Technical Readout: 3145
#1
Posted 02 March 2013 - 01:10 AM
Technical Readout: 3145 introduces the new generation of battle armor, vehicles, ’Mechs, and aerospace craft that debuted in the latter years of the Dark Age era. Featuring new technologies born in the decades since the Word of Blake Jihad, these new machines stand ready to do battle, for the glory and defense of their native realms."
DROOL... I wonder what kind of mech and tech may feature at those time? Angel ECM, Bloodhound active Probe, Triple Heat Sink, Ion cannon, RAC 20s, AC 30s or 40s.
One can dream.
Sniff.. we won't see any of these mech in another 95 years.
Speculations on what kind of mech will you like to see?
I want a 100+ Ton mech, 450XXL engine.. 3 RAC 20s...
#2
Posted 02 March 2013 - 01:20 AM
#3
Posted 02 March 2013 - 01:20 AM
Remember those fantastic Star Wars prequels...
#4
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:00 AM
Protection, on 02 March 2013 - 01:20 AM, said:
Remember those fantastic Star Wars prequels...
Or even worse, that stupid yuzon vong or w/e. I am normally a peaceful person but those guys and the legacy people need to lined up and shot. Fan fiction run amok I tell you!
#6
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:16 AM
Protection, on 02 March 2013 - 01:20 AM, said:
Remember those fantastic Star Wars prequels...
Slow your roll, man. Catalyst has done a pretty good job of un-derping the Jihad era, so I'd hold judgement until Era Report 3145 and Field Manual 3145 are out as well.
Feel free to mock the Dark Age 'Mech designs though.
#8
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:31 AM
#9
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:38 AM
How to ruin the legacy of a franchise by selling out for the short term (Dark Ages art now looks like complete poop, whereas BT stuff is pretty timeless in a lot of ways), instead of identifying and improving the core formula of the product.
#10
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:39 AM
CSJ Ranger, on 02 March 2013 - 02:31 AM, said:
If you're referring to the art style, I agree. The art direction was terrible. The Atlas is a perfect example of ruining a good thing.
#11
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:49 AM
#12
Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:56 AM
"Jar-jar caused the Dark Age."
#13
Posted 02 March 2013 - 03:20 AM
Adridos, on 02 March 2013 - 02:49 AM, said:
I am probably wrong, but under the upcoming release section for Book in BattleTech a TRO for 3145 is listed.
#15
Posted 02 March 2013 - 04:36 AM
Dark Age had some really friggin' creative mechs. It's downfall was the ruleset, rather than the models.
I agree there are some really awful sculpts and SOME of the novels should have never been considered, but as the game went on, more and more models were made to scale, and the sculpts got pretty darned cool looking.
The ruleset, however, made vehicles and infantry more effective units than mechs for the most part. Age of Destruction alleviated some of the problems. The other major problem was, in order to play competitively - as a collectable game - you had to spend a LOT of money on boosters to gather the mechs you really wanted to play. Imagine if all the mechs you bought for MWO were random, how much money and resentment there would be from players who were trying to play the 'I WIN' mechs like the Raven 3L, Splatcats, and D-DCs?
I always tried to figure out how wizkids equated Battletech with MW: Dark Ages. I've come to the conclusion that they payed homage to Classic Battletech, but fudged a good deal. I look forward to seeing the TRO that tries to make sense of it all. I'm sure Catalyst will inject a little bit of humor into explaining a fair bit of it! (The HPG grid went down, after all. Maybe some of those Dark Age stories were just really tall tails meant to scare children away from being Mechwarriors. I do seem to remember a scene where Bannson pins down Tara Campbell's Hatchetman with his Jupiter, and staring lustily down into her cockpit as she fired her weapons into his chest until they melted down. I think she does a cartwheel with said mech earlier in that novel....)
Edited by Peiper, 02 March 2013 - 04:38 AM.
#16
Posted 02 March 2013 - 04:51 AM
No, the problem with Dark Age was the story (or lack thereof), the characters, and the whole idea of jumping forward in the first place and spoiling the storyline before it had a chance to unfold naturally. Some horrible novels combined with a lack of overall direction, and the throwing to the wind of the detailed continuity that FASA had been so meticulous about. All because the people at Wizkids really couldn't be bothered with such things even though they're the essence of why Battletech has endured all these years.
It's the same with the Star Wars prequels or expanded universe novels. What ruined them wasn't the ship designs, which were okay even if they weren't as iconic as those in the original trilogy. What has ruined Star Wars since the 90s is the writing and the lack of care put into it. Short term cash-in profit was prioritized at Lucasfilm and Wizkids over long term consistent and believable universe building.
This usually happens whenever corporate hacks get hold of something good. If the accountant pigs in blue suits start micromanaging decisions in Mechwarrior Online rather than the game's developers, watch out.
.
Edited by 5th Fedcom Rat, 02 March 2013 - 05:09 AM.
#18
Posted 02 March 2013 - 10:19 AM
The only mech I want to pilot one day, should this game survive near a century, is the capelan TianZhong, which has 2 Gauss rifle and Sheath Armor
Edited by William Conrad, 02 March 2013 - 10:22 AM.
#19
Posted 02 March 2013 - 10:31 AM
#20
Posted 02 March 2013 - 10:41 AM
valkyrie, on 02 March 2013 - 02:16 AM, said:
Feel free to mock the Dark Age 'Mech designs though.
They should just retcon 90% of the Jihad. Wizkids did irreparable damage to certain factions and killed some iconic figures in very lame form.
I refuse to believe Dirk Radick of Clan Wolf, a known Crusader extremist, aided Devlin Stone in liberating Terra and the Blake Protectorate, nor that Khan Vladimir Ward, a staunch Crusader himself, sanctioned the action. That Radick went on to become a Paladin for the Republic of the Sphere makes zero sense
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users