Jump to content

What Are The Bt Values For Hp Of Engine, Gyro, Etc?


23 replies to this topic

#21 totgeboren

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 357 posts
  • LocationUmeå, Sweden

Posted 04 April 2016 - 03:20 AM

View PostDingo Red, on 04 April 2016 - 02:14 AM, said:


MechWarrior is 100% and always has been an adaptation of BT. That's the point- not directly bringing rules from BT, that's silly, but adapting rules or ideas into a real time environment. I don't understand why you'd be bugged about this. It's not about wanting MW to be a PC version of TT, and that isn't what he's asking, it's about wanting to play MechWarrior, a real time cockpit-level adaptation of it.

And there's no reason adapting some rules wouldn't make MWO more interesting. A heat scale which actually has negative effects. Critical hits that cause equipment malfunction. Distinction between walking and running, weapon bob.

I guess personally it bugs me that people feel that just because it's from TT, it couldn't be adapted into MWO. Also off-topic. Posted Image


I guess I could have been a bit more precise.
My comment wasn't aimed at the op, more to the following discussion about how MWO does not follow the TT rules (implied that that is a bad thing).
For example, a TT rule that makes no sense in MWO is the 10 HS minimum, and what makes even less sense is that not all engines come with 10 HS stock (so if you go for a smaller lighter engine you still need to add more external HS, meaning in some cases you simply get a worse engine and less crit space for the same tonnage).

Or that the in-built engine HS become double with no drawback at all when you upgrade to DHS. Or that FF is just like Endo, only worse.
These are all direct port over of rules that make sense in the TT setting, but in MWO where engine modularity is much bigger, where there is no battle value or points cost, only c-bills (which are more or less infinite), they only lead to no-brainer choices.
No-brainer choices is a sort of defining feature of bad game design, and should be avoided even if it would lead to rules, mechanisms or solutions that were not in the TT rules, or would even directly contradict TT rules.

They have done this with Clan mech balancing, which I think is great, but there are still many things leftover from the TT adaptation that makes no sense within the MWO setting (even it they made perfect sense in the TT).

#22 CDLord HHGD

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,190 posts
  • Location"You're not comp if you're not stock."

Posted 04 April 2016 - 04:41 AM

View PostEscef, on 03 April 2016 - 10:56 AM, said:

At this point I really recommend picking up the Battletech Introductory Boxed Set, though to be honest it is a bit pricey. Another option would be Battletech Total Warfare (game rules) and Battletech Techmanual (construction rules)... but, again, pricey.

Doesn't CBT still offer PDFs of the basic rules for free?

http://www.battlecor...x.php?cPath=165

#23 Escef

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 8,530 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNew England

Posted 04 April 2016 - 06:04 AM

View PostCD LoreHammer Lord, on 04 April 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

Doesn't CBT still offer PDFs of the basic rules for free?

http://www.battlecor...x.php?cPath=165


The quick play rules ignore internal structure and critical hits.

#24 RAM

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Resolute
  • The Resolute
  • 2,020 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 04 April 2016 - 06:24 AM

For this discussion to have any meaning one must reference the expanded Critical Hits & Damage rules. As such, components function much more closely to the MWO system with equipment able to take multiple hits.


RAM
ELH





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users