404 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, on 08 September 2016 - 01:52 PM, said:

Yup... Even Alex's magical touch couldnt make the bushwalker look good...

Why do you people love this mech so much?!?

Its ugly as sin...

So is the AH-64 and A-10, doesn't make them bad combat units... besides they are a pretty ugly. And the Bushy was built more an eye towards being effective profile in combat rather than being eye candy.... hence the super narrow profile.

[Shadowomega1]

dervishx5, on 08 September 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

Yeah the series has advanced about 5 years or so since the last novel.

Let me guess only in the German Language Novels?

[dervishx5]

Shadowomega1, on 08 September 2016 - 02:07 PM, said:

Let me guess only in the German Language Novels?

No. Battletech operates on sourcebooks primary, novels secondary. The history of Battletech has advanced to 3145, and I think the novels left off a few years before that. They've explained where Stone went and all that.

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Metus regem, on 08 September 2016 - 02:05 PM, said:

So is the AH-64 and A-10, doesn't make them bad combat units... besides they are a pretty ugly. And the Bushy was built more an eye towards being effective profile in combat rather than being eye candy.... hence the super narrow profile.

But but...



At least it fires 8 missles!

Edited by Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, 08 September 2016 - 02:13 PM.

[Foxwalker]

I am not sure if anyone has said it, as there are so many pages of stuff not pertaining to this mech specifically or IS Mediums in general.

My problem with IS 55 tonners is they seem so sluggish for the class. I notice few play them. I used to like my Shadow Hawks, but they seem really clunky now. The current physics in the game make them slow to turn vs mechs that are higher or lower classed.

The Bushwacker may be good dependent on quirks. My recent purchase of the Phoenix Hawk was a bit of a disappointment. I guess due to that, I will have to hold off to see how it does. The early rewards are not enough of a draw to get me to purchase before I see how they pan out.

[Solis Obscuri]

Khobai, on 08 September 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

I see tons of other game franchises that were around in the 80s still going strong...

the fact is battletech has been on the decline for decades and the weakass jihad and dark ages storylines are a large part of the reason why

the best selling mechwarrior games and novels have all been clan centric. you think thats a coincidence?

pgi even brought clans into mwo to make money. theyre focusing on the clan invasion time period for a reason. not jihad or dark ages. because everything after 3058 is complete crap. thats what killed battletech.

there may have been other factors. but thats the big one.

TRO 3060 came out in 1997. How many decades had BT been in decline for? The game only started in 1984.

But, come to think of it, I do have a number of friends who quit playing BT because they decided badly unbalanced space furries were really lame and the game had jumped the shark. Particularly since the inclusion of Clammers mainly served to attract new players solely interested in stat advantages, not the working-with-disadvantages theme of postapocalyptic retrofuturism the CBT had been based on.

So a decline starting around 1989/1990 maybe?

[Bishop Steiner]

Solis Obscuri, on 08 September 2016 - 02:55 PM, said:

TRO 3060 came out in 1997. How many decades had BT been in decline for? The game only started in 1984.

But, come to think of it, I do have a number of friends who quit playing BT because they decided badly unbalanced space furries were really lame and the game had jumped the shark. Particularly since the inclusion of Clammers mainly served to attract new players solely interested in stat advantages, not the working-with-disadvantages theme of postapocalyptic retrofuturism the CBT had been based on.

So a decline starting around 1989/1990 maybe?

And accelerated when they started slapping samurai swords and stuff on their Ninja Gundams, trying to tap into the 90s anime surge.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

And accelerated when they started slapping samurai swords and stuff on their Ninja Gundams, trying to tap into the 90s anime surge.

One of the many reasons BT could probably use a reboot, to retcon away some of the racial stereotypes it played into.

[Terrorsdawn]

The main advantage the Bushy had was it's profile much like the 50 ton crab and we all know what happened to the Crab in the re-scale.

If the Bushy arrives and it's to tall there is no point even considering it a viable mech.

[Wolf Ender]

Solis Obscuri, on 08 September 2016 - 02:55 PM, said:

I do have a number of friends who quit playing BT because CLANS

Interesting point you're trying to make here, but it makes me wonder... tell me what do YOU think generated more revenue... all the classic battletech stuff from before clans... or the millions of copies of Mechwarrior 2 that sold when it came out? And then all the other Mechwarrior games that came after, all of which featured Clan designs pretty heavily even when the stories weren't based on clanners.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 September 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

One of the many reasons BT could probably use a reboot, to retcon away some of the racial stereotypes it played into.

Don't be stupid.

Edited by Wolf Ender, 08 September 2016 - 03:14 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 September 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

One of the many reasons BT could probably use a reboot, to retcon away some of the racial stereotypes it played into.

well, the pre internet 1980s wasn't super enlightened. Heck most people now still only know loose stereotypes. And a lot of wrong info.

[Bishop Steiner]

Wolf Ender, on 08 September 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:

Interesting point you're trying to make here, but it makes me wonder... tell me what do YOU think generated more revenue... all the classic battletech stuff from before clans... or the millions of copies of Mechwarrior 2 that sold when it came out? And then all the other Mechwarrior games that came after, all of which featured Clan designs pretty heavily even when the stories weren't based on clanners.



Don't be stupid.

munchkin gaming always sells. It's why unkillable Wolverine (marvel comics) was more popular than less powerful versions. Doesn't make it better, except from a financial standpoint. It's still undeniable that balance went to hell in a handbasket in 1990. And even the people who created the game admit it. And it likely still would have boosted sales without being so overpowered.

The IDEA of the Clans is not in itself terrible, and was obviously, in abstract always part of the plan. The plan in retrospect was poorly administered.

[TheMadTypist]

Wait a second... they're marketing the Bushwacker as an Omnimech.

Look at the hardpoint listings, specifically the arms:

LEFT ARM 2 Missile (Available Actuators: Upper, Lower)
RIGHT Arm 1 Ballistic (Available Actuators: Upper, Lower, Hand)

See that phrasing? "Available" actuators. Now look at the ones from the previously announced battlemechs-

LEFT ARM 2 Energy (Actuators: Upper, Lower)

That's from the Mad IIC. And from a previously announced Omni?

LEFT ARM 1 Energy (Available Actuators: Upper, Lower, Hand)

That's from the Linebacker.

Either they're making the Bushwacker an Omnimech, or they've somehow managed to get their page phrasing wrong in a way they haven't previously.

First IS Omni? Dun Dun Dun!

EDIT: Alright, yeah, they didn't specify slot locations for the FF. And the BSW is canonically a Battlemech. But they did do the wording differently!

Edited by TheMadTypist, 08 September 2016 - 03:23 PM.

[Uncle Totty]

Red Shrike, on 06 September 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

Still waiting....

#neverforget

[Solis Obscuri]

Foxwalker, on 08 September 2016 - 02:12 PM, said:

I am not sure if anyone has said it, as there are so many pages of stuff not pertaining to this mech specifically or IS Mediums in general.

My problem with IS 55 tonners is they seem so sluggish for the class. I notice few play them. I used to like my Shadow Hawks, but they seem really clunky now. The current physics in the game make them slow to turn vs mechs that are higher or lower classed.

The Bushwacker may be good dependent on quirks. My recent purchase of the Phoenix Hawk was a bit of a disappointment. I guess due to that, I will have to hold off to see how it does. The early rewards are not enough of a draw to get me to purchase before I see how they pan out.

Well, the lighter mediums and lights need to have some kind of advantage, so there's that.

But I think a big part of the problem was how PGI decided to nerf jump-sniper assaults without nerfing jump sniping, by nerfing jump jet turning and agile assault brawlers instead. The trickle-down didn't do the SHD, WLV and GRF any favors.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 September 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

One of the many reasons BT could probably use a reboot, to retcon away some of the racial stereotypes it played into.

Yellow scare?

In my mid-eighties Battletech?

[Wolf Ender]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:19 PM, said:

munchkin gaming always sells. It's why unkillable Wolverine (marvel comics) was more popular than less powerful versions. Doesn't make it better, except from a financial standpoint. It's still undeniable that balance went to hell in a handbasket in 1990. And even the people who created the game admit it. And it likely still would have boosted sales without being so overpowered.

The IDEA of the Clans is not in itself terrible, and was obviously, in abstract always part of the plan. The plan in retrospect was poorly administered.

Not trying to deny that the clans aren't stronger than IS pound for pound but the guy I was addressing made the assertion that the introduction of the clans caused the downturn of the franchise based on his experience where battletech TT players started getting unhappy and quitting due to clans arriving

Even accepting that fact, I see it as the TT declined in the early 90s...but at the same time, the Mechwarrior side of the franchise exploded and has sprouted many games since while the TT languished and attempts to reboot it failed.

So I guess I'm trying to ask if he's gauging the success of the battletech universe as a whole based solely off how well the TT version is doing which I would suggest is not being fair.

TheMadTypist, on 08 September 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

they've somehow managed to get their page phrasing wrong in a way they haven't previously.

Yeah somebody got lazy with the Copy/Pasting and nobody gave the page a proof-read before putting it up.

[Solis Obscuri]

Wolf Ender, on 08 September 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:

Interesting point you're trying to make here, but it makes me wonder... tell me what do YOU think generated more revenue... all the classic battletech stuff from before clans... or the millions of copies of Mechwarrior 2 that sold when it came out? And then all the other Mechwarrior games that came after, all of which featured Clan designs pretty heavily even when the stories weren't based on clanners.

The best selling and most critically acclaimed game within the MW2 series (Mercs) barely featured the Clans until near the end, and then only as an opforce so I think that largely blows that argument. The subsequent titles were likewise focused heavily on I.S. play in MW3, and the Clans had a minimal role in MW4.

I had a blast with MW2 and GBL, but I don't think they sold many TT intro sets. Mechanically the series was geared towards FPS players and had little in common with TT strategy, the MechCommander titles being the RTS exception.

[Tibbnak]

Terrorsdawn, on 08 September 2016 - 03:12 PM, said:

The main advantage the Bushy had was it's profile much like the 50 ton crab and we all know what happened to the Crab in the re-scale.

If the Bushy arrives and it's to tall there is no point even considering it a viable mech.

Bushwhacker: A 55 ton medium mech with a better profile than the nova, squat and wide, with almost all the guns and missile pods on level with the cockpit. This made it ideal for ambushing and sniping on terrain, thus the name "bushwhacker".

http://www.sarna.net.../Bushwacker.jpg



Meanwhile, at PGI: "Let's take the linebacker, the mad dog, and the vulture and mr potatoman them together!" :pgi:

https://static.mwome...wacker-hero.png

pgi had an opportunity to make buckets of money making the literal canonical hill humper for IS at a perfect 55 ton marker, and I guess based the design off the cartoon instead? Whee.

Edited by Tibbnak, 08 September 2016 - 03:49 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:16 PM, said:

well, the pre internet 1980s wasn't super enlightened. Heck most people now still only know loose stereotypes. And a lot of wrong info.

Oh I'm not blaming them given the time period this all started, just saying that it is one of the reasons it could use a reboot.

[CanadianCyrus]

Will the P1 variant be able to mount a AC20 in the right arm since it doesn't have a lower arm actuator?