21 replies to this topic

[Kannen]

j

Edited by Kannen, 05 September 2013 - 04:20 AM.

[GroxGlitch]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

...made this game for a very few hard core Battletech fans...

Say that to the 67,710 Founders (http://mwomercs.com/...unders-numbers/) who contributed based solely on what PGI said was expressly going to be in the game. Sounds like a lot more than a few hardcore battletech fans to me...
Also, you can pick your mech for the battle grounds; you can choose which mech you drop in from the Mechlab.

Edited by GroxGlitch, 29 June 2013 - 12:57 PM.

[Pinselborste]

GroxGlitch, on 29 June 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Say that to the 67,710 Founders (http://mwomercs.com/...unders-numbers/) who contributed based solely on what PGI said was expressly going to be in the game. Sounds like a lot more than a few hardcore battletech fans to me...
Also, you can pick your mech for the battle grounds; you can choose which mech you drop in from the Mechlab.

there where so many People buying founders cause PGI didnt say that they wont Change things like autocanon damage even if it could help Balance, majority doesnt care about 10 damage for an AC/10 but they care for a balanced game wich doesnt work if you use TT stats in a game with totally different mechanics.

[GroxGlitch]

I'd say a fair amount of them are still happy with it, considering the community we have that plays the game. While, yes, some have been dissatisfied over the course things have taken here lately, I get the feeling myself that a number of them will return at release after Community Warfare and UI 2.0 are released; these two elements will re-work a large portion of the game and, again saying opinion here, breathe new life into it. Hey, I could be dead wrong, but that's what I get the feeling of...
To make a point, if you feel that the game is so terrible, what changes would you enact to make it better?

[Pinselborste]

one of the main things to make the game better would be to rebalance all weapons, wich means a Change of damage, heat, range, ammo per ton, firerate, projectile Speed to create weapon stats that work with the mechanics of MWO instead of trying to use stats that where made to work with the TT game.

[Kannen]

3 life battles, and i chat room. I dunno where u are seeing what map your playing and picking your mech but I'm not.

[Cubivorre]

Likes his own posts.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Cubivorre, on 29 June 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

Likes his own posts.

[Stormwolf]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

MechWarrior was fun this is not. You made this game for a very few hard core Battletech fans and it is just not fun to play.

ROFL, I'd actually be playing this game if it was aimed at the very few hard core Battletech fans.

Anywho, enjoy your troll thread.

[Hawkeye 72]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

3 life battles,

3 lives? Do you have a carbon monoxide leak in your cockpit? This is a bad thread

Edited by Hawkeye 72, 29 June 2013 - 03:20 PM.

[Vilemind]

"I played Mechwarrior from DOS..."
But you know so little about the gaming background that led to Mechwarrior (Crecent Hawks Inception and Revenge) and that they were based verbatim on tabletop Battetech.
As was the original Mechwarrior 1 game.

It is a long, long way from hardcore tabletop - and it plays effectively the same way as MW2 through 4 ever did.

Oh - barring that they are working to keep light and medium mechs viable (admittedly with a fair way to go for mediums) rather than the "Rush to the heaviest chassis roflstomp everthing while moving at 30km/hr with your multiple gauss that was MW2 etc."

If it was table top it would be 90% light and medium mechs, half the armour, a third the weapon fire rate, and mechs suffering massive damage when they overheat, as well as one shot kills that found a weak point in the armour.

Learn to troll better. You are an embarrassment to trolls everywhere.

[Adridos]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

I'm just saying it is NOT a Mechwarrior game its a Battletech game.

Seriously? The only thing that this game has in common with Battletech are the mechs themselves... and even then those said mechs can be altered in ways unheard of in Battletech. The weapons are completely different Mechwarrior way. The lore is missing or noncanon Mechwarrior way. The game revolves around endless boating Mechwarrior way (barring MW1 which lacked mechlab). Pinpoint accuracy is also Mechwarrior way. All heat does is overheat you from time to time Mechwarrior way.

What on Earth could lead you to think this game is more Battletech than Mechwarrior?

[Stormwolf]

Come guys, just let this thread die, he's only doing this to see how we respond.

[Skylarr]

Why is this game called Mechwarrior? Because. "Players take the role of piloting BattleMechs,"

Also, MWO is still in BETA. It sound to me that you think MWO is a finished product. I will agree with you that they need a better Training area for new pilots. I have heard from many who started playing and thrown to the wolfs right away with out given a tutorial. Many are turned off by this.

[GumbyC2C]

<---- is a hardcore Battletech fan/player. MWO is great fun, but it is nothing like TT. If you think it is, you obviously have not done much TT.

Too many assaults, too fast of a fire rate, heat is not a big deal, ECM is awesome, weapons don't hit hard enough, no good use for hand actuators (I personally find the nearest tree and go Louisville Slugger in TT every time), weapon convergence, mechs too customizable, double HS only good for a 40% boost, and a million other things.

But straight TT rules don't work well in a video game. That's why outside of the Cresent Hawk games it has not really been done.

[Pht]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

MechWarrior was fun this is not. You made this game for a very few hard core Battletech fans and it is just not fun to play.

Uh ... no ... they didn't.

In no way do the mechs actually handle their weapons in combat like they do in the BT setting - which is what an MW game should be majoritarily about.

GumbyC2C, on 30 June 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

But straight TT rules don't work well in a video game.

... I don't see how anyone could presume this about an MW video game. It's never even been tried.

It's not like it couldn't be done: http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/

[Kiiyor]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

Sad to say it but you **** the bed here.

I haven't done that since I was like... 20.

Also, battletech is a board game, and MWO is quite removed from that.

Still, this is a refreshing change of pace from the plethora of 'this isn't enough like battletech' threads.

</trollfood>

[Ridersofdoom]

Kiiyor can i put this here?

I do not like the new designs, have the same torso the same legs, they all look so similar and also ruined the awesome

[Alex Warden]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

As you say 67,000 + contributed to see the game made but are they happy with it. I'm just saying it is NOT a Mechwarrior game its a Battletech game. I't just not fun ......

it´s so far away from a battletech game... but what do i know...

[Parliment]

Kannen, on 29 June 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

MechWarrior was fun this is not. You made this game for a very few hard core Battletech fans and it is just not fun to play. You can't even pick your Mech for the battle ground. Work as a team please. I really tried to enjoy this game but I can't. O'Yeah i looked at a video long time back and said spending money won't give u an advantage please. Make it a 60 dollar game so we can buy it and build our mechs. FAIL IN SO MANY WAYS.

<--- Played MechWarrior from D.O.S.

Sad to say it but you **** the bed here.

Try harder to learn the system...bigole' learnin curve there bub