<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: In Praise Of: MechCommander.</title>
	<atom:link href="https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/</link>
	<description>Science, gaming, and all things in between.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 22:05:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.7.36</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Petrow</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-35485</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Petrow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:19:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-35485</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow, can&#039;t believe, I found your article! I can hardly write about MW unbiased, it was my gateway drug into the Battletech universe, and I pretty much enjoyed it.

As for the weapons; somewhere, in the devs&#039; diary I read, that weapons already include heat-sinks in their total tonnage, and their ROF was calculated accordingly. Sadly, C ER-PPC still rules above all, but weaker weapons still have their place, if you want to reliably salvage a mech, rather than flat-out destroying it.
 
What I found ridiculous, is the loadout capacity of the clan mechs. The W version Cougar could carry 34 tons of weaponry for its 35 ton frame, while a 50 tons Hunchback IIC W had like 45,5 tons of weaponry on itself...

A shame, that the second part could not replicate neither the atmosphere, nor the visuals of this game.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, can&#8217;t believe, I found your article! I can hardly write about MW unbiased, it was my gateway drug into the Battletech universe, and I pretty much enjoyed it.</p>
<p>As for the weapons; somewhere, in the devs&#8217; diary I read, that weapons already include heat-sinks in their total tonnage, and their ROF was calculated accordingly. Sadly, C ER-PPC still rules above all, but weaker weapons still have their place, if you want to reliably salvage a mech, rather than flat-out destroying it.</p>
<p>What I found ridiculous, is the loadout capacity of the clan mechs. The W version Cougar could carry 34 tons of weaponry for its 35 ton frame, while a 50 tons Hunchback IIC W had like 45,5 tons of weaponry on itself&#8230;</p>
<p>A shame, that the second part could not replicate neither the atmosphere, nor the visuals of this game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thoughts: MechWarrior Online. &#187; The Scientific Gamer The Scientific Gamer</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-15676</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thoughts: MechWarrior Online. &#187; The Scientific Gamer The Scientific Gamer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-15676</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] definitely encouraging. Part of that assessment is doubtless going to be influenced by my latent  MechCommander fanboyism  ; however, as the first proper MechWarrior game in a decade &#8212; if you don’t count the Living [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] definitely encouraging. Part of that assessment is doubtless going to be influenced by my latent  MechCommander fanboyism  ; however, as the first proper MechWarrior game in a decade &#8212; if you don’t count the Living [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-780</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nicholas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mechcommander was a fantastic game. It&#039;s a bit of a dark horse but I did enjoy Mechwarrior 3 as well. It was genuinely upsetting to see mechs you had spent hours scrounging and outfitting get shot to pieces. It marked the first time I emotionally invested in particle-based weaponry.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mechcommander was a fantastic game. It&#8217;s a bit of a dark horse but I did enjoy Mechwarrior 3 as well. It was genuinely upsetting to see mechs you had spent hours scrounging and outfitting get shot to pieces. It marked the first time I emotionally invested in particle-based weaponry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hentzau</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-779</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hentzau]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 09:43:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s free! And you will, no joke, spend more time in the mechlab outfitting your shit than you will actually in the missions. It&#039;s very RPG like that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s free! And you will, no joke, spend more time in the mechlab outfitting your shit than you will actually in the missions. It&#8217;s very RPG like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: innokenti</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-778</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[innokenti]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 08:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am slightly more interested in MechCommander, but I might give Mercenaries a go I guess...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am slightly more interested in MechCommander, but I might give Mercenaries a go I guess&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hentzau</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-777</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hentzau]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jul 2012 07:29:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-777</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, you are a bad person. But they&#039;re free! (Free! free) and if you don&#039;t at least try Mercenaries I&#039;ll have to hurt you.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, you are a bad person. But they&#8217;re free! (Free! free) and if you don&#8217;t at least try Mercenaries I&#8217;ll have to hurt you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: innokenti</title>
		<link>https://scientificgamer.com/in-praise-of-mechcommander/#comment-776</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[innokenti]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 23:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scientificgamer.wordpress.com/?p=1887#comment-776</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yeah, looks very good - will definitely pick these up to have a go. Never really got on with the MechWarrior games. This apparently makes me a bad person, but there you go. MechCommander looks interesting, shame to have missed it back then.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, looks very good &#8211; will definitely pick these up to have a go. Never really got on with the MechWarrior games. This apparently makes me a bad person, but there you go. MechCommander looks interesting, shame to have missed it back then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
