159 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

...because it's a BattleTech game? They are not equal as far as I know. Not following the TT rules but adopting the spirit of the source material (fluff) can open a lot of interpretation - for better or worse. Do you think that it would be a good move?

Some TT players like Koniving in various threads have told me that TT rules and fluff influence each other, meaning that the TT have to be a game so it needs to translate the fluff within certain limits and sometimes the fluff incorporates the small details which happen or exist in the game like explaining why the weapons have such short ranges.

I can only ask you guys to imagine what could have been possible since PGI have chosen to adopt the TT values and rules. Next MW game perhaps where your AC rounds can fly past 3km?

[Tickdoff Tank]

This was a very heated topic back in Closed Beta. For good reason. There are excellent points to be made on both sides of the argument. I was always in the camp of "TT is nice, but Computer Gameplay should take precedence over canon". I was all in favor of changing many TT mechanics to make for a better real time gameplay experience.

Unfortunately (or not, depending on your view) they decided to stick to TT values in most situations. And sinc this ship has sailed, there is really nothing that we can do about it now.

[Mcgral18]

MWO doesn't really follow very many TT rules.
Some say that's part of the issue, one way or another. That they try to follow the wrong ones, or fail to put in features.

[SplashDown]

dew to all the IS whiners this game isnt mech warrior any more..its just an FPS with diff skinn robots...

Prolly why so many players leave/

[Metus regem]

Image how different the Battle Mechs would be, if they had to fallow proper engine size rules, meaning tonnage x walking speed (walk*1.5=run, rounding up) = engine size, rather than the fine tuning we get right now with being able to adjust in incrementally by 5.... Or if we had a minor cone of fire, not random % to fit, but a logical deviation between weapon mounts. I think MWO would be better for it, but that's me.

[Accused]

Yeah, I'm in the "PGI doesn't follow TT rules" group.

There's certainly a happy medium somewhere. Right now it feels like a reskinned CoD clone.

[Trauglodyte]

If they followed every rule, this game would be crappy. I think that some of the rules need to be amended or forgotten. Ferrofibrous Armor is a great example of how following the game to the "t" is a bad thing. It was always worse than Endosteel and continues to be to this day. PGI should change that for the betterment of the game but there are balancing issues that come with that like Light mechs and what they have, already, vs. what more they'd gain.

[pbiggz]

The more experienced I get the more i understand why MW4 abandoned TT build rules. They didn't necessarily do a perfect job, but I get why they did it.

The best mechwarrior game, the one that may still be years ahead of us (cause god knows, this ones good but its not the best) will have its own build system. I promise you that.

[Kumakichi]

I think all of us can appreciate the TT camp and what they were trying to do. And I think the TT camp understands it doesn't always translate to a video game.

[MischiefSC]

I love TT. I was playing Battletech before Citytech came out. I still play tabletop with friends pretty consistently.

However this is a pvp fps. The rules don't translate well. Trying to shoehorn them in made more drama. If the Clans had been balanced correctly at release 2 years ago we'd have a better game today.

BT made plenty of mistakes over the years. We are not obligated to repeat them.

[keith]

pbiggz, on 27 February 2016 - 05:20 PM, said:

The more experienced I get the more i understand why MW4 abandoned TT build rules. They didn't necessarily do a perfect job, but I get why they did it.

The best mechwarrior game, the one that may still be years ahead of us (cause god knows, this ones good but its not the best) will have its own build system. I promise you that.

thats y MW4 online part was fun, if u played with heat and ammo. they knew form the start following TT was going to be meh, so made it fun. u have to either go full sim or fun. this is neither...

[Wolfways]

I believe pgi should stick to lore (not necessarily "rules" ) as close as possible but only as long as it doesn't spoil gameplay.
But I also believe that anything pgi uses (or ignores) should be used equally for all players (i.e. full customization for IS and none for clan? ).

[Mead]

Yeah, I wouldn't be sad if they jettisoned all the BT from MWO. Been saying that for a while now.

So many people want to have their cake and eat it too. Want to sh*t on TT for arbitrary reasons? Fine, make up your own stuff. Just don't expect to take from TT and then expect people to not discuss it from the POV of frickin TT.

[LordNothing]

tt is a turn based strategy game. you cant use the same mechanics for a real time action game. other mechwarrior games show the way. this one ignores the lessons learned and does its own thing.

[Triordinant]

SplashDown, on 27 February 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:

dew to all the IS whiners this game isnt mech warrior any more..its just an FPS with diff skinn robots...

Prolly why so many players leave/

[dervishx5]

[Davers]

Players always state that Mechwarrior is a 'niche game'. I believe that is from trying to copy 25+ year old table top rules into a FPS.

[Mad Strike]

Not again , please stop.

People needs to learn that theres no way to pull Turn Based Rules into Real Time videogames whitout having a mess.

Even the guy that made Battletech said that like 2/3 months ago !!!!

Edited by Mad Strike, 27 February 2016 - 07:16 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

I wanted a Battletech game. I would rather have the lore over the TT any day. That is the part that is disappointing. So much source material ignored and we end up with this.

I just don't understand why you can't have a good game based on Battletech lore. Warhammer Online made the same mistake. EA thought they could slap on a deep and rich lore on a bad game and print money. They lasted just over 5 years even with 700k initial units sold.

ESO has it figured out and it started 10 years or so after BT. Make a good game and surround it with a rich background. Win!

For some reason PGI has chosen not to use the lore to its advantage and not make an immersive game. I do not think they are blatantly milking the franchise like EA did with Warhammer, but they do need to be better stewards of the property that was handed to them.

TL:DR I would have waited another 10 years for a good Battletech computer game.

[Wolfways]

Ted Wayz, on 27 February 2016 - 07:24 PM, said:

TL:DR I would have waited another 10 years for a good Battletech computer game.

I'm playing MWO because I'm sick of waiting. Also because MWLL was "shut down".