475 replies to this topic

[TheForce]

Thomas Hogarth, on 09 November 2011 - 05:00 AM, said:

Personally, I'd like to see inaccuracy handled with forced chaining. You fire a weapon group, the more weapons in it, the more random spread of points in time where the weapons are fired. We're talking about half a second to maybe full second range here, so don't go crazy. This will make laser boating less effective, and be more visually interesting to boot.

That's a noble idea...

[Mchawkeye]

Zyllos, on 09 November 2011 - 09:09 AM, said:

Not sure why people are talking about IS vs. Clan stuff anyhow. I thought the devs have stated there will be no clan stuff in the beginning. If this is wrong, then excuse me and continue debating.

But about the weapon convergance and hit/miss related to a mech warrior and in-game play, a cone of fire that increases/decreases with currently performed actions, mech warrior skill, and current weapons in the weapon group. Standing still with a single PPC in your weapon group on a veteran mech warrior? Small cone of fire. Walking forward with your torso turning to the left to unload 2 SRM-2s with 2 Small Lasers on an average mech warrior? Medium sized cone of fire. Running full blast while jump jetting and alpha striking a target on a green mech warrior, huge cone of fire. You catch the gist of the idea, it looks good on paper. Now to see what the devs think and actually implement.

Well they did say they timed it so the clan invasion was right around the corner, so I wouldn't expect Clan right of the bat, but reasonably soon after the start.

As for the cone of fire. I think we all get the idea...Some of us are just not sold on it though...

[Korbyn McColl]

Zyllos, on 09 November 2011 - 09:09 AM, said:

Not sure why people are talking about IS vs. Clan stuff anyhow. I thought the devs have stated there will be no clan stuff in the beginning. If this is wrong, then excuse me and continue debating.

But about the weapon convergance and hit/miss related to a mech warrior and in-game play, a cone of fire that increases/decreases with currently performed actions, mech warrior skill, and current weapons in the weapon group. Standing still with a single PPC in your weapon group on a veteran mech warrior? Small cone of fire. Walking forward with your torso turning to the left to unload 2 SRM-2s with 2 Small Lasers on an average mech warrior? Medium sized cone of fire. Running full blast while jump jetting and alpha striking a target on a green mech warrior, huge cone of fire. You catch the gist of the idea, it looks good on paper. Now to see what the devs think and actually implement.

Oh, and about BV, it also seems good on paper. I think they need to go with a combined approach dependent on the mission. Mission is a surgical strike behind enemy lines? Make the attacking team have a smaller amount of tonnage compaired to the defending team. BV should always be the same.

Aye. The game is set to begin in 3049, right as the Clans begin their invasions (though no one really knows who or what they are till 3050, I think).

As for the devs saying they wouldn't be playable, they said they wouldn't be playable at the start.

It really depends on the direction they go. It's quite possible that this game will stay as MechWarrior Mercenaries Online (hey, the URL is www.mwomercs.com afterall). If so, the whole discussion is mute. But I suspect they'll add in the Houses and Clans as playable factions at a later date (maybe for a RM fee).

Edited by devil man, 09 November 2011 - 09:40 AM.

[TheForce]

red beard, on 09 November 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Mchawkeye is just trying to get the admins attention by crying about riptor. I think that is what happens when a guy starts to lose an argument. They start to cry foul, like Mchawkeye is. All that tells us is that round one and two go to riptor.

Here's a tissue Hawkeye. Looks like you need it.

Ya you're probably right

red beard, on 08 November 2011 - 10:43 PM, said:

You are simply going to have to get it through your bean. 90 percent of the people that will play this game DO NOT CARE about the BT rule set. It worked for the TT game and that is all. Let it go.

People want a game that makes sense and plays with a sense of semi-reality. The TT rules will hobble that feeling, invariably. Sit down fanboi.

[wolf on the tide]

theres so much "history and lore" to this.

a far better question would be..." how much of this are they going to utilize, and how much are they going to leave out?"

is ALL the combat going to be in city's ? (devs have mentioned trying to avoid the old circle/strafe fights...but "mech's" in city's is actually poor doctrine...same as tanks in WW2. if it's all just city fights, how long until people are bored senceless and go to play other games?)

will other vehicles be utilized at a later date ?
will the game worlds be expanded so you can do stuff outside the mech?
will pilot skill progression have skills you use outside the battlebot? or is it all cockpit based sim? if so, most of the intrigue of the books is lost
or is this just "battletech-online?"

i see those as far bigger questions than "will the computer number crunching be based on 2D6?"

just 2pence worth

[Kalunta]

BV is a great model to adapt. Additional restrictions could apply to special situations, say a coop, scout or spy unit dropping behind enemy lines, but BV is a good general starting point. This should also balance the Clans and Clan tech vs IS.

[TheForce]

Kalunta, on 09 November 2011 - 09:43 AM, said:

scout or spy unit dropping behind enemy lines,

omfg i love that idea!

[Mchawkeye]

wolf on the tide, on 09 November 2011 - 09:41 AM, said:

theres so much "history and lore" to this.

a far better question would be..." how much of this are they going to utilize, and how much are they going to leave out?"

is ALL the combat going to be in city's ? (devs have mentioned trying to avoid the old circle/strafe fights...but "mech's" in city's is actually poor doctrine...same as tanks in WW2. if it's all just city fights, how long until people are bored senceless and go to play other games?)

will other vehicles be utilized at a later date ?
will the game worlds be expanded so you can do stuff outside the mech?
will pilot skill progression have skills you use outside the battlebot? or is it all cockpit based sim? if so, most of the intrigue of the books is lost
or is this just "battletech-online?"

i see those as far bigger questions than "will the computer number crunching be based on 2D6?"

just 2pence worth

Not all the combat will be urban, they have said that.
It is going to be a cockpit based Sim. I doubt that will change, but you never know.
They've said no to any other armour currently. I suspect that might change.

I think discussing how they implement game features is certainly worthwhile. As you can see from this thread...people have a lot of ideas...if they Devs have even ten percent of the Inspiration and voracity shown in this forum then I think we'll be onto something worthwhile.

[Kalunta]

Cavadus, on 09 November 2011 - 08:51 AM, said:

Sorry, I edited my post before you replied.



So you want to gimp yourself arbitrarily? Why? Is there any reason beyond you simply being an IS fanboy?

Any casual player who rolls into MWO will see that clan tech is superior and that most of their mechs are omnis. If that's the case there will be absolutely no reason to play IS and those players which do will be put at a huge and pointless disadvantage.

It'd be terrible the game. It's time to let go of the stuff that made Battletech suck. This is a game that needs balanced factions. You can't hand out the insane advantages that the clans get and still expect players to gimp themselves in the name for some poorly written lore.

That would be horrible for the game and it simply wouldn't work.

Wow... So much fear and hatred for such a great franchise and all that is manifest from it. I'm sorry, but your words here make me sad.

[wolf on the tide]

Mchawkeye, on 09 November 2011 - 09:53 AM, said:

if they Devs have even ten percent of the Inspiration and voracity shown in this forum then I think we'll be onto something worthwhile.

good point well made.

think the questions mute to all intents and purposes though, if you want the free PC version of battletech the board game you just trawl the web because it's out there( i found it listed as something like meckamechs or mechamecks a few years ago)

what i'm hoping for ...in the ideal world of me... is that there will be more to this than just getting in a mech and shooting stuff ,thats "battletech" to my mind. where as mechwarrior was more about the whole millenue and what the pilots did , in and out side the mech.


EDIT:- the free (PC) board game is called "MegaMek" and the direct d/load link is http://megamek.info/downloads#MML

Edited by wolf on the tide, 09 November 2011 - 11:33 AM.

[Thomas Hogarth]

TheForce, on 09 November 2011 - 09:13 AM, said:

That's a noble idea...

Thanks!

Wait, noble as in "neat but unworkable?" I'd love to have someone shoot holes in the idea.

[Halfinax]

It could use some tweaking. I don't see why you would need to restrict the 'Mechs the players can use. If they want to blow all their BV and tonnage on a single Atlas to try and sneakily infiltrate then it's their grave.

[Mchawkeye]

wolf on the tide, on 09 November 2011 - 10:10 AM, said:

good point well made.

think the questions mute to all intents and purposes though, if you want the free PC version of battletech the board game you just trawl the web because it's out there( i found it listed as something like meckamechs or mechamecks a few years ago)

what i'm hoping for ...in the ideal world of me... is that there will be more to this than just getting in a mech and shooting stuff ,thats "battletech" to my mind. where as mechwarrior was more about the whole millenue and what the pilots did , in and out side the mech.

That would make a game of great complexity, we can only hope that something out there achieves that.

sadly I think you are going to be disappointed...while I think there will be great depth in terms of strategy, and various RPG and mechlab elements, that all works toward strapping into a mech and fighting battles in one way or another.

[Odin]

Mchawkeye is just trying to get the admins attention by crying about riptor. I think that is what happens when a guy starts to lose an argument. They start to cry foul, like Mchawkeye is. All that tells us is that round one and two go to riptor.

Here's a tissue Hawkeye. Looks like you need it.

You are simply going to have to get it through your bean. 90 percent of the people that will play this game DO NOT CARE about the BT rule set. It worked for the TT game and that is all. Let it go.

People want a game that makes sense and plays with a sense of semi-reality. The TT rules will hobble that feeling, invariably. Sit down fanboi.

Thats actually a point AGAINST you then one for you.

_______________________________________________________

And the winner is:


For the guy complaining about a person's TONE in text, you might want to reconsider name calling and trying to belittle the person making fair and valid points that contradict yours.

Riptor is right there is no ballistic physics with light based weaponry ......

_________________________________________________________



Mchawkeye,
the Trolls don't want you, don't feed them .
This topic is beyond any hope.

Its all down to small ego's unfortunately.

[Halfinax]

Odin, on 09 November 2011 - 11:01 AM, said:

Mchawkeye is just trying to get the admins attention by crying about riptor. I think that is what happens when a guy starts to lose an argument. They start to cry foul, like Mchawkeye is. All that tells us is that round one and two go to riptor.

Here's a tissue Hawkeye. Looks like you need it.

You are simply going to have to get it through your bean. 90 percent of the people that will play this game DO NOT CARE about the BT rule set. It worked for the TT game and that is all. Let it go.

People want a game that makes sense and plays with a sense of semi-reality. The TT rules will hobble that feeling, invariably. Sit down fanboi.

Thats actually a point AGAINST you then one for you.

_______________________________________________________

And the winner is:


For the guy complaining about a person's TONE in text, you might want to reconsider name calling and trying to belittle the person making fair and valid points that contradict yours.

Riptor is right there is no ballistic physics with light based weaponry ......

_________________________________________________________



Mchawkeye,
the Trolls don't want you, don't feed them .
This topic is beyond any hope.

Its all down to small ego's unfortunately.

What is your post adding to the conversation, and what was your point?

It has been productive with occasional falling off the rails. It had been back on track until you decided to make some inane point accusing people with a differing opinion to be trolls.

As far as more than just strap into a 'Mech and be the Mechwarrior outside of the battlefield the devs have been pretty clear that you won't be leaving the 'Mech in the foreseeable future, but I'm sure there will continue to be great references to both the canon and eventually the feats and blunders of all of us Mechwarriors once the game launches. I think most RP type stuff will be handled on the forums though.

[TheForce]

Thomas Hogarth, on 09 November 2011 - 10:14 AM, said:

Thanks!

Wait, noble as in "neat but unworkable?" I'd love to have someone shoot holes in the idea.

Noble as in what spicoli from fast times would say.

I think it has potential...

Edited by TheForce, 09 November 2011 - 12:11 PM.

[wanderer]

gregsolidus, on 08 November 2011 - 05:35 PM, said:

I still can't grasp the exact problem with boating.Without coolant a laserboat must dedicate a good portion of its weight to heat sinks if it wants to fire at an effective rate,a missile boat needs copioud ammo and may be foiled due to changes made to ECM,and any other gimmick boat will come with its own set of exploitable short comings.

The point to boating in the MW series is that you could pump obscene amounts of damage into a single spot, easily crippling or killing the target while you watched the fireworks and cooled down. Pinpoint targeting generally lets you pull off those instant-kill focused fire tricks, which is why it frankly stunk so bad in the Mechwarrior series to date. It doesn't capture the feel of the original game at all, and it leads to Stupid Alpha Tricks.

[guardiandashi]

one thing that would help (and be canon) is that instaid of having 1 crosshair for the mech as a whole is you have the aiming crosshair and then pointer indicators where each weapon is "actually" aiming IE I put a marker and center it on my opponants torso I am piloting a nova prime as I aim there are 12 little dots moving on the screen trying to follow my targeting pointer

since the nova has all its weapons in the arms the tracking should "mostly" be in 2 clusters of 6 but there will be some "fine tuning aiming" of the lasers in each cluster

I also like the suggestion having the guns chain or "ripple" fire never all fire simultaniously.

[Kudzu]

Mchawkeye, on 09 November 2011 - 09:16 AM, said:

As for the cone of fire. I think we all get the idea...Some of us are just not sold on it though...

Have you actually played a game using it? World of Tanks, though it had plenty of problems elsewhere, had COF for shooting and it lead to some interesting tactical choices. Do I sit still and shoot better while being easier to hit? Do I take the powerful but inaccurate gun over the less powerful but more accurate gun? Moving the MW series away from "highspeed, pinpoint accurate alpha strikes" will lead to more involving games, especially if they couple in a few other suggestions floating around like BV matches, no respawn, etc.

So yeah, it might mean that the Hunchback pilot will need to use the terrain to get in really close, and he might need to slow down to let the circle shrink a bit before he rips his target a new one... but it also means the Hunchie won't be instantly crippled by a Marauder who's running full out, targeting his left leg and never missing at 1500 meters. It balances out in the end and it balances out for the better.

COF would be a great way to represent a lot of what makes Battletech Battletech. You keep forgetting that it's set in an alternate universe where things don't always match up to the real world, most of us TT vets are fully familiar with "BT physics" and the shenanigans it causes when you think too hard about it. However, it's fun, colorful, and different. The closer they can make it feel like the TT the better.

[Mchawkeye]

Kudzu, on 09 November 2011 - 02:00 PM, said:

COF would be a great way to represent a lot of what makes Battletech Battletech. You keep forgetting that it's set in an alternate universe where things don't always match up to the real world, most of us TT vets are fully familiar with "BT physics" and the shenanigans it causes when you think too hard about it. However, it's fun, colorful, and different. The closer they can make it feel like the TT the better.

I really don't keep forgetting at all. Though I do think, perhaps, that "what makes Battletech Battletech" is incredibly subjective. And what I happen to value is probably different to you, and that's fine: I'm sure the Devs are finding amongst them selves that the game is the culmination of what everyone else thinks is important; that way, nothing should get overlooked.

Yes, I've played games with CoF. From my point of view, its a very frustrating method of solving issues. it certainly adds a challenge, but at what cost? I've stated before and will happily do so again, it's a simulation, at least in part, lets simulate as best we can.
Cof, in my eyes, is a short cut to solve issues that can probably be fixed with less affected means.