202 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

Yup. I'm sad because I think BattleTech is holding the MechWarrior franchise back from being as cool as it should be.

You play other Mechy Stompy games, and they have lots of cool features, and so does this game. However, the features of this game are limited to a build-set from a Table Top game that's not being dynamically-expanded for the current application. For instance, we have these weapons called "AC/10" and they deal 10 damage. Wow, what a super-original naming system.

If I were a soldier in the field, and was told that my weapon was an AC/10, I would ask something like "Does that mean it's a 10mm?"

And the response would be "No, it deals 10 damage."

"What do you mean, 'It deals 10 damage' ? What is 'a' damage?"

"Don't ask questions, Soldier, you will accept that it deals 10 damage and you will like it!"

And that's the Lore this game is based on - a Universe where that conversation actually happens.

I mean, there is no immersion whatsoever when the weapons of the game are literally named after the number of "points" they deal. There is no such thing as "damage points" in war, so the weapons should not be named after the damage points they inflict. That is just CHEESY!

Also, the limited number of weapon systems in the game based on the Year of the Lore is something that should only be implemented in a game that's designed for pre-existing BattleTech fans. If this game is really being marketed to non-BattleTech fans in an effort to expand the playerbase, then we should not be adhering to the Lore's technology limitations. A non-BattleTech fan has 0 appreciation for the "reason" why the Inner Sphere forces have no LBX-AC/5 or UAC/10s. Zero appreciation at all, and it's harming the game.

Why would you enforce rules like that if their only existence is to create a situation where the game gets more exciting by waiting 10 years for additional content? We don't need to wait 10 years for additional content. I'm sure you can find ways to make the game more exciting over the course of the next ten years other than by slowly releasing additional IS Tech that's not around until 3060.

__________________

What I am saying is... basically... MekTek had it right when they made their own non-cannon weapons systems. The canon of BattleTech is only as holy as the Developers intention to make this game specifically for pre-existing BattleTech fans, and not to market it to a greater audience.

We need better names for equipment. "Large Laser" Oh, how impressive, tell me how large it is...

Edited by Prosperity Park, 04 October 2014 - 10:59 AM.

[FupDup]

For balance, corerule ignore?



That being said, there are definitely a number of areas where I have qualms with TT rules (i.e. engines under 250 needing to allocate sinks externally instead of them all being inside the engine, 20 ton mechs having a lower leg armor/internal HP ratio than other lights, FF being worse than Endo all the time, etc.).

Edited by FupDup, 04 October 2014 - 11:03 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

I think you're overestimating the significance of weapon names, but I do agree that the game isn't properly taking advantage of the lore. The game has been out for 2 years now and there's still nothing in the game that explains anything at all about the background. Inner Sphere, Houses, Clans, what does it all mean? Why are they fighting?

That part is sorely lacking. And I'm really beginning to wonder if it'll change when CW phase 2 is implemented, or if every player is just expected to Google everything and read up on the background on the website. Which is a very dull solution for a game of this magnitude.

[Lefty Lucy]

In-universe people don't call it an "AC10."

They call it a Luxor D-Series, or Pontiac 50.

I've always thought they should have gone with light/medium/heavy/assault autocannon (or similar) instead of 2/5/10/20 so they wouldn't feel constrained by a silly number to the detriment of balance flexibility, but I doubt they'll change it at this point.

[Mcgral18]

Would you like me to inform you that we have a 11 ton AC50?

It deals 50 damage over 10 seconds....


We have stepped pretty far from every TT value.

[Burke IV]

Mechwarrior was a role playing game set in the battletech universe. If you drop the battletech it wouldnt be mechwarrior any more it would be one of the other mechy stompy games

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 04 October 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

For balance, corerule ignore?



That being said, there are definitely a number of areas where I have qualms with TT rules (i.e. engines under 250 needing to allocate sinks externally instead of them all being inside the engine, 20 ton mechs having a lower leg armor/internal HP ratio than other lights, FF being worse than Endo all the time, etc.).

It won't be MechWarrior if it doesn't pay attention to the game the name comes form. mindless adherence would be bad, But Blasters are not the Federation go to weapon in Star Trek cause it's Star Trek.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

I'd say there is not enough Battletech in MWO, gravely so, that's what is holding it back.

[kapusta11]

Broken heatscale and useless energy assaults and heavies is direct result of not following BT rules.

[Lefty Lucy]

kapusta11, on 04 October 2014 - 11:17 AM, said:

Broken heatscale and useless energy assaults and heavies is direct result of not following BT rules.

The game followed BT rules much more closely early in development, and it was terrible.

[Scratx]

Lefty Lucy, on 04 October 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

In-universe people don't call it an "AC10."

They call it a Luxor D-Series, or Pontiac 50.

I've always thought they should have gone with light/medium/heavy/assault autocannon (or similar) instead of 2/5/10/20 so they wouldn't feel constrained by a silly number to the detriment of balance flexibility, but I doubt they'll change it at this point.

This. In universe they don't call it AC/10. However, I do think in-universe they do categorize weapons by class, so it's probably not unheard of to refer to an AC/10 of some sort of model as a class ten autocannon (I'm pretty sure if I hunt down on Sarna I'll find it, I know I read it there). But that wouldn't be the norm. In any case, it's an abstraction that's useful for a tabletop game and works for MWO.

Would I like to have different weapons available in the same weapon class? Yep. Do I think it's particularly important? Uh, not really.

[kapusta11]

Lefty Lucy, on 04 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

The game followed BT rules much more closely early in development, and it was terrible.

Worse than now? Doubt that.

Edited by kapusta11, 04 October 2014 - 11:22 AM.

[Myke Pantera]

This game is a success because its battletech. It has a huge fanbase because it's battletech. I play this game because it's battletech. I spent way more money into this game, than in any other game, because it's battletech, and because it's a damn good implementation as well.

I don't give a cent about the naming of weapons. If it was just about robots, I could play Hawken or Titanfall, but I haven't even touched them. If this wasn't battletech, it would be like those racing games with made up cars. Or Fifa with made up players.

Granted this game is mostly for fans of the franchise, but there a plenty and they are loyal. If this was yet another mech shooter it wouldn't have made it this far!

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Lefty Lucy, on 04 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

The game followed BT rules much more closely early in development, and it was terrible.

Yet near the end of Closed Beta still had better gameplay than what we have now.....

[ManDaisy]

Do you want gundams? That's how you get gundams.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Well the AC Classes # is the damage designation over 10 seconds.

At any rate, I'd love to see new Tabs with expanded weapon options

================================
Machineguns
================================
20mm Gatling = 20mm (TRO 3039) skorpion tank entry
M100 = 12.7mm (leithal hearitage) -Phawk
Johnston minigun = 20mm (temptation by war) Ranger VV1 -discribed as caseless (ch 14)
Scattergun = 20mm (temptation by war) DI Schmitt
22mm Gatling = 22mm (TRO 3075) JES 1 entry
================================
Class 2 Autocannons
================================
Whirlwind-L = 32mm (Binding force) BlackJack BJ-1
Whirlwind-L = 30mm (Threads of ambition) Blackjack BJ-1
SarLon = 30mm (TRO 3026) Warrior VTOL
Thor RAC-2 = 40mm (TRO 3058) Warrior VTOL
Mydron Model D-rf (Ultra) = 20mm (Imminent Crisis) Jagermech III
Mydron Model D = 30mm (Threads of ambition) Jagermech
Defiance Shredder LBX = 20mm (Fortress republic) -Catapult
================================
Class 5 Autocannons
================================
GM Nova 5 Ultra = 50mm (Binding force) -cataphract
GM Nova 5 Ultra = 40mm (Illusions of victory) -Cataphract
GM Whirlwind = 120mm (Thunder ridge & Wolves on the border) -Marauder
GM Whirlwind = 50mm (killing field) -Marauder
Armstrong J11 = 80mm or 90mm (Thunder ridge) -Shawdow Hawk
Imperator-A = 80mm (Price of Glory) -Riflemen
Whirlwind = 60mm (Price of glory) -Wolverine
Whirlwind = 90mm (Wolves on the border) -Wolverine
Imperator Ultra AC-5 = 80mm (Storms of fate) -Vulcan & Daikyu
Armstrong AC-5 = 50mm (Double blind) -Clint
Armstrong AC-5 = 105mm (TRO 3075) -Merkava Hvy Tank
Pontiac Light = 40mm (Illusions of victory) -Striker mech
Snake killer LAC5 = 60mm (Battlecorps) -Shadowhawk-9D
Mydron Model RC RAC5 = 50mm (A call to arms & fortress republic) -Legionnaire & Rifleman
Mydron Tornado RAC5 = 50mm (By Temptations and By War) -DI Schmitt
Defiance type J AC-5 = 75mm (Heir to the dragon) -Zeus 6S
================================
Class 10 Autocannons
================================
Luxor-D = 80mm (Price of glory, Ghost of winter) -Centuien
Mydron Excel UAC = 80mm (Patriots and tyrents) -Enforcer
Mydron Excel LBX = 80mm (Patriots and tyrents) -Dragon Fire
Mydron Excel LBX = 80mm (Illusions of victory) -Cataphract
Defiance Disintegrator?= 100mm (end game) -Banshee
Mydron Model B = 80mm (Flash point) -Bushwacker
Federated AC-10 = 80mm (Flash point) -Enforcer
Imperator Code Red = 100mm (Flashpoint) -Challenger MBT
KaliYama = 80mm (Illusions of victory) -Orion
Imperator Code Red = 80mm (Illusions of victory) -Emperor
Imperator-B = 80mm (Warrior en Guard) Urbanmech (implyed to be similer in caliber as the Riflemen)
================================
Class 20 Autocannons
================================
Death Giver = 100mm (Heir to the dragon) -Atlas
Pontiac 100 = 100mm (Heir to the dragon) -Victor
Armstrong = 120mm (binding force) -Von Luckner MBT
Chemjet = 185mm (TRO 3026) -Demolisher I tank
Crusher SH = 150mm (TRO 3026) -Hetzer Assault gun (or 120mm Threads of ambition)
Defiance Thunder Ultra = 120mm (Patriots and Tyrants) -Blitzkrig
Defiance Disintegrator LBX = 120mm (Patriots and Tyrants) -Barghest -Illusions of victory & The Dying time as well
Kali Yama Big Bore = 120mm (Threads of ambition) -Thunder
Tomodzuru = 180mm (Era Report 3052) -Hunchback
Luxuor Devastator = 120mm (Storms of fate) -Typhoon UAV
Death Giver = 120mm (Storms of Fate) -King Crab

List from here.

[LauLiao]

Prosperity Park, on 04 October 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

Yup. I'm sad because I think BattleTech is holding the MechWarrior franchise back from being as cool as it should be.

You play other Mechy Stompy games, and they have lots of cool features, and so does this game. However, the features of this game are limited to a build-set from a Table Top game that's not being dynamically-expanded for the current application. For instance, we have these weapons called "AC/10" and they deal 10 damage. Wow, what a super-original naming system.

If I were a soldier in the field, and was told that my weapon was an AC/10, I would ask something like "Does that mean it's a 10mm?"

And the response would be "No, it deals 10 damage."

"What do you mean, 'It deals 10 damage' ? What is 'a' damage?"

"Don't ask questions, Soldier, you will accept that it deals 10 damage and you will like it!"

And that's the Lore this game is based on - a Universe where that conversation actually happens.

Actually, if you get into the game, there isn't actually a weapon that's named AC/10. AC/10 is the meta name of a group of weapons that deal the same damage. Here's a list of the names of various AC/10s in cannon:

Armstrong Buster
Ceres Arms Model T
Defiance Killer Type T
Federated Autocannon
Imperator-B
Luxor D-Series
Mydron Model B
Pontiac 50
SarLon Maxicannon
Western Heavy

Many of these have unique quirks and qualities that potentially could be integrated into MWO, but for the sake of simplicity, they just stuck to generic AC/10. So you see, it's actually quite the opposite. There's lots of potential depth to BattleTech, but keeping the game simple for Non-BT fans is what's holding the game back.

Edited by LauLiao, 04 October 2014 - 11:38 AM.

[phalanx]

Scratx, on 04 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

This. In universe they don't call it AC/10. However, I do think in-universe they do categorize weapons by class, so it's probably not unheard of to refer to an AC/10 of some sort of model as a class ten autocannon (I'm pretty sure if I hunt down on Sarna I'll find it, I know I read it there). But that wouldn't be the norm. In any case, it's an abstraction that's useful for a tabletop game and works for MWO.

Would I like to have different weapons available in the same weapon class? Yep. Do I think it's particularly important? Uh, not really.

Basically this.

Myke Pantera, on 04 October 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

This game is a success because its battletech. It has a huge fanbase because it's battletech. I play this game because it's battletech. I spent way more money into this game, than in any other game, because it's battletech, and because it's a damn good implementation as well.

If it was just about robots, I could play Hawken or Titanfall, but I haven't even touched them. If this wasn't battletech, it would be like those racing games with made up cars. Or Fifa with made up players.

Granted this game is mostly for fans of the franchise, but there a plenty and they are loyal. If this was yet another mech shooter it wouldn't have made it this far!

Also this.

I honestly think that very few of MWO's new players are unfamiliar with both Battletech AND Mechwarrior. Right now the lore explanations are mostly being provided by the playerbase(that's us).Hopefully, further explanations will be provided by the time we really get into Community Warfare.

This might be an opportunity for more player submitted content that can add "flavor" to this game.

[Alek Ituin]

Scratx, on 04 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

This. In universe they don't call it AC/10. However, I do think in-universe they do categorize weapons by class, so it's probably not unheard of to refer to an AC/10 of some sort of model as a class ten autocannon (I'm pretty sure if I hunt down on Sarna I'll find it, I know I read it there). But that wouldn't be the norm. In any case, it's an abstraction that's useful for a tabletop game and works for MWO.

Would I like to have different weapons available in the same weapon class? Yep. Do I think it's particularly important? Uh, not really.

AFAIK, they would refer to it as an AC/10. In fact, the naming system was design in-universe as a way of clumping the myriad weapon designs in to a series of roughly similar groups for simplicity. You can say PPC in universe and everybody knows exactly what kind of weapon it is, regardless of manufacturer. Same with saying AC/10 or AC/5, it gives a rough approximation of the effective firepower of the weapon.

[Lefty Lucy]

WM Quicksilver, on 04 October 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

Yet near the end of Closed Beta still had better gameplay than what we have now.....

I disagree. Gauss was the best weapon to use, period.