An DC-17m question.

[Lord Revan]

is the DC-17m so badly nerfed in the book(s) or that just a Republic Commando game mechanics?

[Darwin]

Don't read game mechanics very heavily into things.

I wish the thing had a little more punch, myself. more than 60 shots to down a Super Battledroid? ugh. The DC-15 heavy rifles in AOTC were blowing SBD's and Droidekas in half with one shot.

Its definitely a game balance thing. Don't give it too much credit.

Personally, I like the DC-15m's overall design.

[Lord Revan]

Don't read game mechanics very heavily into things.

I wish the thing had a little more punch, myself. more than 60 shots to down a Super Battledroid? ugh. The DC-15 heavy rifles in AOTC were blowing SBD's and Droidekas in half with one shot.

Its definitely a game balance thing. Don't give it too much credit.

Personally, I like the DC-15m's overall design.

it's DC-17m if your talking about Republic Commando rifle.

[Stark]

The whole idea of a modular gun is stupid.

Modular is good, in the sense of 'GL here, sight here, stock here, barrel here', because you can alter the gun for different roles, increasing flexibility.

Modular is stupid, in the sense of 'I'll dismantle my gun in the middle of combat, so it can do what it should be able to do anyway (ie, a scope with lotsa damage or a anti-armour lotsa damage, just like with the sandcrawler!). RC would've been better with loadout config and stuff from the movies and cartoon, like that shoulder launcher, the sensor unit, a selection of weapons from massive DC-15s to smaller automatics and sidearms. I'd rather sling my rifle and pull out a LAW than take my rifle to bits and put it back together again. Heaven help the Clone Commando that drops his 'sniper' module during a changeover. I mean, the E-11 had flexible power levels, a scope, and rapid fire, thus rendering the whole idea of the DC-17m a laughable mistake.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Fuck, what a hideously awful game gimmick. The designers should be ashamed.

[Vympel]

They're not taking the rifle apart. The changeover is quick and fluid. It's probably why it's a commando weapon- they're incessantly drilled so they can quickly swap out the relevant add-ons with ease.

[Stark]

Na UH - the amount of gun changed is substantial. It isn't just slapping on a scope or changing a barrel. In any case, the weapon wouldn't work if you dropped a bit, so you're defenceless while you're doing it. It *is* fast, but its STILL stupid. Particularly given the appalling performance of any of its three modes. Underbarrel GLs? Scoped rifles? Nah, lets have a weapon that TRANSFORMS!

The 'anti-armour' weapon in particular shocked me with its lameness. I couldn't understand the point of the sniper (although I used it all the time, because it actually killed people), but the third mode is supposed to be hardcore, and it isn't. Try blowing the detention bay elevator open with THAT, I say.

[SylasGaunt]

Because the Anti-Armor is essentially a grenade launcher. Go to town with it on SBDs or Destroyer Droids and watch it work. Blasting open doors is what breaching charges are for.

[Kurgan]

Who cares, it's a game mechanic (though I guess people are mad because it's now C-Level canon, right?).


In Multiplayer you can only carry two weapons, period, (not including grenades), including attachments.

So effectively the "modular" gun becomes just a matter of eye candy. As far as the gun "transforming" I don't know about that. In MP the pickups for each gun shows the basic rifle with a simple snap on attachment and the ammo. "Dropping" the gun doesn't make it break either, as you can drop it numerous times in MP and it still works (game mechanic, but there you go).

I count three "pieces" to add on. Judge for yourself:








Maybe that doesn't gel with SP, but it works for me. In real life they have scopes and other such attachments that can be put onto other guns. It would save weight rather than carrying four seperate weapons (though one could argue, that's what squad specialists are for). Perhaps not realistic for an efficient army then, but still.

They could have just made it so there was a pure Sniper Rifle, a Pure Grenade Launcher and a Pure Machine gun, it would play exactly the same.

[Kartr_Kana]

Um Stark have you ever heard of the grenade launchers in WW2? Basically you put a blank cartridge in the breach stick a modded potato masher grenade on the end of the barrel pull the trigger and the grenade is launched. This is similar to the way the anti-armor attachment is used. Also there are not a lot of parts used in the changing: Anti armor= anti armor + base unit. Sniper= Sniper barrel and scope one piece attachment + base unit + sniper ammo. Standerd=Standard barrel+standard ammo. Unclip one barrel put it away, grab different attachment, place on base unit, strip ammo clip, replace with appropriate ammo type. Ammo and attachments would be stored next to each other to minimize the distance the hand has to traverse. Fast and it eliminates the need to carry specialized weapons. Also the squad that took out the sandcraller probable contained 8 or more troops and officers, so they had the luxury of having specialists. The commandos have to be able to do everything.

[Lord Revan]

Assuming the ammo count and relative firepowers in RC are correct and the DC-17m is at least as powerfull as the DC-15 this what we got.

the DC-17m Stock
the DC-17m Carbine attachment (200 round per clip with probaly 2 clip per trooper)
the DC-17m Sniper attachment(20 round per clip with probaly single per trooper)
the DC-17m Anti-armor attachment (probaly 4 rounds per trooper)
the DC-15s blaster

as the Carbine capable of taking down the stardard models of the B1 and B2 and unshielded droidekas (but limited range), the Sniper rifle should able take shielded version of the B2 (from the game) take down the shield of a droidekas (but not droid it self) and anti-armor would used harder targets like spider droids. the DC-15s would used as last resort. as the DC-17m attachments are smaller the a full weapon this makes some sence since Commandos aren't meant engage in heavy combat.

[Kartr_Kana]

I prefer the DC-15s over the 17m just because. They are both really good weapons and I agree with you Reven except they do engage in heavy combat just not mass army combat verses hundreds of enemy armor, etc.

[Lord Revan]

I prefer the DC-15s over the 17m just because. They are both really good weapons and I agree with you Reven except they do engage in heavy combat just not mass army combat verses hundreds of enemy armor, etc.

Mass army combat was defenation of heavy combat I was using. And you probaly prefer theDC-15s for same reason why I prefer the Pistol in Battlefront (they reload themselves), a "real" DC-15s would problay have limited ammo count and would use clips (basically a smaller version of DC-15 carbine (never seen, but is in the AOTC:VD))

[Stark]

Um Stark have you ever heard of the grenade launchers in WW2? Basically you put a blank cartridge in the breach stick a modded potato masher grenade on the end of the barrel pull the trigger and the grenade is launched. This is similar to the way the anti-armor attachment is used. Also there are not a lot of parts used in the changing: Anti armor= anti armor + base unit. Sniper= Sniper barrel and scope one piece attachment + base unit + sniper ammo. Standerd=Standard barrel+standard ammo. Unclip one barrel put it away, grab different attachment, place on base unit, strip ammo clip, replace with appropriate ammo type. Ammo and attachments would be stored next to each other to minimize the distance the hand has to traverse. Fast and it eliminates the need to carry specialized weapons. Also the squad that took out the sandcraller probable contained 8 or more troops and officers, so they had the luxury of having specialists. The commandos have to be able to do everything.

Deary me. Removing the barrel assembly from your SMG is equivalent to rifle grenades now? And since the AT attachment is so weak, its hardly WORTH having to stop fighting anyway. In order to use the 'slightly less pussy than the pussy SMG' gun, I have to render myself defenceless, and I get an extremely poor GL. Why not have an underbarrel, eh? Oops.

So, sending four guys in is a stupid idea. Thats why we have, y'know, bigger squads. Multipurpose weapons will always be useful (I'm sure this weapon would be useful for light inf or vehicle drivers and whatnot), but its HILARIOUS that the GL attachment is weaker than the DC-15 is by default. Can't you see whats wrong with this?

If anyone can come up with a reason why you couldn't have an E-11 (or perhaps a slightly larger weapon) with a GL and a scope (a frickin smartscope, none of this 'hologram lens' lameness) and do EVERYTHING this weapon does, but with no 'transformzor' feature, I'd love to hear it. I mean, hello, thats what most militaries use NOW.

Amusingly, the 'anti-armour' attach would be totally useless against ACTUAL armour ie tanks. So they'd need a missile launcher anyway! HAH! Its just a stupid gimmick, just like the 'tactical hotspots'.

[Lord Revan]

the DC-17m is designed and build to be broke into parts (the sniper attachment is the only one to add any real length to base stock (this suggest that changing attachments is more equilevent of adding/removing a silencer, a scope or a rifle grenade then taking the weapon apart.) and the firepower of the guns is game mechanics (there for non-canon) (IIRC) the DC-15 is nerfed just as badly.

[Lord Revan]

Is the Delta squad a typical clone commando squad?

Is the shielding on the Commado armor game mechanics or canon?

When does Republic commando happen?

[YT300000]

Is the Delta squad a typical clone commando squad?

Is the shielding on the Commado armor game mechanics or canon?

To both: probably. I'm not sure, having not read Hard Contact (yet).

When does Republic commando happen?

Right before Ep III.

[Kartr_Kana]

delta squad is a typical squad. See hard contact(the best thing from the clone wars!!) Shielding is something they did not mention in the book and appears to replace their armor which is strong enough to allow them to survive a blast from a semi sized vehicle fully load with mining explosives while only 15-20 meters away.

[Lord Revan]

Ok I just finnish the game and the end does not happen before, but during ROTS (Yoda is at Corusant during the Battle of Corusant)

Shielding is something they did not mention in the book and appears to replace their armor which is strong enough to allow them to survive a blast from a semi sized vehicle fully load with mining explosives while only 15-20 meters away.

is it possible that the armor is so resistant because of shield or is it writen so that it excludes a shield.

[Lord Revan]

and the Assault ship mission does it happen before or after the Book "Jedi Trial"

[Kartr_Kana]

The book never mentions shields only the armor. However it never explicetly says that there are no shields.

My opinion is that the shields are a game mechanic because the armor in the game gives you no protection.

[Lord Revan]

Well you get into melee fight with SBD and win and you don't get killed the moment the shield fail (and they do fail).

[Kartr_Kana]

Oh well I have not played the whole game yet just the PC demo which is against Trandos on Kashyyk. The armor does not seem to do any thing against them once your shields are down.

[Lord Revan]

The first time you have destroy a SBD dispencer (and you should do it yourself) you'll see that the armor does protect you to degree (as the SBDs will try to beat you to death).

[Kartr_Kana]

Then I guess that the armor is usless against blasters and simillar weapons because it sucks against the trandos. Quite unlike the way it is in Hard Contact.