17 replies to this topic

[Vellron2005]

After reading the topic https://mwomercs.com...5366-jihad-era/ about why the people hate the Jihad era, a thought occurred to me..

The Battletech setting more or less stops after this era..

But with the increasing popularity of the BT setting, is it not time we go beyond the lore?

Does PGI or HBS for instance, have the legal rights to make a videogame in the BT setting, that takes place, saaaay, 500 years after the last known event in the BT lore?

Would this not be a great way to update the setting to be more logical? Erase inconsistencies, add modern-day technologies and combat tactics that we're missing in BT?

Would you guys support this?

Why could we not have the proud lineage of the Battletech setting, but in a new, fresh, logical way?

[Juodas Varnas]

I'd prefer being stuck in 3025.

[Andi Nagasia]

i say we stop at 3069, and PGI give the Community the reigns and have them build the Universe,
as an Alternate Universe BattleTech, relase all the IS & Clan Factions and let the Universe build it self,

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Checks out this Dark Age stuff

Notices Dark Age Atlas

Me:

[kesmai]

never was interested in any stuff after the fedcom civil war, be it novels or the game itself.
i would be way more interested in amaris era and succesion war era campaigns and setting (so the time line up to the clan invasion itself).
clan invasion (and the introduction of clans) was done so badly in this game, that we even should not talk about.

[Metus regem]

kesmai, on 14 February 2017 - 11:18 AM, said:

never was interested in any stuff after the fedcom civil war, be it novels or the game itself.
i would be way more interested in amaris era and succesion war era campaigns and setting (so the time line up to the clan invasion itself).
clan invasion (and the introduction of clans) was done so badly in this game, that we even should not talk about.

Really it should've been a SLCF (Star League Crusade Force), using the Tech 2 versions of IS weapons, not the Clan versions....

LFE's
UAC/s
LB/s
ERSL
ERML

and maybe some of the other toys like H-PPC's and L-PPC's too...

[FupDup]

I'd honestly just go all the way out to 3150+. That way we can add any mech or equipment we want without having the silly "but bruh it's out of timeline" excuse. Add things based on making a difference and/or just being fun or cool, not based on adhering to arbitrary roleplay.

Stuff like this guy:

Andi Nagasia, on 14 February 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

i say we stop at 3069, and PGI give the Community the reigns and have them build the Universe,
as an Alternate Universe BattleTech, relase all the IS & Clan Factions and let the Universe build it self,

If we stop at 3069, that means no Magshot Gauss Rifle.

U WOT M8?!

Edited by FupDup, 14 February 2017 - 01:04 PM.

[The Lighthouse]

Vellron2005, on 14 February 2017 - 04:19 AM, said:

But with the increasing popularity of the BT setting, is it not time we go beyond the lore?

Go to HBS battletech reddit, it's a ghost town basically.

It's super crazy niche IP.

[Metus regem]

The Lighthouse, on 14 February 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

Go to HBS battletech reddit, it's a ghost town basically.

It's super crazy niche IP.

Just go to the HBS Battle Tech forums, they are actually rather active.... not to mention actual DEV team interaction too...

[1453 R]

The problem with "Stepping beyond the lore" for a 3500-era or whatever BattleTech product, in order to

Vellron2005, on 14 February 2017 - 04:19 AM, said:

Would this not be a great way to update the setting to be more logical? Erase inconsistencies, add modern-day technologies and combat tactics that we're missing in BT?

is that the very lack of these things is considered by many to be something of a BattleTech calling card. The setting is highly anachronistic in ways it sort of has to be to survive at all. if you start trying to Modern Warfare-tize BattleTech...well, the very first thing to go would be the colossal, over-complicated, poorly-armored and nonsensically-armed walking robot-things those silly savages back in the 31st century relied on.

At this point I'd honestly like to see a more MW4-style 'Inspired By' game than this shackled-to-the-lore nonsense we've got going on right now. Take the essence and spirit of BattleTech and turn it into a new spiritual successor IP that dodges some of the mistakes of the original and cleans up some of the worst weirdness, but as its own unique entity rather than as a violently overzealous entry in the existing 'verse.

Heh...give me the reigns on a Son of MechWarrior-style title? To start:

• Remove the 'Assault' 'Mech classification altogether; redistribute the weight brackets on a sensible 'Light, Medium, Heavy' scale rather than trying to jigger borderline-heavy into its own classification.
  
• ALL machines are equipped with jump jets and level design/'Mech balance is done with this feature in mind. Not all jump jets are equal, and a handful of niche specialty machines may sacrifice jet capacity, but the assumption is that all giant robots have lift jets. None of this wishy-washy half-and-half crap that causes no end of problems.
  
• Sensors, targeting, and Information Warfare are tied directly into the fundamental game experience. 'Targeting System' is a customizable component of a 'Mech, as is "Sensor Package" - no more dumb basic default unchangeable versions of either. Better versions of each allow for swifter and more precise target acquisition and shot placement among other benefits, but in turn 'Mechs have multiple means both passive and active of interfering with enemy sensors and targeting systems. Acquiring a solid 100% lock is difficult but rewarding, as opposed to the "Meh" hip-shot ironsights crap we got going on now.
  
• Weapons are streamlined to the same 'light, medium, heavy' scale, excising obvious turds like the AC/2. Weapons are also divided by distinct roles - the Gauss Rifle analog, for instance, would be specifically tagged as an anti-armor tankbuster gun, and would be built to suit that role. 'Mechs are given stock weapons loadouts with complementary roles that make sense, instead of things like half the TT stock stable being allowed to happen.

And I'd go from there as a base. Heh, but that's me. I'm absolutely certain everybody else has their own ideas, and equally certain that people will hate mine. Which is why Piranha's not doing it - the one thing most anyone here can agree on is that they appreciate and enjoy the established BattleTech 'verse enough to want to play in it.

Why throw that away, eh?

[FupDup]

1453 R, on 14 February 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

• Remove the 'Assault' 'Mech classification altogether; redistribute the weight brackets on a sensible 'Light, Medium, Heavy' scale rather than trying to jigger borderline-heavy into its own classification.

On this note, I think it would make more sense to combine mediums/heavies rather than removing assaults.

Lights and assaults are both polar opposites in every category (mobility, firepower, durability). Mediums and heavies, on the other hand, both serve the purpose of trying to combine the traits of both lights and assaults, as a "compromise class" of sorts. The problem is that due to mathematics and the BT construction system, heavies are almost always better at being a compromise class than mediums.


In general, I do wish that some developer would make some kind of "generic" ripoff of BT title that took basically all of the good ideas from BT but ignored the crappy ideas. And of course a construction system that doesn't result in clear winners and losers, or frankly no construction system at all (each mech has its own pretermined stats, whereas in BT every mech is identical if you mount the same internal stuff). Like, for example, in BT every 65-ton mech with an XL325 always has identical mobility. Every 35-ton mech always has identical internal structure and armor capacity. Etc. Leads to a lot of mech redundancy.

Like, a mech might have its own speed value that isn't determined based on tonnage or engine. It's just a fixed value assigned based on role/flavor. This allows the developers to buff/nerf mech stats without rippling out and having collateral damage. Health, pod space, agility, etc. could also be stats that can be increased or decreased via an XML edit rather than mounting different equipment or quirks.

Edited by FupDup, 14 February 2017 - 03:10 PM.

[1453 R]

FupDup, on 14 February 2017 - 03:06 PM, said:

On this note, I think it would make more sense to combine mediums/heavies rather than removing assaults.

Lights and assaults are both polar opposites in every category (mobility, firepower, durability). Mediums and heavies, on the other hand, both serve the purpose of trying to combine the traits of both lights and assaults, as a "compromise class" of sorts. The problem is that due to mathematics and the BT construction system, heavies are almost always better at being a compromise class than mediums.

Yeah, I explained that poorly. What I meant was that the game would have "Light" 'Mechs, "Medium" 'Mechs, and "Heavy" 'Mechs, but the 'Heavies' would be equivalent to current Assaults, and current Mediums/Heavies would be split up into the other brackets as needed. There'd be variation inside each bracket, faster Heavies and gun-ier Lights and such, but the four-point division just doesn't work as well as a three-point division would.

FupDup, on 14 February 2017 - 03:06 PM, said:

In general, I do wish that some developer would make some kind of "generic" ripoff of BT title that took basically all of the good ideas from BT but ignored the crappy ideas. And of course a construction system that doesn't result in clear winners and losers, or frankly no construction system at all (each mech has its own pretermined stats, whereas in BT every mech is identical if you mount the same internal stuff). Like, for example, in BT every 65-ton mech with an XL325 always has identical mobility. Every 35-ton mech always has identical internal structure and armor capacity. Etc. Leads to a lot of mech redundancy.

Like, a mech might have its own speed value that isn't determined based on tonnage or engine. It's just a fixed value assigned based on role/flavor. This allows the developers to buff/nerf mech stats without rippling out and having collateral damage. Health, pod space, agility, etc. could also be stats that can be increased or decreased via an XML edit rather than mounting different equipment or quirks.

Yeah, exactly. One of the big points of my Ideal Robot Game would be that Power systems (reactor, energy transmission) would be distinct from Mobility systems (legs, jets, movement-related stuff) and customizing one has no impact on the other. More like Armored Core than MechWarrior in that aspect, but as Armored Core is my other Great Robot Love that's not terribly surprising.

Being able to tweak and adjust the base frame you build your machine on would be cool, but it'd also be cool for that base frame to, as you said, have its own unique values and capabilities that its installed equipment modifies, rather than simply being an inert coathangar-ish skeleton for internal systems that derive the entirety of your performance. 'Mechs are more than just their engines; a Thunderbolt with a 260, a JagerMech with a 260, and a Hellbringer with a 260 should not all have identical mobility profiles. Nor should they have identical armor layouts or totals, identical sensors and targeting, or identical practically-everything-but-weapons.

It's crap and no MechWarrior game beyond the much-(over)maligned MW4 has ever done much of anything about it.

[Mister Glitchdragon]

If they're smart, they'll use different servers for different epochs. I'm thinking of MW5, mind you. MW:O is, for better or for worse, a baked cake. Think how long we've been in the "Clan Invasion" era. They can reasonably stay with this coming epoch for another four years, and by then 5 will be the next step. I'm assuming that along with 5's pve, we will get a new pvp component as well.

If they begin 5 with the Succession Wars, and with each new age (Clan invasion, FedCom Civil/WoB) offer a whole new setting (new tech, mechs, factions, maps, etc.) Players will have the option of sticking with their old characters, or making new accounts and playing in any era, even having multiple accounts so they can play whatever epoch they want whenever they want.

As to what's beyond the Jihad, who knows? The interesting thing about this franchise is that the farther down the timeline you go, the fewer "loremeisters" you'll find. Most people lost interest in new content after the Clan Invasion and the FedCom Civil War. The "Dark Ages" are roundly considered basura. The video games seemed to have spent more time reliving the past than breaking new ground.

It was a savvy move by PGI to get out of the Clan Invasion. Less "loremeisters" means more room to operate creatively within the bounds of the IP to build a successful game. I think it would be great to see the timeline advanced beyond the lore someday, new lore founded, and all of it playing out in an online, immersive universe in which we all play some part.

It really is an awesome opportunity. I hope PGI doesn't make a hash of it.

[SmokedJag]

Mister Glitchdragon, on 14 February 2017 - 04:05 PM, said:

If they're smart, they'll use different servers for different epochs. I'm thinking of MW5, mind you. MW:O is, for better or for worse, a baked cake. Think how long we've been in the "Clan Invasion" era. They can reasonably stay with this coming epoch for another four years, and by then 5 will be the next step. I'm assuming that along with 5's pve, we will get a new pvp component as well.

If they begin 5 with the Succession Wars, and with each new age (Clan invasion, FedCom Civil/WoB) offer a whole new setting (new tech, mechs, factions, maps, etc.) Players will have the option of sticking with their old characters, or making new accounts and playing in any era, even having multiple accounts so they can play whatever epoch they want whenever they want.

As to what's beyond the Jihad, who knows? The interesting thing about this franchise is that the farther down the timeline you go, the fewer "loremeisters" you'll find. Most people lost interest in new content after the Clan Invasion and the FedCom Civil War. The "Dark Ages" are roundly considered basura. The video games seemed to have spent more time reliving the past than breaking new ground.

It was a savvy move by PGI to get out of the Clan Invasion. Less "loremeisters" means more room to operate creatively within the bounds of the IP to build a successful game. I think it would be great to see the timeline advanced beyond the lore someday, new lore founded, and all of it playing out in an online, immersive universe in which we all play some part.

It really is an awesome opportunity. I hope PGI doesn't make a hash of it.

Most gamers today (get off my lawn!) have never seen the tabletop and didn't experience that lore progression. They'd know it from the computer games.

So going through the timeline isn't going to be stale to people picking it up for 'Mechs or "future mercenary, wooo!" OFC that also means that "Clan invasion!" isn't obvious as to what that was (ahem PGI promo video...). Hard to convey how menacing the Clans were as a concept when they first appeared. The SLDF- which was far superior to anything in the 3025 setting - vanishing was this giant background mystery. People weren't necessarily happy when they came back as animal totems but that they just steamrolled across hundreds of worlds in a couple years and were about that steamrolly on TT...that made an impression.

I would not mind if due to procedural generated missions MW5 slowly moved forward in time with your merc unit until it shifted from one era to the next. Many of the BT merc units were around for a long, long time.

[Black Ivan]

Read the Era Report 3145 and thought it awfull. It is just like 3025 and before like more hightech weapons and mechs. It is the Sucessiong Wars all over again, but this time without the Lord or Star League backround, but for total domination of the Inner Sphere. I would be happy for anything else than this.