105 replies to this topic

[Tharimiar]

Its in battletech lore, ammo feed systems can bring stored ammo from any part of the mech to any other part. They always talk about how the ammo feed system is the worst part of building a mech

source: battletech starter box manuals (either core rules or inner sphere at a glance, i forget which)

[MustrumRidcully]

armyof1, on 06 April 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

It's pointless to claim things should be according to TT when there already are all these tweaks and changes to the rules in the first place and you know it. If I start a chess game with 3 queens, I can't still claim it's chess just because all other rules are still the same. MWO uses the parts that makes sense in an FPS and change the parts that don't. So asking for TT rules at this point is meaningless. What makes sense is asking for things that works in the game while avoiding parts that break it, which might or might not be according to TT.

No, MW:O doesn'T use parts that make sense in an FPS and changed parts that didn't. It's just a weird mix of TT stuff and self-made arbitrary changes.

Double Armour supposedly was implemented because combat was too fast. Completely understandeable. But why then give mechs triple the DPS? (And Triple the heat generation, without adjusting heat sinks? Didn't they consider that part of the balance of weapons was based on factors like range and damage per shot vs the investment in weight made via the weapon itself and ammo, and that increasing the DPS and HPS of a weapon that has most of this cost tied up in the weapon weight and not the heat sinks will make this weapon stronger this way then a weapon whose cost are mostly tied up in heat sinks?)
If only pin-point aiming was too be dressed by double armour to avoid instant kills, why keep the old armour ratios that only worked reasonably in the table top because on how hit locations were randomly assigned most of the time, not player-chosen? Isn't it obvious that with mouse aim and convergence, there is little reason to delibarely go after an arm if a center torso kill is likely to be faster than literally disarming a mech? And hey, speaking of instant shots - why give mechs such high heat capacities so that it becomes more feasible to alpha-strike other mechs to death?

There is a lot guessing and randomly changing things involved, rather than forethought and deliberate design. Adopting to a real time game with player aiming via mouse requires changes from the table top, but that doesn't mean that any change will do.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 06 April 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Wow I gave a solid answer with canonical proof and this thread is still going I feel people are about to enter a state of special that I haven't seen for a long time.

You can not argue the logic of science fiction canon as it is illogical to begin with until it becomes a logical reality that is.

[armyof1]

MustrumRidcully, on 06 April 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

No, MW:O doesn'T use parts that make sense in an FPS and changed parts that didn't. It's just a weird mix of TT stuff and self-made arbitrary changes.

Double Armour supposedly was implemented because combat was too fast. Completely understandeable. But why then give mechs triple the DPS?
If only pin-point aiming was too be adressed by armour, why keep the old armour ratios that only worked reasonably in the table top because on how hit locations were randomly assigned most of the time, not player-chosen? Isn't it obvious that with mouse aim and convergence, there is little reason to delibarely go after an arm if a center torso kill is likely to be faster than literally disarming a mech?

There is a lot guessing and randomly changing things involved, rather than forethought and smart design. Adopting to a real time game with player aiming via mouse requires changes from the table top, but that doesn't mean that any change will do.

My point is there is no reason to claim something should be a certain way just because it says so in the TT rules, because that rule might or might not fit in an FPS and might as well be changed or even ignored if it works better in-game. I mean we have removed the tossing of a dice here, which is a central part of any TT. Why would it make sense to keep all the other rules when the core of it isn't part of the game?

[Joseph Mallan]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 06 April 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

Wow I gave a solid answer with canonical proof and this thread is still going I feel people are about to enter a state of special that I haven't seen for a long time.

You can not argue the logic of science fiction canon as it is illogical to begin with until it becomes a logical reality that is.

Oh You know us gamer fans. There ain't no argument finished till we say it's done. Even if the OP hasn't posted again since the very first OP. and hadn't posted before that since Dec!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 April 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Klaa]

LordDeathStrike, on 05 April 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

...

btw when you leg a mech with ammo in the leg, that ammo blows up, and has a very high chance of taking out the engine when it does, 100% chance if it had an xl engine.

Heh why I always take potshots at lesser armored legs.