64 replies to this topic

[Unbound Inferno]

Gaan Cathal, on 20 June 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Exaggeration for effect on my part, although some CoF systems do actually produce that effect though, and we can't say PGI have never accidentally let something utterly ridiculous through their QA before (LRMpocalypse comes to mind).

That said, CoF will drive people away by taking control of their mech out of their hands. Re-implementing convergence won't. Both will reduce the easy pinpoint alphas. One (convergence) can be partially mitigated by intentional player action (aka skill) and the other (CoF) is entirely arbitrary. Additionally, the code for one is already in the game, and has a pilot skill associated with it (convergence) and the other would require recoding a huge chunk of the weapon fire mechanics.

Convergence > Cone of Fire. Drastically so.

Oh, I agree - mostly.

Completely on the convergence part, at most the width of your mech is essentially the variable of accuracy - and the optimal Long range is where pinpoint is easiest, so its hard to misjudge that. The most I see is a longer delay for the adjustable convergence that is affected by ECM, movement and overall heat. The hotter, faster you run the longer it takes for your system to acquire that good shot where you can.

But a Cone of what I'd love to see is a penalty for running hot frequently. I need to brood over the initial idea, but basically its where if you push your mech near or past max where you begin to suffer damage it causes an increasing cone of effect on accuracy making shooting harder. It would encourage running your mech correctly than suffer increasingly difficult aiming. Its completely preventable - just don't overheat - but it would be a massive penalty for the majority of boaters that do such a thing. Or something like that - maybe some of what Naut says on moving fast too. Really need to think more on that one...

[stjobe]

I don't really care how they do it, but unless they make this feel like it's about 'mech combat in the BattleTech Universe (and for those of you who just gagged, MechWarrior is part of that universe) I'm out.

I've played BattleTech for nigh on 30 years now (started with 2nd edition in the mid-80s), and that's what I want this game to be about.

I don't care if they follow the BT rules by the letter, but they better damn well follow the spirit of them, or this will never be a game set in the BattleTech Universe - it'll just be stompy robot combat with a borrowed name. And that's not something I'm interested in playing or paying for.

[Jestun]

This is not a simulation of the tabletop game, and it should not try to be.

Compare Blood Bowl with any NFL game, one simulates a turn-based boardgame based on American Football and the other simulated American Football.

I want a MechWarrior game, not a tabletop conversion.

:Edit:

For those too lazy to search...

Blood Bowl (skip to 1 minute):


NFL 12 (skip to about 2:45):

Edited by Jestun, 21 June 2013 - 07:12 AM.

[Mercules]

Jestun, on 21 June 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

This is not a simulation of the tabletop game, and it should not try to be.

Compare Blood Bowl with any NFL game, one simulates a turn-based boardgame based on American Football and the other simulated American Football.

Yes, one remains faithful to a TT game it emulates so you can play it ONLINE instead of having to travel to a gamestore and find an opponent. That would be Bloodbowl. and it doesn't "simulate" the turn base boardgame. It -IS- the turn-based boardgame. We have a version of that called MegaMek and it works excellent.

Most TT enthusiast want a simulated Mechwarrior game. Notice that in American Football sim the players can't leap 50 yards. It is grounded in the rules of reality and the game. Well, the reality of mechwarrior is based off of Battletech. So even though you could just change everything to whatever you want it wouldn't be Mechwarrior anymore than an NFL Game where the players can leap 50 yards would be a true NFL game.

[Zyllos]

I still wonder why almost every major FPS in the past utilized a CoF while only allowing the player to shoot one weapon at a time while MWO does not utilize a CoF and it allows players to fire multiple weapons at the same time?

Just because it will allow players to fire multiple weapons, there should be a CoF introduced.

But, CoF so not be introduced if you are only firing a single AC/20 or Gauss Rifle, or a couple of PPCs, or couple of Large Lasers, or 4 Medium Lasers, several ACs.

So, if you control how often you fire weapons, you will hit exactly where you aim. But if you don't care about where your shots land within a CoF, then just fire as fast a possible.

That is what would bring balance. Want to fire many weapons in a huge alpha strike? Then you can only control where the cone if pointed at. Want some accuracy in your shots? Fire only a few weapons and chain them to continue the accuracy.

Super simple and doesn't effect the heat system with some off the wall, lazy, arbitrary system that adds heat when firing ONLY the same weapon multiple times. That system is just asinine and adds nothing to the game!

[Jestun]

Mercules, on 21 June 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Yes, one remains faithful to a TT game it emulates so you can play it ONLINE instead of having to travel to a gamestore and find an opponent. That would be Bloodbowl. and it doesn't "simulate" the turn base boardgame. It -IS- the turn-based boardgame. We have a version of that called MegaMek and it works excellent.

No, it simulates it. It is a simulated board with simulated units. There is nothing physical about it, it's all virtual. It's a replication in a new media, it is not a board game.

Quote

Most TT enthusiast want a simulated Mechwarrior game. Notice that in American Football sim the players can't leap 50 yards. It is grounded in the rules of reality and the game. Well, the reality of mechwarrior is based off of Battletech. So even though you could just change everything to whatever you want it wouldn't be Mechwarrior anymore than an NFL Game where the players can leap 50 yards would be a true NFL game.

This is a simulated MechWarrior game. It's not a simulated TT game. It's based on TT / books, not the same thing reproduced in a different media. It works differently and some lore has to be broken for the same of balance and gameplay.

Edited by Jestun, 21 June 2013 - 07:43 AM.

[Tombstoner]

PEEFsmash, on 20 June 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

You mean, why would you CHOOSE to base gameplay on mechanics on games from 10+ years ago, rather than basing gameplay on 30 year old inconsistent books and board games?

Because the implementation of the 10+ old MW variates excelled in single player, but where flawed for multi player

Fix whats wrong with multiplayer (high damage alphas hitting the same location) and then expand/ fix the 30+ year old source materiel.

Edited by Tombstoner, 21 June 2013 - 07:50 AM.

[Lostdragon]

I think you can make a great video game based on the board game mechanics. Compromises will be necessary and it requires a very holistic approach but it can be done.

I think Dawn of War is a great example of this. For those unfamiliar, it is a RTS based on Warhammer 40k. I think that game was able to stay true to the spirit of the tabletop game as well as the look and feel but it deviated from the TT rules where necessary. Of course not everyone agrees but I personally love DoW and (most of) its expansions. I still play Dark Crusade pretty regularly.

MWO is pretty close to being a really good game, there just needs to be a few changes to make it balanced and I think it can be very successful.

[PhantomRX]

Well I think the accuracy in this game is too accurate tbh. The amount of time I get ct/cored even from rediculas ranges is utter tosh. What happened to mechs getting arms blew off of legged. Its simply a case of aim anywhere near the bulk of a mech u ht its ct most of the time from ANY range.

[Seddrik]

With the choices you give... there is ONLY bias in the poll.

NO. (Easier) Should we balance MWO numbers to make it easier and remain more Mechwarrior?
NO. (Harder) Or should we balance the mechanics- specifically accuracy - to make it feel mroe Battletech?
I.e. Any other choice than what I offer is LAZY. NO. (Lazy) I don't care which, gimme my game.

How about none of the above! What was on paper is not how you play a FPS, that is just reality. The more you randomize and take away a players SKILL the more you kill the excitement of a FPS. Similarities exist of course with the paper game, but taking away player skill & ability to be accurate is not the answer.

The problem is super high alphas. But like the poptart solution (which affected all JJs used on all mechs, even mechs that were not poptarts or high long distance alphas), I'm expecting an eventual resolution that will not just reduce alpha strike max damage but sweepingly affect all mechs and all weapons. Thats the PGI way currently.

Edited by Seddrik, 21 June 2013 - 08:08 AM.

[Jestun]

Lostdragon, on 21 June 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

I think you can make a great video game based on the board game mechanics. Compromises will be necessary and it requires a very holistic approach but it can be done.

I think Dawn of War is a great example of this. For those unfamiliar, it is a RTS based on Warhammer 40k. I think that game was able to stay true to the spirit of the tabletop game as well as the look and feel but it deviated from the TT rules where necessary. Of course not everyone agrees but I personally love DoW and (most of) its expansions. I still play Dark Crusade pretty regularly.

MWO is pretty close to being a really good game, there just needs to be a few changes to make it balanced and I think it can be very successful.

I don't disagree, and for the record I own Blood Bowl, BB: Dark Elves Edition & BB: Legendary (everything except the newest chaos version) so I'm fine with direct TT conversions too.

But MWO is was designed, developed and marketed not as a TT simulation but as what is essentially an FPS. It is it's own game and like DoW it will need to deviate from lore when required.

Edited by Jestun, 21 June 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[Mercules]

Jestun, on 21 June 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

No, it simulates it. It is a simulated board with simulated units. There is nothing physical about it, it's all virtual. It's a replication in a new media, it is not a board game.

Wow.. let me guess... If I played Bloodbowl with Chits it would be a simulation because I used chits and not actual models? You do understand what a figure in a miniature game like bloodbowl is, right? It is a placeholder, a simulation of something. Changing it from a physical placeholder to an electronic placeholder with the exact same properties does not change it from being a placeholder.

Settlers of Catan has several perfect translations of the game from the physical media to the virtual media. Magic the Gathering has the same thing. That digital card functions exactly as it's physical counter part. The game is completely unchanged. It is not a simulation of the game, it is the actual game in digital format.

A simulation is an enactment or imitation of something. The cards might be a digital simulation of the physical cards, but the game is not a simulation. It is the actual game, using the exact rules, in a different medium. For Bloodbowl you move figures based upon certain stats they have and use dice to determine outcomes of actions. This is true for the digital and physical version of the game and therefor it is not a simulation of the game... it is the game.

Same with MegaMek and Battletech. It is not a simulation it IS the game.

Jestun, on 21 June 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

This is a simulated MechWarrior game. It's not a simulated TT game. It's based on TT / books, not the same thing reproduced in a different media. It works differently and some lore has to be broken for the same of balance and gameplay.

Why are you arguing that? I stated that. The problem is that the LORE can't be broke or you are not playing Mechwarrior. Mechwarrior, BTW, is part of the TT rules. There was a TT book called Mechwarrior and the first computer games based off Battletech borrowed that. The original Mechwarrior rule book was specific rules for being a Mechwarrior or person in the Battletech universe. It is in the TT universe as were all the games.

If you were a sports enthusiast and were playing an NFL based game would you possible be upset if field goals only scored 2 points or maybe if they only counted if they were kicked from greater than 20 yards away? What if we didn't deal with rules of the game but instead the video game simply wouldn't let a Lineman recover a fumble. In the universe of football linemen recover fumbles all the time, but in the video game only those who are typically posted off the line can recover a fumble. That would upset you because it is against the nature of football and is really jarring to the football world. In fact you might just say, "Well, this game isn't really a football sim because in football if a lineman forced the QB to fumble he could then recover it and he can't here."

So really you have to stay true to the theme and the lore or you really don't have an NFL Football game or you don't have a Mechwarrior game.

[Mercules]

Jestun, on 21 June 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

I don't disagree, and for the record I own Blood Bowl, BB: Dark Elves Edition & BB: Legendary (everything except the newest chaos version) so I'm fine with direct TT conversions too.

But MWO is was designed, developed and marketed not as a TT simulation but as what is essentially an FPS. It is it's own game and like DoW it will need to deviate from lore when required.

NO! It will need to deviate from specific rules when required but it should NEVER deviate from the Lore.

Spacemarines in DoW don't suddenly decide Daemons are okay and start summoning them. Tau don't suddenly have units with Psycher powers for "Gameplay Balance".

[Unbound Inferno]

Jestun, on 21 June 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

This is not a simulation of the tabletop game, and it should not try to be.

Compare Blood Bowl with any NFL game, one simulates a turn-based boardgame based on American Football and the other simulated American Football.

I want a MechWarrior game, not a tabletop conversion.

You misunderstand. I don't want turn-based, but I do want this to feel like Battletech. Old, outdated parts duct-taped together to make a walking tank that occasionally unreliable and dangerous if you play reckless. I want this MWO to be the real-time brawl it sounded like, based off the old battletech - not just another ludicrious MW title that is only best as a single-player blast 'em up game. Something challenging, and fun. Not this horrific misguided game where they use inappropriate values and patch things up to hide the issue at hand.

I don't doubt it can be fixed - but the only real solution to me would be harder but to accept a level of inaccuracy, or the easier of reworking the armor and damage numbers to give mechs the surviveability then need so its not a peekaboo ones hot game.

Besides, if we'd wanted to play a turn-based copy of battletech, there is Mechwarrior Tactics I think that's pretty much it.

Seddrik, on 21 June 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

With the choices you give... there is ONLY bias in the poll.

NO. (Easier) Should we balance MWO numbers to make it easier and remain more Mechwarrior?
NO. (Harder) Or should we balance the mechanics- specifically accuracy - to make it feel mroe Battletech?
I.e. Any other choice than what I offer is LAZY. NO. (Lazy) I don't care which, gimme my game.

How about none of the above! What was on paper is not how you play a FPS, that is just reality. The more you randomize and take away a players SKILL the more you kill the excitement of a FPS. Similarities exist of course with the paper game, but taking away player skill & ability to be accurate is not the answer.

The problem is super high alphas. But like the poptart solution (which affected all JJs used on all mechs, even mechs that were not poptarts or high long distance alphas), I'm expecting an eventual resolution that will not just reduce alpha strike max damage but sweepingly affect all mechs and all weapons. Thats the PGI way currently.

Read the post, thread and answer again. I don't think you got beyond the poll there.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 21 June 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[Mercules]

Unbound Inferno, on 21 June 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

Besides, if we'd wanted to play a turn-based copy of battletech, there is Mechwarrior Tactics I think that's pretty much it.

Ugh, when I last tried Tactics it was Battletech flavored but not TT Battletech. It was a horrible interpretation of it. Don't get me wrong, it had some interesting features but it was poorly done. Mega-Mek still rules the day for TT. It even lets you EASILY use Double Blind rules where ECM, BAP, Sensors, and scouting really become useful.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Table top is not compatible with this style of FPS shooter. Why? Because weapon's with stats designed around a turn-based mechanic don't always translate into a real time play type. The game types are too different.

The BT rules I am sure work great in Mechwarrior Tactics (turn based), but not in MWO. A real time game needs some exceptions to better tweak the weapons.

[Acid Phase]

At this point it needs to extend far beyond 3 minutes of match time. As battletech lore would have it, battles lasted long period of time. If matches ended near 15 minutes and there would be enough kills on both ends, well it was a good game.

[Mercules]

Acid Phase, on 21 June 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

At this point it needs to extend far beyond 3 minutes of match time. As battletech lore would have it, battles lasted long period of time. If matches ended near 15 minutes and there would be enough kills on both ends, well it was a good game.

Most of a TT game is maneuvering. You often spend several full turns just getting to where you start the cat and mouse maneuvering before even firing. At that point you cat and mouse a bit with shots fired that are unlikely to hit. Eventually one person makes a mistake or has something happen like they fall, and the other moves to exploit it and the full on brawl is started.

I rarely see any of this in MWO and I think it is because the maps are too small, the timer too short, and the damage doubled and tripled. It is a bit too common to see a 3-4 minute match that didn't end in a Cap.

[Unbound Inferno]

MeiSooHaityu, on 21 June 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Table top is not compatible with this style of FPS shooter. Why? Because weapon's with stats designed around a turn-based mechanic don't always translate into a real time play type. The game types are too different.

The BT rules I am sure work great in Mechwarrior Tactics (turn based), but not in MWO. A real time game needs some exceptions to better tweak the weapons.

The only real change so far is the addition of time. Weapons deal damage, generate heat and consume ammo. Mechs are armored and shots are made - but here in MWO we have pinpoint perfect accuracy with all fo the weapons at the same time. The damage, heat and ammo is focused around each weapon being shot in essential chain-fire all the time - the grouping and alphastrike abilities don't mesh well, even though I think both are great for the FPS atmosphere here. We just need to tweak the accuracy which isn't easy to give us the spread damage so the numbers and gameplay is elongated and more fun for everyone.


The only other glaring deviation is that in Battletech I think pretty much all weapons have identical recharge times - once every turn. The aspect of time here has added the recharge which each weapon is slightly different, that should be better reflected in the weapon damage IMO. But that might be a bit much to ask at this point.

[Tombstoner]

Lostdragon, on 21 June 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

I think you can make a great video game based on the board game mechanics. Compromises will be necessary and it requires a very holistic approach but it can be done.

I think Dawn of War is a great example of this. For those unfamiliar, it is a RTS based on Warhammer 40k. I think that game was able to stay true to the spirit of the tabletop game as well as the look and feel but it deviated from the TT rules where necessary. Of course not everyone agrees but I personally love DoW and (most of) its expansions. I still play Dark Crusade pretty regularly.

MWO is pretty close to being a really good game, there just needs to be a few changes to make it balanced and I think it can be very successful.

I completely agree. without the DOW games i would never touch 40K