74 replies to this topic

[Lugh]

Alistair Winter, on 24 November 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

What's the single player bit like?

Guaranteed to be all here are the ways you can play online... like the previous titles in the series. And not at all compelling, AT BEST.

*yawn* off to play more Fallout 4.

[Lily from animove]

Mystere, on 24 November 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

Then I regret to inform you that the direction seems to actually be:

eSports!

when this "eSports" looks similar balanced like the last tournament they streamed, then well, good night. Esports of this kind of games is not fun when every comes in the same 3 mechs and plays the same srategy. Thats boring.

[Malagant]

Madcap72, on 25 November 2015 - 01:16 AM, said:

And yet, it's still a BT game. Just like the other MW games.

In name only.

Quote

Kind of like how the MW novels are branded as being a BT novel?

Funny how the novels actually reflect the Battletech universe. MWO does not.

Quote

Feel free to explain where I'm incorrect.

Why bother to explain to you why the sky is blue or the grass is green? Others have already explained it, I don't need to rehash what was already said...

[pwnface]

Malagant, on 25 November 2015 - 11:09 AM, said:

Funny how the novels actually reflect the Battletech universe. MWO does not.

Well MWO definitely does reflect the Battletech universe even if it isn't up to your standards. We have CW with multiple factions including various IS houses and Clans that are exactly the same as those found in the battletech universe. Dropships deploy battlemechs onto a battlefield where they combat each other. Sounds a lot like battletech universe to me.

Every single mech in the game has it's name and design copied directly from the battletech universe.
Every single weapon in the game has it's name and design copied directly from the battletech universe.
Every single planet in Community Warfare is from battletech universe.

Yes, this game is based on the battletech universe.
No, this game is not based on the battltech BOARD GAME and neither should it be.

[Mycrus]

/thread

For balance. Corerule ignore.

Fake edit: yawn....

[Bobzilla]

If you can just rename and re-skin and absolutely nothing else needs to be adjusted at all, 'based on' is loosely used.

[shellashock]

Naduk, on 24 November 2015 - 11:22 PM, said:

I think the deviations from bt are mostly good
Majority of them even have precedence in older mechwarrior games

However mwo manages to feel more like battle tech than any other mw title we have had to date
We remember those old games through rose colored glasses but if you really look at them you will see just how awful many of their systems were

I'll give you one small example
Info warfare or role warfare is poised to actually be a thing
Do we have exquisite and indepth recon play ? No but it's at least possible and playing a light Mech is still very meaningful
If you cross examine with mechwarrior2 recon and light Mech were irrelevant
A single LRM20 salvo would kill most light mechs outright and mortally wound the others
A Mech could be target from over 10km away by all players at all times , los was not a requirement , if the Mech was on it was on sensors
That's not a world where anybody would ever play a light Mech

So yes this game does something's not so great but it does alot of things outstanding

I don't think I could call it a battle tech game until I have tanks and infantry under my feet
But it's a damn fine mechwarrior game

Here Here!

I have to agree with you guys here. MW:O may not do everything great (or sometimes even good), but it has a great deal of promise and is miles of fun for what it is; a customizable mech shooter that aspires to be greater then what it already is.

It's hard to describe just how great a feeling it is to not have to worry about "just grind/play till you get assaults before you start having fun" like it was for Mechwarrior 4 Vengeance/Mercanaries and Mechassault 1/2. I can have fun in any of my mechs as long as I know how to play them and enjoy the play style I specialize in.

Seriously, how many Mechwarrior/Battletech versions do you know where it is preferable to use a light or medium or an assault in a combat situation? (Of course, I am fairly new to BT/Mechwarrior so this is more of an actual question then a rhetorical one.)

That said, I think this game needs more time to be developed before we are ready for a Steam launch. So many things missing, broken or underdeveloped...

Good luck Mechwarriors and good hunting!

[Lyoto Machida]

Mystere, on 24 November 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:

You've got to be kidding on this one.

Lootee, on 25 November 2015 - 04:30 AM, said:

Lol. Yeah it's not like every FPS since DOOM in the early 1990s had the ability to switch from a single shot weapon to a spread weapon or anything.

As for BTech fans who've given up on this game, the only content this game has is money grab mech packs one after another. There's absolutely nothing that makes you feel like part of the BTech Universe.

Who are the faction leaders? What is the culture like in each faction? Which faction hates another faction's guts? Which ones are on friendly terms? Why do they fight? Why is technology so rudimentary 1000 years in the future? What is Comstar? Where do the Clans come from? Why do clanners act so constipated all the time? What rituals do clan test tube babies adhere to? Where do mechs come from?

1 starship description in Elite Dangerous has more flavor than everything in this entire game put together. Would it really hurt to say somewhere in the game that your Atlas was manufactured by Independence Weaponry and the design dates from the Amaris Civil War when Protector-General Kerensky of the SLDF commissioned the ultimate battlemech?

They miss every opportunity to flesh out the universe and instead milk players for money and plop out a generic shooter for LOLesports.

Well, by "we" I meant "PGI" and by "processing power" I meant "programming ability." Hope that clarifies things.

Madcap72, on 25 November 2015 - 01:16 AM, said:

And yet, it's still a BT game.

Just like the other MW games.

Amazing right?


Kind of like how the MW novels are branded as being a BT novel?


Licensing, how does it work...


Feel free to explain where I'm incorrect.

BT is more than just mechs. Thanks for playing.

This is also an NFL game...probably the kind you like. Consider this MWO for football games...some of us prefer more depth and substance than this:

pwnface, on 25 November 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

Well MWO definitely does reflect the Battletech universe even if it isn't up to your standards. We have CW with multiple factions including various IS houses and Clans that are exactly the same as those found in the battletech universe. Dropships deploy battlemechs onto a battlefield where they combat each other. Sounds a lot like battletech universe to me.

Every single mech in the game has it's name and design copied directly from the battletech universe.
Every single weapon in the game has it's name and design copied directly from the battletech universe.
Every single planet in Community Warfare is from battletech universe.

Yes, this game is based on the battletech universe.
No, this game is not based on the battltech BOARD GAME and neither should it be.

Factions that don't mean anything whatsoever...look at our sigs and look at our tags.

[Xetelian]

Rizzelbizzeg, on 24 November 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

It clicked, I get it. And it took Star Wars Battlefront to make it sink in. Battlefront looks amazing. I didn't do my due diligence and bought in sight unseen. I assumed there'd be awesome missions like in the old Rogue Squadron games, more ships, dogfights, a riveting solo campaign. Lore, LORE, and MOAR LOAR!

But what I did get was a game that looks great, has awesome sound effects, but no substance. It's just a run and gun FPS where I don't have to reload my blaster (silly brain, stop trying to reload dammit!).

Don't get me wrong, I really like MWO and I still find it fun, but I totally get if you were coming in with a different idea of the game already made up in your head. These are not the droids you're looking for. So ya, my b, maybe that kickstarter game will work out for y'all and maybe I'll just get an old copy of Rogue Squadron.

You thought Battlefront 3 would be like Rogue Squadron?
You thought a multiplayer game was going to be like a single player game?

Did you even play Battlefront 2? I really doubt you did but you should have considered it and watched a few youtube videos of it before you bought Battlefront 3.


Lore is important when telling a story, it isn't nearly as important when playing multiplayer that doesn't revolve around a story.

In MWO lore can be nice, I'd like to see what house made the mech I'm piloting and info on the planet we're fighting on. However this isn't a single player game and faction based multiplayer can hardly revolve around a single story.

Moral? Don't expect story when you buy an entirely multiplayer game.

Edited by Xetelian, 25 November 2015 - 06:31 PM.

[Madcap72]

Lyoto Machida, on 25 November 2015 - 06:17 PM, said:

BT is more than just mechs. Thanks for playing.

Well, when you get down to it BT is just a game you play against other people with rules that change over time and the primary income for the IP holder being selling new mechs all tied together with fluff.

MWO is LITERALLY following the same sales model that made BT popular, pokemech, gotta catch them all.

But instead of paying a couple bucks for a mini, you can just play and buy them in MWO.

[Sandpit]

Lyoto Machida, on 25 November 2015 - 06:17 PM, said:

Well, by "we" I meant "PGI" and by "processing power" I meant "programming ability." Hope that clarifies things.



BT is more than just mechs. Thanks for playing.

This is also an NFL game...probably the kind you like. Consider this MWO for football games...some of us prefer more depth and substance than this:





Factions that don't mean anything whatsoever...look at our sigs and look at our tags.

Don't diss NFL Street. One of the best football games ever made

[Lily from animove]

We should mke Mechbowl, A battletech based clone of Bloodbowl.

[ice trey]

Madcap72, on 24 November 2015 - 04:11 PM, said:

The BT purist misery stems from them not realizing that MW is not directly based on BT.

I beg to differ. It's just that since Mechwarrior 3, the franchise has been on a downward slope of being corrupted from it's core content in order to cater to plebs a broader audience. Prior issues were mostly due to programming issues.

As much as people on this board use the mantra of "You can't convert the game because it's based on dice", it's painfully clear that they've never played the game before. That, and the primary gripe from the Battletech setting fans (Which is by extention, the Mechwarrior setting) is never about perfect recreation of the mechanics, but rather, the feel.

I actually applaud PGI for some of the things they did with MWO. Not the least of which, taking things back from Microsoft and undoing the customization system. The synergy between the tabletop game and MWO was immediately made visible. Getting a layman into the P&P game during the Mechwarrior 4 / Mektek days was an uphill battle, as the record sheet was unfamiliar to them. Fast Forward to MWO's early days... pre coolant flush anyway... and I was getting people trying and repeatedly coming out for game days at the LGS, no problem.

Many of these mechanics could be resolved really easily, like including simple game-improving mechanics like removing pinpoint aiming, replacing it instead with counterstrike-style reticules, which would better resemble the rules.

Then comes the gripes about that not being futuristic, and so and so not being up to par with modern technology, but the entire setting is rooted in the concept of "What if instead of technology progressing forwards, it was degrading as we fell back into the stone age". When 'mechs have targeting computers that are probably more in line with a Commodore 64 than anything else, not that hard to believe.

But my biggest gripe with the game has never been about the mechanics of the gameplay, or how well scaled the models are compared to each other, or how so-and-so weapon is that much more OP than the next... my gripe is the root of why those are problems in the first place.

It's when the newest iteration of Mechwarrior went from this...




...to this


Suddenly, the reasons I fell in love with the Mechwarrior / Battletech franchise in the first place were already lined against the wall. I knew that all the atmosphere of the Battletech universe, the expansive lore, the amazing soundtrack, the plot that expands before your eyes, and the struggle to keep your hundred-year-old war machines in working order was doomed to fall to tier lists, e-peen sparring, and meta abuse.

It's not about playing the game, it's not about experiencing it. It's about breaking and gaming it. Just like every other online game. Period. All the effort that could have been used in making a memorable game with amazing story, character development, and atmosphere? Something we'd look back on, come back to, and cherish? Instead it's wasted on infinite meta tweaks and matchmaking balances, trying to keep the e-sports players in check.

So in the meantime, I fart about in this because there has not been any other option since 2002. Even Living Legends, which a handful of players hold up as some holy grail, was online only and clearly made not by Battletech fans, but by Mechwarrior 4 multiplayer fans, so I never even bothered with it. Until the HBS Battletech title comes out, I have no other choice.

Myself? I started on Mechwarrior 2 and 3. It's what got me into BattleTech in the first place, whether it was the card game or an RPG campaign. I've tried everything going back to the Crescent Hawks inception. I have been involved with both enough to know that all claims that "Mechwarrior isn't Battletech" are bunk. It's just that when you let people who don't have a franchises' best interests behind the wheel, the first thing they're going to do is milk it for all it's worth and then drive it into the ground.

Edited by ice trey, 27 November 2015 - 03:57 AM.

[Almond Brown]

OP you have not felt the True BT Purist Misery just yet. When the HBS BT game gets under way, and HBS change stuff in that game, because they "have to" to get any real "audience", niche just doesn't cut it anymore, then you will see what "True BT Purist Misery" really looks like. Muhahahahaha!

It will be both "absolute" and "gruesome" at a level never see before on any Gaming Forums... The New Gen Gamer can be "brutal" when armed with "social media" as their weapon of choice but that pales in comparison to an OLD Gen Gamer armed the same as they can carry a True Hate in their Hearts that makes "brutal" look tame.

Just ask PGI about the Islanders!...

I am very stoked for it all actually. MWO has been a very nice "Level 1 Starter Course" for the future of BT events to come. It will be *ucking glorious indeed. LOL!

Edited by Almond Brown, 27 November 2015 - 11:37 AM.

[JC Daxion]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2015 - 03:02 PM, said:

Anyhow, yea, it hurts when you're expecting this rich story and history and you get more of a michael bay version lol

I don't understand how people can come in expecting this, when it was super clear at launch that it was going to be a Map based pvp game, with customization or mechs, and 4 unique weight classes. Thats what founders new going in.

They also said, that when they could, they would add Clan vs IS faction wars, and if all went well, a single player experience down the road.

we have 100's of mechs now, and CW is making strides, and like all online games they take years to balance, and now they are improving single player and new player experience, with the Hopes of Story based DLC for single and co-op play, with game play that hopefully will rival the Mech 1-4 Single player experiance over the next some odd years.


Maybe it is not fast enough for some, But I don't think the dev rate has been bad. If anything the major pushes by IGP in the early days gave us a very large collection of mechs to choose from. Now that PGI is taken over, they are still giving us some mechs, but really giving the game play side a big boost. It honestly feels like a normal Dev cycle.. only people played it for the last 3+ years, verse it being in closed Alpha. I know i had fun playing the Alpha...


I suspect the starwars game will be the same in some ways.. If they run it right add some good story lines, it could be pretty fantastic.. But it is true, that game is based towards the teen market.. I'll try it down the road i'm sure..

[Metus regem]

shellashock, on 25 November 2015 - 03:42 PM, said:

Seriously, how many Mechwarrior/Battletech versions do you know where it is preferable to use a light or medium or an assault in a combat situation? (Of course, I am fairly new to BT/Mechwarrior so this is more of an actual question then a rhetorical one.)

Well that actually depends on a few things, myself personally I rarely field assault mechs in my IS companies, I find the lack of mobility (3/5 movement [walk/run speed]) a bit of a turn off. About the slowest I like to field is a 4/6 mech, often capping out around 70t, the Warhammer (WHM-6R or WHM-6Rb if I can swing it) being my go-to heavy.

But to answer your question, Lights and Mediums have a place in TT, the Lights I find is often best used for scouting and spotting the OPFOR, cleanup work, Infantry killing or speed tanking. It is possible to make someone need to roll a 13+ on 2d6 to hit a Locust in TT. Mediums are your workhorse, they do the bulk of the heavy lifting I find in TT, tough enough to take some hits, packing enough of a punch to give some hits, fast enough to get to where you need them (5/8 or 6/9), and cheap enough to field in numbers with average pilots (4/5 gunner/pilot skills).

My usual 3025 company that I field looks like this:

2 x Stinger STG-3R
1 x Stinger STG-3G
1 x Phoenix Hawk PHX-1D
4 x Centurion CN9-A
4 x Warhammer WHM-6R

I generally use the Stingers with the Phoenix Hawk as a scout force, with some bite (being a 6/9/6 [walk/run/jump]), but their job is to locate and tie down the force while I get the Centurions (5/8) and Warhammers (4/6) into position for the kill.

[wanderer]

CN9-A's are 4/6, not 5/8. Just sayin'.

What grinds me on MWO is knowing- unequivocally- that the head of design doesn't and didn't play Battletech. Nor does much of anyone at the top. It's obvious in the balancing decisions, the MechLab construction, the entire direction the game putters along in since beta.

Pretty much the one exception being Alex I to all that.

How can you make a game feel right when you're unwilling to immerse yourself in the game's background? It's like "improving" an age-of-samurai battle game by giving them chainsaws instead.

[Metus regem]

Your right, my bad on the speed, I was thinking about a different mech.

Edited by Metus regem, 27 November 2015 - 06:11 PM.

[Jun Watarase]

Malagant, on 25 November 2015 - 11:09 AM, said:

In name only.


Funny how the novels actually reflect the Battletech universe. MWO does not.


Why bother to explain to you why the sky is blue or the grass is green? Others have already explained it, I don't need to rehash what was already said...

Wait...you mean to say that the BT universe doesnt have entire companies doing 30 damage pinpoint FLD in poptarts with perfect accuracy, fully customizable battlemechs and that the 2x gauss/AC20 build is NOT the most common jagermech variant?!

EVERYTHING I KNOW IS A LIE!

[InspectorG]

Lily from animove, on 27 November 2015 - 02:11 AM, said:

We should mke Mechbowl, A battletech based clone of Bloodbowl.

Yes Yes YES!!!

But, add a mix of this to it as well: