B, 5E instead of 10M, 1B, 5E).

Edited by Jay Leon Hart, 07 May 2018 - 08:25 AM.

[Seranov]

Just be prepared for the ginormous gun to be in the one of the STs, rather than magically suspended above the CT with space wizardry.

[TheArisen]

Jay Leon Hart, on 07 May 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

11M, 4E?

Not likely, since they already altered the Thanatos Hero (5M, 5E instead of 9M, 4E) and Fafnir Hero (4M, 1B, 5E instead of 10M, 1B, 5E).

Well even 6M & 4E on a 100t would be interesting but I do agree.

[Battlemaster56]

Jay Leon Hart, on 07 May 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

11M, 4E?

Not likely, since they already altered the Thanatos Hero (5M, 5E instead of 9M, 4E) and Fafnir Hero (4M, 1B, 5E instead of 10M, 1B, 5E).

Well it's a standard variant and not a hero plus we already got a clan mech pushing 9M hardpoints even if it's a 40 ton platform.

I say leave the 4H as it is not gonna break the game or anything, mostly use as a crazy lrm boat buy pugs.

[MechaBattler]

At 85 tons the IIC version has a good mix of performance and firepower for an assault. But at 100 the mad II will likely not perform much better than what the IS already has.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Battlemaster56, on 07 May 2018 - 09:47 AM, said:

Well it's a standard variant and not a hero plus we already got a clan mech pushing 9M hardpoints even if it's a 40 ton platform.

I say leave the 4H as it is not gonna break the game or anything, mostly use as a crazy lrm boat buy pugs.

It would side-step the "Pay-2-Win" complaints the Hero 'mechs would have faced, but I still find it doubtful.

Just look at hardpoint counts for Clan vs IS and it's pretty clear PGI is unwilling to give many IS 'mechs the level of inflation needed to directly compete with Clan firepower.

Which is fine, I guess, as it further reinforces the firepower vs durability dynamic.

[Tordin]

It better have variants with ballistics on left torso too, unlike its older little brother. Or 1 ballistic per side torso if not even more. And please make the symmetry real! the Nightstar is hideous with those lower left hardpoints.

[Helsbane]

Tordin, on 07 May 2018 - 11:33 AM, said:

It better have variants with ballistics on left torso too, unlike its older little brother. Or 1 ballistic per side torso if not even more. And please make the symmetry real! the Nightstar is hideous with those lower left hardpoints.

Yeah the Nightstar is one of the few mechs I regret buying prior to release. They look like the weapons were arranged by someone after far to many tequila shots.

[Y E O N N E]

Viktor Drake, on 07 May 2018 - 08:13 AM, said:

But hitbox-wise, we already know it will be tanky as hell without quirks and it would be nice to have a mobile 100-tonner for the IS side, that could actually compete with the existing IS 100 tonners. Also as a Marauder fan, even if the payload was a bit stale, I would likely still buy it just to complete my Marauder collection.

It won't be mobile. The Atlas already runs a 350 engine more often than not, and that's 56.7 kph. You gain 8.1 kph going to a 400 and that just isn't worth the weight. Even if it can turn better than any current 100 tonner, who cares when it mounts less and worse firepower than a Nightstar? I sure don't. A Heavt Gauss with three LL/LPL and an ERML just isn't appealing and we have way better options for everything else including mobility.

It also won't be any tankier than the Nightstar because it will be huge and still have god-awful side vent tumors

Quote

Edit: I decided I should also add that with the amount of mechs currently in game, there is nothing really radically new as far as hard points of unique builds anyway so most of the time now it really comes down to either aesthetics or hit boxes as far as if a mech is worth buying or not.

IS Omnis add unique, new-to-them capabilities...notably laser nukes.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 07 May 2018 - 11:52 AM.