Jump to content

To Bushido or Not to Bushido


233 replies to this topic

#41 FireBerretta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 169 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 29 June 2012 - 05:17 PM

View PostIMTatsu, on 29 June 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Jesus, folks. Thanks for the flamejob. I think you missed a spot . . . nope, you got that one too.

I merely posed the question because that is how it used to be done. Much better to have everything clarified now than to wonder about it later.

The terminology was used for the benefit of those who WEREN'T there. Little trouble spotting those, though.

Enjoy.

>:{

Wow, I think we just got a glimpse of some sorta "twisted reality" Tatsu. Too much tainted blood from other MW games perhaps? Not quite sure, but something is in the water here. Such a lack of respect in this thread, even from our own brethren doesn't say much about the future of this game. It actually is starting to remind me of the ISW boards. That's ok my friend, we will re-write it like we did before, and we already know those who will be left standing because they have always been here. Those who were not there will never understand. Hey, it's a game let's go have some fun and blow SH*^ up!

#42 Slapshot

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts
  • LocationNew York

Posted 29 June 2012 - 05:19 PM

View PostFireBerretta, on 29 June 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:


@ AceTimberwolf and Slapshot. Unfortunately it seems you have been playing with a different breed of Liao than I have if you perceive the Entire House as a Dishonorable. I have been a part of Liao in MPBT:Solaris (1996-1999), MPBT:3025 (as short lived as that was), and ISW (Inner Sphere Wars). The old timers from MPBT days know what honor is and have always upheld their honor in and off the battlefield. Sure we have some renegades..who doesn't? But to say Liao as a whole is dishonorable is neither fair nor is it accurate. I have seen enough of my old Pals here on the forums to know that "this" rendition of House Liao will be as honorable as any I have known. Before condemning us I would ask that you give House Liao some credit and a fair chance. <DB>


I wasn't trying to insult you or any of the groups you have been in. I was mostly speaking about how House Liao is portrayed in the fiction.

Edited by Slapshot, 29 June 2012 - 05:20 PM.


#43 NCIceman

    Rookie

  • 2 posts
  • LocationCary NC

Posted 29 June 2012 - 05:27 PM

Completely depends on how the mechanics and role-play of the game are set up. Back in my merc days, you legged 'cause it gave you the most valuable salvage. In most fights, it's about stopping the enemy mech; the pilot is incidental unless it was a known ace that you DID NOT want your House facing again.

So I'm waiting to see how the mechanics of fights work, and how much people are interested in roleplaying their house of choice, before I try to apply any arbitrary rules to combat.

#44 FireBerretta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 169 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 29 June 2012 - 06:18 PM

View PostNCIceman, on 29 June 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

Completely depends on how the mechanics and role-play of the game are set up. Back in my merc days, you legged 'cause it gave you the most valuable salvage. In most fights, it's about stopping the enemy mech; the pilot is incidental unless it was a known ace that you DID NOT want your House facing again.

So I'm waiting to see how the mechanics of fights work, and how much people are interested in roleplaying their house of choice, before I try to apply any arbitrary rules to combat.

I agree. I am interested to see the mechanics as well.

#45 Cole Christensen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 126 posts
  • LocationOsan AB

Posted 29 June 2012 - 06:26 PM

If a certain aspect of combat is not making me earn more cash/XP (which these won't, ever) then I am not partaking.

#46 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,654 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 29 June 2012 - 06:53 PM

View PostIMTatsu, on 29 June 2012 - 07:09 AM, said:

There's been considerable activity in other forums, so I thought I'd bring it here.

From the beginning of time, in as much as it relates to us here, we have followed the Honor Code of mech combat, primarily defined as:
1. No Heading
2. No Legging
3. No Unnecessary Beatdown of an Incapacitated Foe.

With the potential massive influx of the new 'Pepsi Generation', they're understanding is 'Play to Win'. Every rule of warfare they've ever been subjected to up to this point is 'By Any Means Necessary'

Battletech purists would argue that the most effective method of mech combat completely contradicts the Honor Code we have traditionally clung to. If the game employs salvage rules, this is going to be an even more important topic.

Here it is gang. What do you think?

I believe the feedback provided is due to the lack of understanding of where you are coming from.

Primarily the no legging/heading started during MPBT Solaris (AOL/Gamestorm) Initially due to the initial coding, a legged mech was a bump in the road. There were no alternate views nor could the pilot fire his weapons except from the mech's foreward arc, which meant with a legged mech the enemy had to be standing over the downed to be hit by return fire. And no, the player mech was not destroyed with both legs gone. As for the head, it was almost always an instant kill.

With that in the light, lots of people who were dropping into the game as newbies, there was no fun nor joy in laying on your backside waiting to be destroyed (and most did not know how to eject) or within seconds of contact with the enemy losing your mech losing its head. Not very long the House Leaders came together with the community and adopted the no legging/heading rules, wrapping honorable game play around it. The aim was to reduce the frustration involved and allow the new players time to learn and love the game. Those who refused to abide by the community rules were ostracized if they did not step in line. Usually this started with discussions but if ignored their names were posted everywhere and people stopped dropping with them. If they were part of a unit then peer pressure was used or they were removed from the unit.

Eventually code went in that randomized headshots, as well as not only having alternate views but the ability to fire from those views (arm or rear mounted :) weapons).

It was the more seasoned merc/house units, iirc, who urged the lifting of the ban on heading/legging. The restrictions were not utilized in their tourneys most of the time and allowed different and more of a variety of gameplay. Once it was decided the community was informed of the decision a few weeks before the SSW that was being hosted by House Kurita. The lifting of the ban also meant tactics had to be tweaked or changed, dependent on class and lance mix. For the veteran players and units alike, for some it was a bigger change than for others. Players during their matches could request that the head/legging not be allowed for that match and as long as the other players agreed then that was honored during that match.

Then came MW2-3-4 and that idea carried over into those games, each with their own issues and weirdness, for a variety of reasons but no small part due to those MPBT Solaris players.

As for us snakes :P We were the host for the first SSW when legging/heading was allowed. Fun times, especially for those who had no tactics when that removal. Lots of people went legging without understand that it has its place and time, thus ended up losing matches unnecessarily.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 29 June 2012 - 06:56 PM.


#47 Bastard Ken

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 167 posts

Posted 29 June 2012 - 07:14 PM

Some other schools have a liking for extra-long swords. From the point of view of my strategy these must be seen as weak schools. This is because they do not appreciate the principle of cutting the enemy by any means. Their preference is for the extra-long sword and, relying on the virtue of its length, they think to defeat the enemy from a distance.
In this world it is said, "One inch gives the hand advantage", but these are the idle words of one who does not know strategy. It shows the inferior strategy of a weak spirit that men should be dependent on the length of their sword, fighting from a distance without the benefit of strategy.

#48 IronEricP

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 174 posts
  • LocationBangor, ME

Posted 29 June 2012 - 07:15 PM

From what we have heard of the mechanics from the devs and the E3 demo, convergence is going to take all of that right out the window anyways. Unlike earlier MW titles not every weapon is going to easily hit the location you have centered, so legging and heading will take MORE skill to manage and not less. And, as many have posted, where does Bushido come into this?

Regarding the house comments here:
Yes, in the fiction Liao was usually underhanded both because they were often being portrayed as villains and because they had less resources to win with. No offense to people playing them, but that IS a big part of how people are going to view the house, no matter how you personally act in the game.

As to the comment that Davion is a 'mary sue' house? You just jelly cause the Fox was awesome :)

#49 Ko Time

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • LocationKentucky

Posted 29 June 2012 - 07:39 PM

Death, death to all who oppose us. By any and all means at my disposal [excet using cheats,hacks or bugs,none of that]

#50 Danikov

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 29 June 2012 - 08:06 PM

The game itself has no sense of honour. Winning is winning. Many people will judge you by your scores and your rankings, nothing else. Playing to win, defining yourself by those scores, is entirely valid an approach. Whether that extends to exploits, bugs and 'cheats' is a risk- it's possible you will be detected and penalised/banned, but given that you're not playing for direct social validation, cheating or not falls under the same motivation of play.

Social validation is another valid motivation- win or lose, as long as you play fair and people recognise that, the game can still be fun. Such players are more likely to empathise with unbalanced situations and will complain about cheap tactics and people stooping to a successful (according to the game), but non-mutual fun experiences. Most of them prefer to play with like-minded friends.

Ultimately, play to win players will scoff at 'honorable' players basically tying one hand behind their backs and will probably win more often, should tactics that favour their no-rules attitude remain in play. Honourable players, however, will always have a slightly more smug sense of satisfaction when they do win (whether it's out of self-righteous honour, or being aware that they're winning against the odds), especially when they have a bunch of friends around to validate that.

I must confess I fall into the honourable camp and it works just fine for me.

#51 Lorcan Lladd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts

Posted 29 June 2012 - 08:32 PM

Target fixation, much?
Unless it's a 1-on-1 match, there are more things on the table besides just personal honor; I'm sure everyone at the very least expects to win more often than not, and to this purpose they must rely on their lancemates to fight efficiently at all times.

#52 Anders

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 612 posts
  • LocationKaetetôã

Posted 29 June 2012 - 11:20 PM

The House of Lowtax recognizes only the dishonorable tactic of Winging (also known as Cho Mai), as the gravest insult a Tetatae warrior could perform to another warrior.

Legging is fine.

#53 Jess Hazen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Star Colonel V
  • Star Colonel V
  • 643 posts
  • LocationFrozen in Time Somewhere IDK?

Posted 29 June 2012 - 11:34 PM

View Postwanderer, on 29 June 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:


We need a "headshot kill" icon. It's going to happen, lots and lots considering LRM's seem to rain down from a near vertical angle- and...well, the head happens to be up there, with it's light armor and all that. Likewise, the easiest way to deal with light 'Mechs is probably going to be legging them while they zip over the field at 100+kph, from the look of the Frozen City video.

Shooting up a downed target, though- that's just kicking someone while they're out of the match entirely. Only reason to do it is if you hate their guts to begin with.


or if you can not get the job done cleanly.

#54 Alizabeth Aijou

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 877 posts

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:28 AM

View Post******* Ken, on 29 June 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

In this world it is said, "One inch gives the hand advantage", but these are the idle words of one who does not know strategy.

A sword is only as good as it's wielder.
Still, the quality of the sword can help.
So even though I'm Kuritan, I'd vastly prefer a nice Zweihänder/Langschwert.
Deutscher Lanschwerter - proven to be superior to Katana.

Edited by Alizabeth Aijou, 30 June 2012 - 02:29 AM.


#55 Amberlance

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:38 AM

This is ******* well what happens with sword chat *********.

#56 BlakeAteIt

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 394 posts

Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:18 AM

I never understand these questions.

Did they fall down? Then they aren't moving. Easy shot.
Is that guy blasting a teammate, showing you his back? Alpha strike.
Leg damaged? Remove it.
Oh, that guy talks a lot in all-chat? Ask him a question, shoot him while he replies.
Mech has heavy armor? Bet the head doesn't.

It's a game about blowing up giant robots. So, blow them up.

#57 Adridos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 10,635 posts
  • LocationHiding in a cake, left in green city called New A... something.

Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:34 AM

View PostBlakeAteIt, on 30 June 2012 - 05:18 AM, said:

It's a game about blowing up giant robots. So, blow them up.


And let's not forget it gives you more salvage (even though it won't in MW:O, probably). :)

#58 Exilyth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,100 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:24 AM

子貢問曰:“有一言而可以終身行之者乎”?子曰:“其恕乎!己所不欲、勿施於人。”

Zi Gong [a disciple] asked: "Is there any one word that could guide a person throughout life?"
The Master replied: "How about 'reciprocity'! Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself."

in Analects XV.24, tr. David Hinton


Personally I prefer treating all enemies with respect until they show themselves not worthy of such honor. Once that line is crossed, everything goes, but I shall never be the first to cross it.

#59 FireBerretta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 169 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:22 AM

View PostTarl Cabot, on 29 June 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

I believe the feedback provided is due to the lack of understanding of where you are coming from.

Primarily the no legging/heading started during MPBT Solaris (AOL/Gamestorm) Initially due to the initial coding, a legged mech was a bump in the road. There were no alternate views nor could the pilot fire his weapons except from the mech's foreward arc, which meant with a legged mech the enemy had to be standing over the downed to be hit by return fire. And no, the player mech was not destroyed with both legs gone. As for the head, it was almost always an instant kill.

With that in the light, lots of people who were dropping into the game as newbies, there was no fun nor joy in laying on your backside waiting to be destroyed (and most did not know how to eject) or within seconds of contact with the enemy losing your mech losing its head. Not very long the House Leaders came together with the community and adopted the no legging/heading rules, wrapping honorable game play around it. The aim was to reduce the frustration involved and allow the new players time to learn and love the game. Those who refused to abide by the community rules were ostracized if they did not step in line. Usually this started with discussions but if ignored their names were posted everywhere and people stopped dropping with them. If they were part of a unit then peer pressure was used or they were removed from the unit.

Eventually code went in that randomized headshots, as well as not only having alternate views but the ability to fire from those views (arm or rear mounted :( weapons).

It was the more seasoned merc/house units, iirc, who urged the lifting of the ban on heading/legging. The restrictions were not utilized in their tourneys most of the time and allowed different and more of a variety of gameplay. Once it was decided the community was informed of the decision a few weeks before the SSW that was being hosted by House Kurita. The lifting of the ban also meant tactics had to be tweaked or changed, dependent on class and lance mix. For the veteran players and units alike, for some it was a bigger change than for others. Players during their matches could request that the head/legging not be allowed for that match and as long as the other players agreed then that was honored during that match.

Then came MW2-3-4 and that idea carried over into those games, each with their own issues and weirdness, for a variety of reasons but no small part due to those MPBT Solaris players.

As for us snakes :( We were the host for the first SSW when legging/heading was allowed. Fun times, especially for those who had no tactics when that removal. Lots of people went legging without understand that it has its place and time, thus ended up losing matches unnecessarily.

Excellent explaination Tarl! Even I had forgotten about those important facts. SSW= fun times. BTW, good to see you again

#60 marcus elgin

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 53 posts

Posted 30 June 2012 - 08:03 AM

Read the sig.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users