68 replies to this topic

[Captain Stiffy]

It could happen. Right?

[SecondReversal]

Veritech Fighte-rrr I mean, Land-Air 'Mechs are the stupidest thing to happen to Battletech since the Hetzer and the Zentradi Command Pod.

Nobody needs to see a Guardian Mode anything stomping around the battlegrounds of the thirty-first millenium.

[Captain Stiffy]

SecondReversal, on 04 October 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

Veritech Fighte-rrr I mean, Land-Air 'Mechs are the stupidest thing to happen to Battletech since the Hetzer and the Zentradi Command Pod.

Nobody needs to see a Guardian Mode anything stomping around the battlegrounds of the thirty-first millenium.

We totally do though. The mechanic of being able to relocate yourself quickly on the battlefield would make some of these utterly massive maps actually playable. The transformation effect and flight ability are extra funtiem. The loadouts wouldn't be extremely different from what mechs have now.

Implementing this is really just a physics effect (flight) and some modeling work.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Can't happen, won't happen (also legal reasons)

Never

[Alex Warden]

no... Lams have been scratched from BT Canon pretty early for a reason. besides the fact that i don´t like them at all, PGI doesn´t also

wait for transformers universe

Captain Stiffy, on 04 October 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

make some of these utterly massive maps actually playable.

multiple, tactically placed objectives would solve the EMPTY large maps way better than a "mount" for battlemechs

Edited by Alex Warden, 05 October 2013 - 12:41 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

mwhighlander, on 05 October 2013 - 12:29 AM, said:

Can't happen, won't happen (also legal reasons)

Never

What legal reasons are there? The rules are still valid and they have released three new LAMs the TRO: Project Phoenix plus they're in TRO: 3085. New rules will be in the Interstellar Operations Handbook.

Alex Warden, on 05 October 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

no... Lams have been scratched from BT Canon pretty early for a reason. besides the fact that i don´t like them at all, PGI doesn´t also

wait for transformers universe


multiple, tactically placed objectives would solve the EMPTY large maps way better than a "mount" for battlemechs

Land-Air Mechs are still valid in tournament play and have been since their inception. They have also been a part of the canon and still are to this day. Only the art of the original LAM's has been removed, but the mechs themselves remain. This is exactly the same thing that happened with the rest of the Unseens. The mechs are still valid to use in play, but the art isn't.

http://www.sarna.net...and-Air_%27Mech

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Canon

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 05 October 2013 - 06:35 AM.

[GoManGo]

Captain Stiffy, on 04 October 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

We totally do though. The mechanic of being able to relocate yourself quickly on the battlefield would make some of these utterly massive maps actually playable. The transformation effect and flight ability are extra funtiem. The loadouts wouldn't be extremely different from what mechs have now.

Implementing this is really just a physics effect (flight) and some modeling work.

OMG are you insane? MWO maps are like 1/10 the size most maps in Mechwarrior2-Mechwarrior4 were? MWO maps are tiny compared to them. Plus if you want to go play Transformers the games are still available on PC or XBOX360. Lams should be in the game as a option you can add.

Edited by GoManGo, 05 October 2013 - 06:45 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

GoManGo, on 05 October 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

OMG are you insane? MWO maps are like 1/10 the size most maps in Mechwarrior2-Mechwarrior4 were? MWO maps are tiny compared to them. Plus if you want to go play Transformers the games are still available on PC or XBOX360. Lams should be in the game as a option you can add.

You do realize that the art for LAMs predate Transformers by 6 years as Super Dimension Fortress Macross was beginning to be worked on in 1978 and Transformers wasn't done until 1984. Just because you don't like them doesn't make them any less canon etc... than the other mechs that are Unseen or even the ones created by FASA/Catalyst/Fan Pro.

For reference, BattleDroids was released in 1984 and re-released in 1984 as BattleTech after Lucas threw a hissy fit over the name Droids.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 05 October 2013 - 06:56 AM.

[Firewuff]

no.. let him have them and see how much fun it is A) ending up out of bounds in about 3 seconds and not being able to get back in time and landing ALONE in the middle of an enemy force

;-)

[Appogee]

IF there is a degree of improbability which is even lower than PGI committing to ''Perhaps One Day'', then LAMs fall into it.

[Gaan Cathal]

I love LAMs, because they are one of the best arguments for discrediting the "But Tabletop was perfect, and cloning everything from it would make the best Mech-FPS evar." crowd. Because they're utterly terrible in concept, design and execution. They are a perfect storm of terrible.

TL,DR: No

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gaan Cathal, on 07 October 2013 - 03:53 AM, said:

I love LAMs, because they are one of the best arguments for discrediting the "But Tabletop was perfect, and cloning everything from it would make the best Mech-FPS evar." crowd. Because they're utterly terrible in concept, design and execution. They are a perfect storm of terrible.

TL,DR: No

I take it that you don't know how to use them properly. When used in the role they were designed for, they can take out mechs that out ton and out gun them reliably.

[Gaan Cathal]

James The Fox Dixon, on 07 October 2013 - 06:37 AM, said:

I take it that you don't know how to use them properly. When used in the role they were designed for, they can take out mechs that out ton and out gun them reliably.

You appear to be under the misconception that I'm talking about their effectiveness, I'm talking about their design.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gaan Cathal, on 07 October 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

You appear to be under the misconception that I'm talking about their effectiveness, I'm talking about their design.

Funny, but a lot of BT fans prefer the Unseen designs over the reseen.

[Gaan Cathal]

James The Fox Dixon, on 07 October 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Funny, but a lot of BT fans prefer the Unseen designs over the reseen.

Whilst they do look terrible, it wasn't the graphic design I meant either

[Ryvucz]

I'd rather they add the ability to pilot Aerospace Fighters and Tanks than some Land-Air-Mech.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Gaan Cathal, on 07 October 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

Whilst they do look terrible, it wasn't the graphic design I meant either

Then clearly state what you mean and be done with it.

[Ghogiel]

James The Fox Dixon, on 05 October 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

You do realize that the art for LAMs predate Transformers by 6 years as Super Dimension Fortress Macross was beginning to be worked on in 1978 and Transformers wasn't done until 1984. Just because you don't like them doesn't make them any less canon etc... than the other mechs that are Unseen or even the ones created by FASA/Catalyst/Fan Pro.

For reference, BattleDroids was released in 1984 and re-released in 1984 as BattleTech after Lucas threw a hissy fit over the name Droids.

Both of the toy lines that transformers was based on dates to pre Macross.

[PropagandaWar]

With as clunky as the mechs were described then and now are even with new tech LAM's never made sense in the Universe. I don't ever recall a single novel having the wasp and hawk transform. Plus rule wise wasn't it if you took a single point of damage you couldn't convert?

[Kenyon Burguess]

the only way I can see Lams coming into the game is if aerospace fighters are put into place to balance them first. of course that would make being a lam pilot incredibly difficulty to achieve success with. aerospace fighters > lams < mechs