Lord Trogus, on 10 June 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:
I agree with the OP's logic here, this isn't daddy's Battletech anymore. The TT turn-based hex days were fun, but there is still an element of realism to consider. Look me in the Webcam and tell me a Machine Gun fires as rapidly as an AC-20. Tell me a pilot won't see a Catapult hanging five seconds in the air prepping for the fatal DFA, tell me there every pilot is as good as the last, and tell me there are only six directions to look on the battlefield. Short and simple, the TT doesn't represent the "conventional" aspects of gaming warfare. Mechwarrior may be based off a fun 80's robo board game, but that does not mean it has to stay hampered down by decades-old rules that contain obvious mechanics flaws.
Obviously, MWO is not going to be a hex-based game. It is not like every 'Mech is going to move, stop, torso-twist and then fire - in that order. Tabletop rules are going to be applied to areas where they make sense, such as construction, ranges and comparative values - weight, damage and armor. Everything else will be in the hands of the player - reaction, accuracy and timing.
And, once again, flawed TT game mechanics or not, they are based on logic defined by the setting. (Note the distinction between "mechanics" and "logic.") Different mechanics can enhance MWO, but they cannot supplant the core logic of BT without completely altering the setting.
And comparing MGs to ACs in BT is redundant. They both can have the same rate of fire. Regardless of their name, the mechanical operation of both can be the same.