92 replies to this topic

[Dlardrageth]

Red Beard, on 06 December 2011 - 05:43 PM, said:

[...]
C). This is a video game. Canon=gibberish.

This might become a video game for the record.

And I hope the salvage/customization/whatever mechanisms will be rather complex and thus compelling. If it becomes too much EzMode, it won't be enough left to distinguish MWO from any given shooter/FPS. Having it too streamlined will possibly attract a whole bunch of console dweebs or whoever, who will move on to the next FOTM game after a month or three though.

Now... going as far as citing/employing the Ares conventions... if as an automated mechanism, it might work. Beyond that though... it's not supposed to become a micromanaging game mainly, is it?

[Kyll Long]

There has to be more. If not this will become a flavor of the month. Heck maybe even a flavor of the year. After that people will move on and those of us that love the whole universe will be left where we started. Thats something a lot of us (based on these boards) aren't willing to see.

[Threat Doc]

Dlardrageth, on 07 December 2011 - 01:03 AM, said:

This might become a video game for the record.

Wise guy, hehe.

Quote

Now... going as far as citing/employing the Ares conventions... if as an automated mechanism, it might work.

Honestly, this goes back to my argument FOR honor being included as a defined, but hidden, mechanism in the game, that was decried so badly. If an honor mechanism does make it into the game, I would be extremely glad; however, implementing it, even behind the scenes, would only keep it behind the scenes for a short while before it was discovered, and then there would be outrage from those who just want to point-and-click.

Quote

Beyond that though... it's not supposed to become a micromanaging game mainly, is it?

Only for Command role players, hehe.

Kyll Long, on 07 December 2011 - 03:25 AM, said:

After that people will move on and those of us that love the whole universe will be left where we started. Thats something a lot of us (based on these boards) aren't willing to see.

I got a lump in my throat on this one. It might sound sort of sad, but I think I love the BattleTech universe as much as I love my family, though obviously they take far more care and feeding. Kyll, I couldn't agree with you more, and it will break my heart if MWO actually turns out to be a twitch-fest. For the record, I don't believe it's going to be like that, and I think a LOT of people, from both sides of the veteran/twitcher argument will be pleasantly surprised and equally happy with the game.

[Red Beard]

Kay Wolf, on 07 December 2011 - 07:23 AM, said:

Only for Command role players, hehe.

This, coming from a person who sees command as a position defined by an amount of paperwork.

Quote

It might sound sort of sad, but I think I love the BattleTech universe as much as I love my family

Yeah, that is really sad, and I would venture to say that your family reaps the benefit of your lost time.

Quote

it will break my heart if MWO actually turns out to be a twitch-fest.

While I don't think that it will be like a full on FPS, I do know that ANY game of this sort will lend itself to those with faster hand-eye reactions. I can see why so many PC gamers don't want it to be anything like a console game. At least, in that sense.

[Red Beard]

Kay Wolf, on 03 December 2011 - 08:47 PM, said:

However, many types who like to be in Command, such as myself, enjoy doing the paperwork aspects, especially if Mercs want more money and less hassle, who are NOT playing Commanders.

Sounds to me like you would be better at accounting than commanding.

[Kyll Long]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 05:42 PM, said:

Sounds to me like you would be better at accounting than commanding.

Wow always so negative. Looks can be deceiving. I've known quite a few paper pushers who turned out to be better CO's than the line CO himself. Oh and I'm talking real life not in a game just so you aren't confused.

Edited by Kyll Long, 07 December 2011 - 05:52 PM.

[Red Beard]

Kyll Long, on 07 December 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

Wow always so negative. Looks can be deceiving. I've known quite a few paper pushers who turned out to be better CO's than the line CO himself. Oh and I'm talking real life not in a game just so you aren't confused.

Sure pal. Not negative, realistic. Been around long enough to know the difference.

Edited by Red Beard, 07 December 2011 - 05:59 PM.

[Red Beard]

Kyll Long, on 07 December 2011 - 03:25 AM, said:

people will move on and those of us that love the whole universe will be left where we started.

The game will last as long as it is FUN to play. All of the side trimmings will have little effect on it's overall longetivity.

[Kyll Long]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:01 PM, said:

The game will last as long as it is FUN to play. All of the side trimmings will have little effect on it's overall longetivity.

First statement is absolutely true. Second part not so much. The side trimmings are what can contribute to and prolong the fun factor. People burnout on FPS mode. Having a second mode of play or additional detailed things to do can give people a way of avoiding or postponing that burnout. The longer that's postponed the longer the game survives.

[Red Beard]

Kyll Long, on 07 December 2011 - 06:06 PM, said:

The side trimmings are what can contribute to and prolong the fun factor. People burnout on FPS mode. Having a second mode of play or additional detailed things to do can give people a way of avoiding or postponing that burnout. The longer that's postponed the longer the game survives.

To me, the trimmings come in the form of additional game types, such as capture the flag and such. I do, however, get your point. And if paperwork appeals to some, then so be it.

[Red Beard]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:01 PM, said:

The game will last as long as it is FUN to play. All of the side trimmings will have little effect on it's overall longetivity.

All the side trimmings will have little effect on it's overall longetivity...if the core game is not FUN, or is merely mediocre. I would prefer to know that the core game is the focus, and not a bunch of paper pushing, political jockying and the like. Maybe I am aiming too high.

[Kyll Long]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:22 PM, said:

To me, the trimmings come in the form of additional game types, such as capture the flag and such. I do, however, get your point. And if paperwork appeals to some, then so be it.

I'm curious Red Beard as to what your take on the Info release today was. Overall good or bad and why? I may not agree with you on some things but I always like to know what the other opinions might be.

[Red Beard]

Things seem rather preliminary, so I guess an opinion is a bit early. That said, I guess I am intrigued by the LP system. I worry that it will give too much power to the "all nighter" guys. I have limited time to play, ( not NO time ) . As I have spent most of my adult life being a leader, I tend to be VERY selective of who I follow, and why they want to lead. Awarding LP to players simply for winning might lend itself to players gaining positions when they really do not DESERVE it.

Winning does not mean you LED well, just that you won. Again, things are very early in the process, and even if it does end up that way, I am still in. I have a small, select group of guys that are already organized and ready to play, and we all agree that time will choose our leaders, not numbers of wins. Just being the star player does not qualify one for command. Nor does pencil pushing or paper shuffling. No disrespect to you or your own experiences.

[Red Beard]

Kyll, there is GREAT danger in desiring leadership. I tend to avoid those that openly admit that they like being the leader.

[Kyll Long]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:38 PM, said:

Things seem rather preliminary, so I guess an opinion is a bit early. That said, I guess I am intrigued by the LP system. I worry that it will give too much power to the "all nighter" guys. I have limited time to play, ( not NO time ) . As I have spent most of my adult life being a leader, I tend to be VERY selective of who I follow, and why they want to lead. Awarding LP to players simply for winning might lend itself to players gaining positions when they really do not DESERVE it.

Winning does not mean you LED well, just that you won. Again, things are very early in the process, and even if it does end up that way, I am still in. I have a small, select group of guys that are already organized and ready to play, and we all agree that time will choose our leaders, not numbers of wins. Just being the star player does not qualify one for command. Nor does pencil pushing or paper shuffling. No disrespect to you or your own experiences.

Interesting I actually agree with this. That was one of the benefits of the other systems. In order to hold those higher positions you not only had to have earned the points but you had to be able to garner the support of others to determine you were capable and worthy of holding the position. I'll keep a bit of optimism for what they want to implement until we see more details on how the House ranks will function but overall I am glad they are allowing for people who want a more traditional rank/ play experience.

[Kyll Long]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:41 PM, said:

Kyll, there is GREAT danger in desiring leadership. I tend to avoid those that openly admit that they like being the leader.

For us the HL and HXO's were usually the ones who lost the coin toss Fortunately I only lost once and quickly arranged for someone else to lose within a month heh. I much prefer the title I last bore which was not a coded rank.

[Red Beard]

Kyll Long, on 07 December 2011 - 06:42 PM, said:

you had to be able to garner the support of others to determine you were capable and worthy of holding the position.

Therein lies the essence of how a true leader is chosen. I turn a wary eye to anyone who "likes" to command.

Quote

I'll keep a bit of optimism for what they want to implement until we see more details on how the House ranks will function but overall I am glad they are allowing for people who want a more traditional rank/ play experience.

I agree.

[Threat Doc]

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 05:58 PM, said:

Sure pal. Not negative, realistic. Been around long enough to know the difference.

No, sincerely, horribly, nasty and negative.

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 05:42 PM, said:

Sounds to me like you would be better at accounting than commanding.

Did I offend you in a past life or something? The paperwork is sometimes necessary and, just because I like doing the paperwork does not mean I dislike being on the field. You should stop and think that, unlike yourself, many people are multi-faceted. I have every reason in the world to be jaded and hateful, Red Beard, and I have been in quite a few aspects of my life, but I don't think I've EVER met anyone as hateful as you are.

Red Beard, on 07 December 2011 - 06:41 PM, said:

Kyll, there is GREAT danger in desiring leadership. I tend to avoid those that openly admit that they like being the leader.

Did you ever stop to think... that some desire the role of leadership because they found out they were good at it, legitimately good, and they built up their ability to do so over time, and that their desire comes from a place of knowledge there are few who will honestly put forth effort to do it?

You're sad, brother.

I'm off this thread. Good night, folks, and take care.

[Red Beard]

Kay Wolf, on 07 December 2011 - 08:31 PM, said:

I don't think I've EVER met anyone as hateful as you are.

I'm sure you say that to all the guys who disagree with you...

Quote

some desire the role of leadership because they found out they were good at it

Sure. I am also willing to bet that ain't you, sister. Your attitude smacks of...well, attitude. It's gonna be funny when my company spanks you in direct combat and you get stripped of rank for ineffective leadership.

[Alex Wolfe]

On topic, for a change... weren't the Ares Conventions basically tossed out of the airlock the first chance the Successor States had? In the first Succession War that happened, or shortly thereafter? Some people mentioned that in the "Ares Conventions and urban warfare" thread.

The wiki notes only one page of one source on its Ares Conventions page, but somehow I doubt the Houses decided to abide by them for some 600 years, and I sure have never heard of anyone tried for breaking them.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 08 December 2011 - 03:43 AM.