126 replies to this topic

[Voivode]

Just a legitimate issue I've been thinking about lately. I fell in love with Mechwarrior as a franchise based on single player campaign play. Multiplayer was always a nice bonus feature, but I never played specifically for multiplayer.

So the question is, without a single player, is this really a mechwarrior game?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Voivode, on 16 August 2015 - 03:04 PM, said:

Just a legitimate issue I've been thinking about lately. I fell in love with Mechwarrior as a franchise based on single player campaign play. Multiplayer was always a nice bonus feature, but I never played specifically for multiplayer.

So the question is, without a single player, is this really a mechwarrior game?

Its not, its a Battletech game. Says so in the corner XD

[Voivode]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 16 August 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

Its not, its a Battletech game. Says so in the corner XD

Perhaps BT:O (BattleTech : Online) would be the appropriate name then

[Mcgral18]

In name, yes.


Not many TT stats left in the game. Not the weapons (2-20x damage), I suppose armour is the same ratio (without quirks), and the mechs are from Battletech.



It's best to just view MWO as Shooty Stompy Robots, with how they stick to lore.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Voivode, on 16 August 2015 - 03:08 PM, said:

Perhaps BT:O (BattleTech : Online) would be the appropriate name then

Not even that cause theres so little more than name connecting this TO battletech lol

Mcgral18, on 16 August 2015 - 03:08 PM, said:

It's best to just view MWO as Shooty Stompy Robots, with how they stick to lore.

Shooty Stompy Robots with btech names and models

[Kassatsu]

It's a failed game with a Mechwarrior mod applied, which makes it successful. So... Kind of? Not really? In name it is I guess. It's literally NOTHING like any past Mechwarrior game, that's for sure.

I miss Mechwarrior 2. Time to find the good old dosbox and load it up again for nostalgia's sake... Now the question is do I do my Kodiak made out of heat sinks with 5 ER PPCs and jump jets, or do I do my Firemoth with a maxed out engine, two small lasers and jump jets so that it can launch itself across the continent at 600kph... Or maybe the Marauder. Not only was it the first mech I ever piloted, it's what got me hooked on the series (and ER PPCs).

[ScarecrowES]

Mcgral18, on 16 August 2015 - 03:08 PM, said:

In name, yes.


Not many TT stats left in the game. Not the weapons (2-20x damage), I suppose armour is the same ratio (without quirks), and the mechs are from Battletech.



It's best to just view MWO as Shooty Stompy Robots, with how they stick to lore.

Weapons do pretty much the same damage across the board, armor and internal structure has been doubled. So exactly the opposite.

[Throat Punch]

Well, you are in a 'mech and acting as the pilot of said 'mech which is known as a Mechwarrior...so in a round about way by all definitions this would technically speaking be a "Mechwarrior" game kinda sorta maybe....

[Mcgral18]

ScarecrowES, on 16 August 2015 - 03:41 PM, said:

Weapons do pretty much the same damage across the board, armor and internal structure has been doubled. So exactly the opposite.

You don't think very critically, do you?

If weapon A deals 5 damage in TT, over a course of 10 seconds, how much damage does it do?
It weapon B deals 5 damage every 1.66 seconds, how much damage does it deal in 10 seconds?


TT stats were largely ignored. You could argue every 5 seconds to account for doubled armour.

Edited by Mcgral18, 16 August 2015 - 03:43 PM.

[Khobai]

weapons in TT were horribly balanced though, like worse than they ever were in MWO. Literally only 3 weapons were ever worth using in tabletop: ML, Gauss, and PPC

[Kira Onime]

it's an FPS with a battletech skin over it.

[ScarecrowES]

Mcgral18, on 16 August 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

You don't think very critically, do you?

If weapon A deals 5 damage in TT, over a course of 10 seconds, how much damage does it do?
It weapon B deals 5 damage every 1.66 seconds, how much damage does it deal in 10 seconds?


TT stats were largely ignored. You could argue every 5 seconds to account for doubled armour.

I'm not sure it's physically possible to roll my eyes harder at this without them popping out of my skull.

[Afuldan McKronik]

Kira_Onime, on 16 August 2015 - 03:44 PM, said:

it's an FPS with a battletech skin over it.

This.

[Mystere]

Well at least it's not in the same horrid situation as that of the book Starship Troopers and that awful movie.

[Mcgral18]

ScarecrowES, on 16 August 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

I'm not sure it's physically possible to roll my eyes harder at this without them popping out of my skull.

I guess being wrong does have that effect on some people.

[Khobai]

Quote

Well at least it's not in the same horrid situation as that of the book Starship Troopers and that awful movie.

would you like to know more?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Khobai, on 16 August 2015 - 03:44 PM, said:

weapons in TT were horribly balanced though, like worse than they ever were in MWO. Literally only 3 weapons were ever worth using in tabletop: ML, Gauss, and PPC

and no way to boat them in your mech if you listen to the tt purists lol

[SpiralFace]

Khobai, on 16 August 2015 - 03:44 PM, said:

weapons in TT were horribly balanced though, like worse than they ever were in MWO. Literally only 3 weapons were ever worth using in tabletop: ML, Gauss, and PPC

This is categorically false unless you are simply throwing out any form of balance system the game already had. ML's, PPC's, and Gauss was powerful, but not all consuming. They are hands down the most expensive weapons to field, and under the BV system that BT operated under, unless you where actively ignoring it, those weapons remained powerful, but EXPENSIVE to field, so you would be sacrificing something else (tonnage, range, maneuverability, pilot skill, armor,) in order to have the points available to spam those weapon systems.

Not to mention that 2-3 of those weapons have min-ranges you can maneuver into, and the other one is a short range weapon that is easily zoned.

That being said, there where imbalances in the TT because the system itself was balanced AS A TABLE TOP WAR GAME. Where it is alright that some weapons are better then others, but are priced more "expensively."

The weapons where never designed to be 1 to 1 with other weapon systems in the game, and to that end, Its fine that they adjust the values to better correlate with MWO needing to be an FPS. Not a 1st person board game simulator like some seem to want it to become.

Edited by SpiralFace, 16 August 2015 - 04:07 PM.

[Sjorpha]

It's a mechwarrior game because it is a mech combat sim in the battletech universe, and fact is that as a matter of controls and basic combat it plays pretty similar to the old games. Main difference is the setting of PvP instead of single player adventure.

The obsession with numbers being "correct" is just silly, those numbers are means to an end not an end in themself.

[Mcgral18]

Sjorpha, on 16 August 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

It's a mechwarrior game because it is a mech combat sim in the battletech universe, and fact is that as a matter of controls and basic combat it plays pretty similar to the old games. Main difference is the setting of PvP instead of single player adventure.

The obsession with numbers being "correct" is just silly, those numbers are means to an end not an end in themself.

The numbers as a starting point might have proven better...rather than PGI being "Mechs are dying too fast because we tripled damage"