202 replies to this topic

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Lefty Lucy, on 04 October 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

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

As were SRMs, Lasers, UAC 5's thats why the meta revolved around them. (some maybe the very early open beta)

Closed beta/ early open was the best this game ever was.

Edited by DV McKenna, 04 October 2014 - 11:48 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

I remember back in october 2012, when you told me that I was a fool for wanting RnR gone, and my reasoning that it'd bring in more players was bad, because MWO is a mechwarrior game, and mechwarrior has to be like mechwarrior.

[Lefty Lucy]

DV McKenna, on 04 October 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

As were SRMs, Lasers, UAC 5's thats why the meta revolved around them. (some maybe the very early open beta)

Closed beta/ early open was the best this game ever was.

Versus right now where AC5/10/20, Lasers, SRMs, LRMs, PPCs, Gauss are all pretty damned useable, depending on what drop deck you're going for.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Lefty Lucy, on 04 October 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

Versus right now where AC5/10/20, Lasers, SRMs, LRMs, PPCs, Gauss are all pretty damned useable, depending on what drop deck you're going for.

He wasnt arguing that there was more diversity, just that more than Gauss were meta weapons, hell back then lurms had their uses without bringing the next lurmpocalypse. Also, small lasers weren't worthless, which is an achievement for any Mechwarrior game.

The pace of gameplay, the lack of convoluted mechanics, and no consumables is made the days of Closed Beta so wonderful.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 04 October 2014 - 11:59 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

WM Quicksilver, on 04 October 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

He wasnt arguing that there was more diversity, just that more than Gauss were meta weapons, hell back then lurms had their uses without bringing the next lurmpocalypse. Also, small lasers weren't worthless, which is an achievement for any Mechwarrior game.

The pace of gameplay, the lack of convoluted mechanics, and no consumables is made the days of Closed Beta so wonderful.

See you win internet cookies for reading comprehension.

[AssaultPig]

Battletech the tabletop game / universe has balance inputs that MWO simply does not have.

In 'actual' battletech nobody would run (say) a 6PPC stalker because it would be hilariously expensive, even if your faction/clan/whatever actually had enough PPCs available. In MWO this isn't a concern and the 6PPC stalker was predictably ridiculous.

In the tabletop game 'pinpoint' damage isn't a concern because 1) hits are rolled independently anyway and 2) jump-sniping isn't a thing (phases go move > fire.) In an FPS environment it's obviously a big deal.

It's really profoundly silly to use a tabletop ruleset as the basis for balancing this game. I like the battletech lore and the art style, but trying to balance MWO around it seems to be the cause of many of the current problems with the game.

[w0rm]

AssaultPig, on 04 October 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

In 'actual' battletech nobody would run (say) a 6PPC stalker because it would be hilariously expensive, even if your faction/clan/whatever actually had enough PPCs available. In MWO this isn't a concern and the 6PPC stalker was predictably ridiculous.

Fun fact: In MWO only the clueless Underhive did run the 6PPC Stalker. The effective (read: competetive) version boated only 4PPCs.

[CocoaJin]

I find the BT to be an engaging, strategic and tactically robust contribution to an immersive MechWarrior experience. If I wanted some other mech stomps game, I go play them.

I have no desire to see BT diluted, or at least the spirit of BT exorcized from a MechWarrior game. I'm ok with making adaptions for palsy, but not when moves away from being BT experience. Increase range, increase rates of fire, buff armor...fine, these are just adjustments in scale. Ultimately the spirit and experience of BT is preserved with changes only a matter of degrees.

But when we start trying to change stuff to mimic or appeal more toward a generic and overly saturated genre of gameplay, then you lose my support.

It has to be BT first.

Edited by CocoaJin, 04 October 2014 - 12:13 PM.

[Lefty Lucy]

kapusta11, on 04 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

Worse than now? Doubt that.

Everyone getting one-shot because armor and internals weren't doubled. The entire "dome" on the Atlas being its head hit box. Yeah. Much worse than now.

[Roadbeer]

Yeah, no.

It's not the lore that's holding back MWO, it is either simplification or expedience that is holding it back.

In the BT Universe you have a wide variety of equipment manufacturers who would produce the same "rating" but could have different "quirks"

Engine manufactures like Consolidated, Hermes, General Electric, Nissan, etc.

Weapons manufactures like Vandenberg MilTech, Defiance, Red Devil and so on.

Rather than give each of those manufacturers a place to flavor and add variety to the equipment, we get Weapons Modules.

So no, don't blame the IP about this.

[IceSerpent]

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.

Bro, are you for real? I mean you've been hanging with BT/MW crowd since at least 2011 and still don't realize that there are actual weapon names in BT (i.e. Luxor AC, Magna Hellstar PPC, etc.), while things like "AC/10" designate weapon type/class?

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

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.

Wasn't BT rules fault, but what the devs made of those rules)

[Roadbeer]

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.

Yeah, that had nothing to do with the BT rules but the interpretation/implementation of them. FLD,Pin-point accuracy, poor hitreg, netcode issues....

Don't put that on TT rules, it's transposing those rules into a real-time 3D environment that's the issue. Since computer games became a thing, many have tried to implement D&D rules into a video game, few have gotten it right. The ones that have done it best are the ones who have tuned the pace of combat, stat regen, etc rather than monkey with the core mechanics of the game.

Making a TT game into a real time FPS that has the pace to attract the WASDerp crowds, yet increase the TTK and turning Heat into the mana-bar while failing to look at what made Battletech a niche franchise that has somehow lasted over 30 years and focusing on what made it work rather than interpreting things almost on a whim... well... here we are.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roadbeer, on 04 October 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

Yeah, that had nothing to do with the BT rules but the interpretation/implementation of them. FLD,Pin-point accuracy, poor hitreg, netcode issues....

Don't put that on TT rules, it's transposing those rules into a real-time 3D environment that's the issue. Since computer games became a thing, many have tried to implement D&D rules into a video game, few have gotten it right. The ones that have done it best are the ones who have tuned the pace of combat, stat regen, etc rather than monkey with the core mechanics of the game.

Making a TT game into a real time FPS that has the pace to attract the WASDerp crowds, yet increase the TTK and turning Heat into the mana-bar while failing to look at what made Battletech a niche franchise that has somehow lasted over 30 years and focusing on what made it work rather than interpreting things almost on a whim... well... here we are.

This.

This game is nothing without Battletech. And the issues it does have lie totally at the feet of PGI and formerly IGP.

And really, I doubt IGP had much input on certain game mechanics, I mean I get them wanting consumables and 3PV. Whatever at that.

But the rest of it, ECM, Jump Jets, Heat Scale, Heat Scale 2 (Ghost Heat), Pin Point Damage, Hit Reg, LRM Design, and about 50 other things...that's all PGI and Paul.

All of it.

And you'll note a lot of it is MAJOR deviation from what Battletech had in mind.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 04 October 2014 - 01:21 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 October 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

This.

This game is nothing without Battletech. And the issues it does have lie totally at the feet of PGI and formerly IGP.

And really, I doubt IGP had much input on certain game mechanics, I mean I get them wanting consumables and 3PV. Whatever at that.

But the rest of it, ECM, Jump Jets, Heat Scale, Heat Scale 2 (Ghost Heat), Pin Point Damage, Hit Reg, LRM Design, and about 50 other things...that's all PGI and Paul.

All of it.

And you'll note a lot of it is MAJOR deviation from what Battletech had in mind.

I'm about 85% with you on that.
I'm sympathetic to how difficult it is to turn a TT game into a video game. As I reference above, I could name about 10 D&D titles I've played over the years, but only one or two actually left me feeling "Wow, this is what I loved about D&D" and the rest were "WTF? Have you actually ever played D&D?"
There's a lot of that going on here. There is an old saying, "If you try to make everyone happy, you end up making nobody happy". While taking direction from an uncaring publisher and putting it in the hands of a Lead Designer who's total time in the "Universe" can literally be measured in minutes, and getting pulled in every direction by hardcore BT/MW purists (Which, I'll also point out that over the 30 years of the franchise, there have been numerous "rule" revisions to the point that it's become a "pick a ruleset you like best") and the WASDerp Collective it's no wonder we are where we're at.

Chris Roberts made just over $40 million (at the time) with a product that was completely sight unseen, banking on the nostalgia of his previous works and the need for a good space flight sim. Had PGI stuck with the nostalgia of making a great mechwarrior game focused on the fans of BT/MW, following the one of the many 'rulesets' and saying "THIS is the BT ruleset we'll be following" THEN tried to appeal to a wider base. I think we'd have a superior product now.

Instead we have the platypus, a bunch of stuff that doesn't really make sense to anyone but somehow works well enough to keep the species alive.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I'm not a purist at all.

This isn't about being exactly Battletech.

It's about taking the core concepts of Battletech, and using them to create MW:O.

They've failed at interpreting Battletech and putting it into MW:O at almost every turn. And sometimes when they do get it right (non-instant convergence), they switch back (instant convergence).

Now I get some of it is technical limitations, but the way they dismissed it and haven't readdressed it since...and mind you this was a LONG time ago now. It's sad to me.

The heat scale is a mess, ghost heat is a mess, hard points are a mess....just so many things they could have done right and failed at.

It's frustrating. And the inability for them to admit it and work on fixing it while releasing mech pack after mech pack after mech pack.

God, they won't even admit to ECM being just a stupid deviation from what it was and then caused about 5 other items to be reworked just to counter their stupid design decision.

But hey, it's Battletech's fault.

[Roadbeer]

No, I get you.

When I said 'purist', I meant, "Let's make a Mechwarrior game for Mechwarrior fans", not "Lets make World of Tanks but give them legs and kludge a bunch of **** on to it so we can call it Mechwarrior"

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roadbeer, on 04 October 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

No, I get you.

When I said 'purist', I meant, "Let's make a Mechwarrior game for Mechwarrior fans", not "Lets make World of Tanks but give them legs and kludge a bunch of **** on to it so we can call it Mechwarrior"

Just frustrating when people act like everything is great now. We have so many core issues that made it out of beta.

And BOOM, here comes another mech pack, and a couple mech polls to quell the masses.

[Khobai]

Theres nothing wrong with basing the game off battletech. However not everything can be completely faithful to tabletop and some things are lost in translation. For example, going from random hit locations to pinpoint aiming makes mechs die way faster in MWO than they did in tabletop. And doubling armor didnt fix that.

Quote

I remember back in october 2012, when you told me that I was a fool for wanting RnR gone, and my reasoning that it'd bring in more players was bad, because MWO is a mechwarrior game, and mechwarrior has to be like mechwarrior.

Honestly anyone with more than half a brain wanted R&R gone. It was a blight on the game. You had players that didnt even bother to repair their mechs or pay for ammo because they didnt want to spend the cbills.

The only way R&R could work in this game is if the game was redesigned with R&R in mind (i.e. by making the game more like MW2 mercenaries and having each player run their own merc corp by hiring pilots/engineers/etc...). You would also need some kindve equipment salvage system to justify R&R. R&R as an afterthought was always a terrible idea and impossible to balance properly.

Edited by Khobai, 04 October 2014 - 02:07 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Khobai, on 04 October 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

Honestly anyone with half a brain wanted R&R gone. It was a blight on the game. You had players that didnt even bother to repair their mechs or pay for ammo because they didnt want to spend the cbills.

The only way R&R could work in this game is if the game was redesigned with R&R in mind (i.e. by making the game more like MW2 mercenaries and having each player run their own merc corp by hiring pilots/engineers/etc...). R&R as an afterthought was always a terrible idea.

Like with the premise that the OP is working on, or that others have mirrored.

The problem wasn't R&R (just like the problem isn't BT/MW or TT rules), it was the way that R&R was implemented. Being able to go out on the field with 75% automatic refil... "Oh, really? lemme just up my ammo bins by 25%". "Oh, I don't have to R&R? lemme just drop gimped and sponge some Cbills"
Material cost was always a balance check in BT. There's what you want, and what you can afford. I've suggested elsewhere to decouple AC/missiles from Ghost Heat and make rearm the punitive balance on it

I've always said, R&R works, but the way that they implemented it in CB didn't.