1107 replies to this topic

[Mercules]

Protection, on 25 March 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

Here's the thing - a PVP online video game is the wrong place to go if you want to experience the lore.

Even if you did all of the game mechanics 100% true to lore, you still would never see single heatsinks or stock mechs. You would see 25 medium laser insta-kill death machines, 40xLRM5 boats, 10xSRM6 Boats, etc, etc.

This is the thing you need to account for in the online gaming world - we are optimizers. We will minimax, we will optimize our builds, we will exploit every advantage, we will go through the data, and we will ensure that our builds are as advantageous as possible in every way.

This is the philosophy that an online game needs to balance around -- not tabletop rules in a game that was largely decided by dice rolls.

Ehem... In a true to TT game you would only get to customize mechs a tiny bit and after some effort. So no we wouldn't see those builds you mentioned. In addition if they had followed TT rules heat would not be so out of whack that Single Heat sinks would become THAT sub-optimal. They would still be viable one numerous builds.

The issue is that PGI double and tripled heat by keeping it the same but doubling and tripling the fire rate. As I stated, divide damage and heat by how many shots a weapon gets in 10 seconds and heat is less of an issue. Yes, right now you are silly to not use Double Heat Sinks on the majority of mechs because the heat generated is at LEAST double what it should be. So even keeping customization in the game having weapons that produce less heat would make the crit savings of Single Heat Sinks come closer to the weight savings of Double Heat Sinks.

[Thirdstar]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

https://mwtactics.com/

You're on the wrong website. I think you're confused. This is where you belong. BV is inapplicable to a round based multiplayer game, and TT balance is crap. Everything boats and half the mechs in the TT are worthless trash. Economy can not be a balancing factor, it just creates haves and have nots. People whined because it's a bad idea and no implementation of it is going to work. That is the exact reason why no game ever does it.

The anual revenue and growth of the BT tabletop game is smaller than that of the warlords card game. Another legitimately dead game. It is smaller than AD&D, a 25 year old game that hasn't been updated in 20 of them. BT is dead. That you enjoy means nothing when anyone with a middle class salary could buy the licence outright as long as they took on the debt.

This guy is saying some very truthful things in a blunt, undiplomatic way but that doesn't make it any less truthful.

Edited by Thirdstar, 25 March 2013 - 07:59 AM.

[Shumabot]

Mercules, on 25 March 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

Ehem... In a true to TT game you would only get to customize mechs a tiny bit and after some effort. So no we wouldn't see those builds you mentioned. In addition if they had followed TT rules heat would not be so out of whack that Single Heat sinks would become THAT sub-optimal. They would still be viable one numerous builds.

The issue is that PGI double and tripled heat by keeping it the same but doubling and tripling the fire rate. As I stated, divide damage and heat by how many shots a weapon gets in 10 seconds and heat is less of an issue. Yes, right now you are silly to not use Double Heat Sinks on the majority of mechs because the heat generated is at LEAST double what it should be. So even keeping customization in the game having weapons that produce less heat would make the crit savings of Single Heat Sinks come closer to the weight savings of Double Heat Sinks.

The problem there is that this isn't a dice based game. Players rarely miss with lasers. They rarely miss with anything. You cant transfer the mechanics of a dice driven game into a live environment and remove the dice while still expecting those mechanics to work.

I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you. You are advocating a direct transfer of TT rules into an online videogame. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You're as bad as the dude whose stalker I was able to double in efficiency a page ago and the dude who said his 40kph spider was viable two pages before that.

This is ridiculous. This is precisely why the designers need to stop looking at these forums.

[Protection]

Mercules, on 25 March 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

Ehem... In a true to TT game you would only get to customize mechs a tiny bit and after some effort. So no we wouldn't see those builds you mentioned. In addition if they had followed TT rules heat would not be so out of whack that Single Heat sinks would become THAT sub-optimal. They would still be viable one numerous builds.

The issue is that PGI double and tripled heat by keeping it the same but doubling and tripling the fire rate. As I stated, divide damage and heat by how many shots a weapon gets in 10 seconds and heat is less of an issue. Yes, right now you are silly to not use Double Heat Sinks on the majority of mechs because the heat generated is at LEAST double what it should be. So even keeping customization in the game having weapons that produce less heat would make the crit savings of Single Heat Sinks come closer to the weight savings of Double Heat Sinks.

So, Mechwarrior, but with far less customization and much more grind, with smaller payouts, and a larger gap between top tier players and everyone else?

. . .

How does this attract more players, exactly?

And again - double heatsinks would still be 100% superior. The only way for them to fail to be superior is if you require 40+ single heatsinks (laughable) or are running a very small engine (also laughable).

[tenderloving]

Fenix0742, on 22 March 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

Hopefully they transition to community designed trial mechs for all trial mechs at some point, as I don't think anyone is pretending that trial mechs are viable like they were months ago.

But they are still pretending that new players are quitting because they don't have 3rd person mode, rather than the horrendous experience being forced upon new players by trial mechs.

[Mercules]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

https://mwtactics.com/

You're on the wrong website. I think you're confused. This is where you belong. BV is inapplicable to a round based multiplayer game, and TT balance is crap. Everything boats and half the mechs in the TT are worthless trash. Economy can not be a balancing factor, it just creates haves and have nots. People whined because it's a bad idea and no implementation of it is going to work. That is the exact reason why no game ever does it.

The anual revenue and growth of the BT tabletop game is smaller than that of the warlords card game. Another legitimately dead game. It is smaller than AD&D, a 25 year old game that hasn't been updated in 20 of them. BT is dead. That you enjoy means nothing when anyone with a middle class salary could buy the licence outright as long as they took on the debt.

How is BV inapplicable? How many, many, many, many, matchmaker complaints have we had since Closed Beta? What are some of them?

1. Weight classes are not balanced and skewed toward the heavier extremes of each class.

A BV system that accounts for that switches that around. An 80 ton Awesome ends up closer to BV of a 75 ton Heavy than 100 ton Assualt.

2. Too many too few ECM on a side.

A BV system can weight ECM as a high point cost. Now bringing that ECM mech to the battle does give you a strong advantage but the system will have to slot a lower BV value mech in your group to balance that out making it less likely for you to have numerous ECM mechs to a side.

3. A "Stock" mech not = a Custom mech.

A BV system would match this up with another low value mech or a bunch of lower value mechs on one side and a Stock and higher value mech on the other.


Now, if TT value is crap it's because whomever was running the games made it crap. If things were boating then you were using custom building rules and NOT using BV on top of that.

As for economy, we have the haves and have-nots except we have nothing keeping the haves from having even more every single day. There is no money sink except better gear. At least with the R&R having better gear often meant making a bit less when you had to repair it giving the have-nots running slightly cheaper gear the chance of catching up. As it is now some people have huge stockpiles and simply kit out any new mech as it is released to the perfect spec immediately. The problem with R&R were the free ammo and repair features because if people couldn't run their favorite mech every single game they might whine. Without that it worked.

[MustrumRidcully]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

The problem there is that this isn't a dice based game. Players rarely miss with lasers. They rarely miss with anything. You cant transfer the mechanics of a dice driven game into a live environment and remove the dice while still expecting those mechanics to work.

I can accept that easily. The thing is...

How does "people don't miss with lasers" translate into "we need to have weapons produce 3 times as much damage and heat in 10 seconds as these rules for a turn based game suggest"?

There are a lot of things you would have to go from table top rules to a workable real time video game with mouse aiming and preserving some overall features of mechs (e.g. what weapons do they use? how "hot" are they?"). And even some more to make it balanced enough to be a workable PvP game.

But did PGI do anything of that?

[Noonan]

Shumabot you clearly despise anything BT. Why are you still involved with this game universe at all? It seems to me that a troll site like The Gaming Den would be much closer to your outlook on things.

[Skylarr]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

The anual revenue and growth of the BT tabletop game is smaller than that of the warlords card game. Another legitimately dead game. It is smaller than AD&D, a 25 year old game that hasn't been updated in 20 of them. BT is dead. That you enjoy means nothing when anyone with a middle class salary could buy the licence outright as long as they took on the debt.

Topps made its first foray into the world of games in July 2003 by acquiring the game company WizKids for $29.4 million in cash, thus acquiring ownership of the rights to the well-known gaming universes of BattleTech and Shadowrun.

That is some Middle Class salary.


Dungeons & Dragons (abbreviated as D&D or DnD) is a fantasy, role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974

D&D announced a 5th Edition.

[Shumabot]

Skylarr, on 25 March 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Topps made its first foray into the world of games in July 2003 by acquiring the game company WizKids for $29.4 million in cash, thus acquiring ownership of the rights to the well-known gaming universes of BattleTech and Shadowrun.

That is some Middle Class salary.


Dungeons & Dragons (abbreviated as D&D or DnD) is a fantasy, role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974

D&D announced a 5th Edition.

Shadowrun has quite a few active properties and vastly eclpises BT in sales, and I told you AD&D. The first one. The one they don't make things for anymore. That's the one that's worth more than BT.

Either read my posts or don't respond to them. In fact, just don't respond to them at all.

Edited by Shumabot, 25 March 2013 - 08:21 AM.

[Mercules]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

The problem there is that this isn't a dice based game. Players rarely miss with lasers. They rarely miss with anything. You cant transfer the mechanics of a dice driven game into a live environment and remove the dice while still expecting those mechanics to work. I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you. You are advocating a direct transfer of TT rules into an online videogame. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You're as bad as the dude whose stalker I was able to double in efficiency a page ago and the dude who said his 40kph spider was viable two pages before that. This is ridiculous. This is precisely why the designers need to stop looking at these forums.

No, I am NOT advocating a direct transfer. I am advocating building a better game that is based off the TT rules. It isn't hard from a game concept point.

"Players won't like shooting once every 10 seconds" should not = "Let's double the fire rate but keep everything else the same." It should = "Lets increase fire rate and divide the stats given out so it comes out the same." this is really basic ideas, easy concepts.

"Players will want skill based shooting instead of random hits." should not = "Lets have all weapons pinpoint the same spot." it should = "Lets use the mechanic many other FPS games use where weapons fire within a cone depending on how fast they are moving and weapon accuracy. We now have another weapon balance factor and can emulate lower accuracy up close for things like PPCs instead of just reducing damage."

[Joseph Mallan]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

https://mwtactics.com/

You're on the wrong website. I think you're confused. This is where you belong. BV is inapplicable to a round based multiplayer game, and TT balance is crap. Everything boats and half the mechs in the TT are worthless trash. Economy can not be a balancing factor, it just creates haves and have nots. People whined because it's a bad idea and no implementation of it is going to work. That is the exact reason why no game ever does it.

The anual revenue and growth of the BT tabletop game is smaller than that of the warlords card game. Another legitimately dead game. It is smaller than AD&D, a 25 year old game that hasn't been updated in 20 of them. BT is dead. That you enjoy means nothing when anyone with a middle class salary could buy the licence outright as long as they took on the debt.

AD&D
You were saying?

[Shumabot]

Noonan, on 25 March 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Shumabot you clearly despise anything BT. Why are you still involved with this game universe at all? It seems to me that a troll site like The Gaming Den would be much closer to your outlook on things.

Because I like Mechwarrior. Battletech can go to hell. This is Mechwarrior online, not Battletech online.

Joseph Mallan, on 25 March 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

AD&D
You were saying?

I don't think you can read.

[Skylarr]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Shadowrun has quite a few active properties and vastly eclpises BT in sales, and I told you AD&D. The first one. The one they don't make things for anymore. That's the one that's worth more than BT.

Either read my posts or don't respond to them. In fact, just don't respond to them at all.

Dungeons & Dragons (abbreviated as D&D^[1] or DnD) is a fantasy, role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974

An updated version of D&D was released as Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D). This was published as a set of three rulebooks, compiled by Gary Gygax, between 1977 and 1979

[Shumabot]

Mercules, on 25 March 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

No, I am NOT advocating a direct transfer. I am advocating building a better game that is based off the TT rules. It isn't hard from a game concept point.

"Players won't like shooting once every 10 seconds" should not = "Let's double the fire rate but keep everything else the same." It should = "Lets increase fire rate and divide the stats given out so it comes out the same." this is really basic ideas, easy concepts.

"Players will want skill based shooting instead of random hits." should not = "Lets have all weapons pinpoint the same spot." it should = "Lets use the mechanic many other FPS games use where weapons fire within a cone depending on how fast they are moving and weapon accuracy. We now have another weapon balance factor and can emulate lower accuracy up close for things like PPCs instead of just reducing damage."

You are creating a bad, random, and unfun game purely because you want to keep the math the same as a tabletop game. That is patently ridiculous. Cone of fire lasers? Mechs unloading into eachother while not moving for 45 seconds until one wins? Goody goody gumdrops, this is really transferring well.

Skylarr, on 25 March 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

Dungeons & Dragons (abbreviated as D&D^[1] or DnD) is a fantasy, role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974

An updated version of D&D was released as Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D). This was published as a set of three rulebooks, compiled by Gary Gygax, between 1977 and 1979

What are you on about? Are you done quoting wikipedias for no reason? What the hell is this in reference to? Go away, troll.


--

Screw it, I'm getting bombarded with ridiculous gold defense force crap and no one here is worth talking to (as is the norm on these forums and is why the designers avoid them).

You win. Whatever.

Edited by Shumabot, 25 March 2013 - 08:29 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

He is saying AD&D was on its 4th revision 4-5 years ago and is looking towards a 5th revision shortly.

[Protection]

It's times like this that you really start to appreciate the internal, tangential, sometimes completely unrelated debates that emerge within those middle ten to twenty pages of a Threadnaught.

[Darius Deadeye]

Reduce the efficiency of DH or reduce the weight of SH to make it more viable.

Make the weight of the SH uneven, ie 0.75 tonnes.

That's how I'd fix it.

[Joseph Mallan]

Personally there isn't a reason to remove single sinks. Reducing the time it takes to cycle heat would solve the Trail Mech issue. 5 seconds would be perfect.

[Skylarr]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

What are you on about? Are you done quoting wikipedias for no reason? What the hell is this in reference to? Go away, troll.

You are the one who said AD&D is old than D&D.

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

The anual revenue and growth of the BT tabletop game is smaller than that of the warlords card game. Another legitimately dead game. It is smaller than AD&D, a 25 year old game that hasn't been updated in 20 of them. BT is dead. That you enjoy means nothing when anyone with a middle class salary could buy the licence outright as long as they took on the debt.

Is this your estimated guess? Please show me were you saw this info.