252 replies to this topic

[Engineering]

BTW not trying to discourage ya. Just don't want you to get in trouble

[Odanan]

Engineering, on 12 July 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

Although I'd have a chat with their legal department first before comercializing.

I'm not going to sell it - it's free.

[Odanan]

Updated! (going to sleep now)

[Beneto]

Just wanted to say this is an incredible idea and the work you have put in it so far is really awesome. I am looking forward to getting a chance to try to play it my self soon. Keep up the good work it would be great if this took off as a tie in to this game. I know some great card shops that would sell a ton

[DEHK]

so... you made a CCG of a Video Game of a Table Top game.

And you ripped off someone elses art to do it...

someone take away his photoshop privileges, or just shoot me, whichever is easier.

(look: i approve of both the enthusiasm and the effort... just, like, bend that toward your own universe... make something new... no game is truly original, but give it a different coat of paint or a different mechanism)

Edited by DEHK, 12 July 2012 - 09:41 PM.

[Odanan]

DEHK, on 12 July 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

so... you made a CCG of a Video Game of a Table Top game.

Good definition!

DEHK, on 12 July 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

someone take away his photoshop privileges, or just shoot me, whichever is easier.

Or just shoot me, because I'm on fire!

DEHK, on 12 July 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

(look: i approve of both the enthusiasm and the effort... just, like, bend that toward your own universe... make something new... no game is truly original, but give it a different coat of paint or a different mechanism)

The most fun games are those based in something we know (and love). I'm a big fan of the Battletech universe and I like to play every BT/MW game in every platform. Most of us are here (and are founders) because MWO is Battletech - if it was some generic game of brawling giant robots I would probably skip it.

I didn't try to make something new: on the contrary. I'm having an effort to make my game the more similar to MWO as possible. That's why every element is the game (including every element in the art) is a rip off of MWO.

The fun here is to play MWO in a game board.

[DarthMolen]

FYI, I skimmed... but I just want to give my appreciation... that's amazing! I'm going to print all this off at work and try it out with a couple of my co-workers on their chess boards. See if I can get some interest in MWO drummed up.

Thank you so much for the time you put in. I know all about passions. Any way we can get a PDF? I'll host it (i have unlimited bandwidth server)

[DarthMolen]

Heh. I made my own word doc so that I can print it off

[McScwizzy]

I'm gonna send this off to my friend who I play the Btech board game with. We are gonna try it this weekend!

[Glasswlkr]

This is a great idea! I haven't read through the rules thoroughly yet, but it looks pretty good. And well thought out.

Will print it out and try it when I get the chance!

[Pollux114]

Nice.

[Glasswlkr]

Not sure how much of a "community effort" you want this to become, but a suggestion:

For costing forumla, why not at least derive it from the TT BV or BV2 calculations? That may still result in balance issues, but while not perfect by any means, the BV is fairly "accepted" by BattleTech community. Either that or base it off the CBill cost. Either one works. Then if you find balance issues, it will help illustrate balance problems in your translations of the combat mechanics instead (requiring tuning in the combat mechanics).

I've always found in the past having a "formula" for most mechanics makes it much easier to tune things by adjusting one variable here or there in the future. And removing any "arbitrary" values being assigned to things helps keep down arguments on what this number should be, or that number or whatever. Just stick to the formula, and tweak it a bit to achieve "good enough" balance

Thoughts?

[Odanan]

DarthMolen, on 13 July 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

Thank you so much for the time you put in. I know all about passions. Any way we can get a PDF? I'll host it (i have unlimited bandwidth server)

I can make a PDF with all rules and print-friendly cards. PM me you e-mail.

[Sauhund]

Pretty AWESOME

Printing and playing it tonight

EPIC!

<(^(00)^)>

[Brunhin Graywind]

this reminds me a lot of the old CCG Battletech (I loved that game), I am wondering though if you were planning on adding more cards, because from the looks of it, maybe half of the abilities are not used by the cards you presented. I do have a few questions though, obviously it is turned based with multiple phases, my question is about the phases. Do you envision the movement and attack phases as one phase or separate? Basically do you move and attack with a mech at one time tapping as you go, or do you move all of your mechs and then start attacking (I kind of assume the former because you have tapping, but you never know).

Have you thought up any rules on how players are to set up the "map", meaning the addition of obstacles and high ground, or do you leave that up to the players to decide

Good Job

Glasswlkr, on 13 July 2012 - 06:00 AM, said:

I've always found in the past having a "formula" for most mechanics makes it much easier to tune things by adjusting one variable here or there in the future. And removing any "arbitrary" values being assigned to things helps keep down arguments on what this number should be, or that number or whatever. Just stick to the formula, and tweak it a bit to achieve "good enough" balance

that is a good point, you could modify

• ECM
  
  • Used in: opponent player Attack Phase, just after receiving Damage.
    
  • Effect: if a player has at least one mech in game with ECM, he can ignore 1 Damage received by one of his mechs during a turn. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one mech with ECM in game.
• Anti-Missile
  
  • Used in: opponent player Attack Phase, just after receiving Damage.
    
  • Effect: a mech with Anti-Missile can ignore once in a turn 1 Damage received from Indirect Fire.
• Commander (or Beagle, or TAG?)
  
  • Used in: player’s Attack Phase, when dealing Damage.
    
  • Effect: if a player has at least one mech in game with the Commander ability, he can choose one of his mechs to deal +1 Damage in a turn. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one Commander mech in game.

to include X like you did with overheat and indirect fire. That way you leave yourself open to add more powerful cards later (i.e. special mechs). By changing them to ECM X you would have to change the Effect portion to "if a player has at least one mech in game with ECM, once per turn he can ignore X Damage received by one of his mechs during that turn, where X is equal to the highest value of ECM among mechs that player controls. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one mech with ECM in game." You could do the same thing with same thing with Anti-missile and Commander. The main thing this would do is allow you create specialty mechs further down the line. Maybe something like a full anti-missile platform with anti-missile 2 that has no long or medium ranged attacks (and probably a low short ranged). And there are mechs that are just begging to be labeled one way or another, the Raven practically screams advanced ECM, and a Grand Dragon variant would be a great advanced commander

Or I believe that is what Glass was suggesting in the second part of his post

Edited by Brunhin Graywind, 13 July 2012 - 06:26 AM.

[Odanan]

Glasswlkr, on 13 July 2012 - 06:00 AM, said:

Not sure how much of a "community effort" you want this to become, but a suggestion:

For costing forumla, why not at least derive it from the TT BV or BV2 calculations? That may still result in balance issues, but while not perfect by any means, the BV is fairly "accepted" by BattleTech community. Either that or base it off the CBill cost. Either one works. Then if you find balance issues, it will help illustrate balance problems in your translations of the combat mechanics instead (requiring tuning in the combat mechanics).

I've always found in the past having a "formula" for most mechanics makes it much easier to tune things by adjusting one variable here or there in the future. And removing any "arbitrary" values being assigned to things helps keep down arguments on what this number should be, or that number or whatever. Just stick to the formula, and tweak it a bit to achieve "good enough" balance

Thoughts?

I will make a formula for calculating the cost, based of the card stats.

BV and C-Bills cost from the TT are based on several things that do not aply to this game, so I will just ignore them.

[Glasswlkr]

Odanan, on 13 July 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

I will make a formula for calculating the cost, based of the card stats.

BV and C-Bills cost from the TT are based on several things that do not aply to this game, so I will just ignore them.

Fair enough

Was just throwing some suggestions out there to perhaps make it a bit easier for you than coming up with your own formula from scratch

Looking forward to seeing how this develops!

With the support of some of the PGI folks so far, who knows wouldn't it be funny if it ended up as an in-game mini-game in MWO in some distant future update? lol

[Odanan]

Brunhin Graywind, on 13 July 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

this reminds me a lot of the old CCG Battletech (I loved that game), I am wondering though if you were planning on adding more cards, because from the looks of it, maybe half of the abilities are not used by the cards you presented. I do have a few questions though, obviously it is turned based with multiple phases, my question is about the phases. Do you envision the movement and attack phases as one phase or separate? Basically do you move and attack with a mech at one time tapping as you go, or do you move all of your mechs and then start attacking (I kind of assume the former because you have tapping, but you never know).

Have you thought up any rules on how players are to set up the "map", meaning the addition of obstacles and high ground, or do you leave that up to the players to decide

Good Job



that is a good point, you could modify

• ECM
  
  • Used in: opponent player Attack Phase, just after receiving Damage.
    
  • Effect: if a player has at least one mech in game with ECM, he can ignore 1 Damage received by one of his mechs during a turn. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one mech with ECM in game.
• Anti-Missile
  
  • Used in: opponent player Attack Phase, just after receiving Damage.
    
  • Effect: a mech with Anti-Missile can ignore once in a turn 1 Damage received from Indirect Fire.
• Commander (or Beagle, or TAG?)
  
  • Used in: player’s Attack Phase, when dealing Damage.
    
  • Effect: if a player has at least one mech in game with the Commander ability, he can choose one of his mechs to deal +1 Damage in a turn. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one Commander mech in game.

to include X like you did with overheat and indirect fire. That way you leave yourself open to add more powerful cards later (i.e. special mechs). By changing them to ECM X you would have to change the Effect portion to "if a player has at least one mech in game with ECM, once per turn he can ignore X Damage received by one of his mechs during that turn, where X is equal to the highest value of ECM among mechs that player controls. This ability is not cumulative if the player has more than one mech with ECM in game." You could do the same thing with same thing with Anti-missile and Commander. The main thing this would do is allow you create specialty mechs further down the line. Maybe something like a full anti-missile platform with anti-missile 2 that has no long or medium ranged attacks (and probably a low short ranged). And there are mechs that are just begging to be labeled one way or another, the Raven practically screams advanced ECM, and a Grand Dragon variant would be a great advanced commander


Or I believe that is what Glass was suggesting in the second part of his post

Nice! I will adapt some of these suggestions to the game.

But how could a mech have ECM 2?

[Odanan]

I will add soon the cards for the tech level 2 mechs. After all, we need to put in use those fancy abilities, right?

There is also a (distant) plan to make the mechs' card images represent their real variants, like this and this. It's a huge work and I will need the help of the repainters, but eventually it can be done.

[LazDude2012]

Ya know, there's already a "MechWarrior board game". It's called BattleTech.