108 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

Just translating a 'Mech created for a table top game into an FPS has already been a problem.

In this game, weapon layout and their location matters, for example, so you can't necessarily expect the same performance out of a 'Mech from the board game in an FPS setting.

There are still other problems which manifest when you make an FPS PvP game out of a board game which plays totally different.

[Phoolan Devi]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

Imagine MWO, but it's not a BT game. Imagine all BT stuff are removed, but the concept and premise stays the same.

-Giant stompy robots
-Slow paced, "A thinking man's shooter" and is closer to simulation that it is to arcade
-Massive depth on customizations
-Role warfare
-Faction battles in a galactic scale
-Tech differences that offer different playstyles
-Role play elements

What do you see?

What I see is a great potential and a LOT of opportunity

"But Shiroi, MWO ISN'T a BT game, PGI killed all BT elements and turned into a complete monstrosity"
No


IMHO, making the game into a BT game and following the lore is more of a restriction rather than a potential in the grand scheme of things. While following the lore, you don't really have to worry a lot about creating new things as the stuff you already need are already there; the weapons, damage values, mech designs, their loadout, factions etc. That's like half the game right there.

By lore, the Clans have the better equipment, hands down. The way PGI balanced this is by making IS more "tanky" (inb4 XL balance hurr durr) and the Clans better at DPS.

Instead of having a bajillion factions and ~2 base techs, what if we only had ~5 factions but each faction plays a lot differently from the other?

For example;
Faction A relies on ballistic based weapons. Cannons, shells, stuff like that. While they have to aim a little higher above their target to compensate for bullet drop over long distances, they can also use this to their advantage by firing them like mortars, being able to shoot behind cover and damage enemies without LOS. Their support weapons will include artillery strikes that can do a lot of AoE but may have little effect on targets hiding behind a hill

Faction B emphasizes a lot on energy based weapons, stuff like lasers and plasma rifles. Gameplay wise, they do a lot of LOS.
Support wise, they can have an orbital laser platform that can shoot targets hiding behind a hill, but will have no effect against those that have cover above their heads.

Just by these 2 different examples, I can already see a diverse gameplay that can rival the IS/Clans that we have right now. Now add 3 other factions each with their own unique play style, gameplay depth and variety increases a lot. Of course, they will have to introduce new mechanics and new weapons as well to add more to what we already have.



One of the problems with MWO's current state is that it's a modern game with modern players with ~80's gimmicks. The lore balance doesn't also translate well to game balance. I guess part of this is because table top that heavily relies on RNG won't necessarily be the same for players with reflexes and quick thinking. Without quirks, an IS Gauss is pretty much superior to an IS AC/20. Less slots, practically has no heat, and most importantly, SUPERIOR RANGE. This is especially important since MWO/BT has quite a few weapons that literally do no damage at certain ranges. That sort of restriction is not really common in a lot of modern games of the same genre.


Like most other games, there has to be a story or a background setting. Like the gameplay, this also opens up a LOT of potential and opportunities to create a great universe. While they may not be able to create one that is as deep as BT in a short period of time, they can add to it as time goes on. They can even introduce new factions with new tech, making the game more deeper. By following the lore, MWO is RESTRICTED to what BT has laid out a few decades ago.This means certain factions will be **** on simply because lore said so lole.
The FRR was fighting 6 other factions at once and we were down to two planets at some point in Phase 1. Factions like Liao on the other hand only have 2 Factions to go up against at the start (though I think they manage to fight Steiner too, can't remember) This might be interesting on the political and narrative side of things, but in the end, MWO is a game, not politics.


While I understand that PGI is a small team, I do believe that with proper investments, decision making, marketing and funding, they could have developed an even better game and a new IP.

TL;DR: More freedom and variety, less BT restrictions

I wouldn't play the game you are suggesting since I play this game solely because of BT! Heck, I actually do not like FPS-games, never played them......but having the opportunity to steer a mech around I was playing in table top.....heck yeah, I'm all in for that! If this game looses the little lore it has, I would be gone immediately!

[Bishop Steiner]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

TL;DR: More freedom and variety, less BT restrictions

Imagine PGI, makers of .....er, co makers of? Cabelas Hunting/Fishing Games, advertising for no name, generic Stompy Robot FPS gGame Founders Packs......

Imagines PGI not making 5 Million in Founders Packs sales....and therefore never getting MWO off the ground at all........

And wonders.... would that really have been a bad thing? (Realizes that as many missteps as PGI has made, that MWO has led to a Battletech Resurgence, and without it, there would be no HBS Battletech 2017, no upcoming MW5, and probably no Unseen and Classic Battletech TT Renaissance.... )

Sorry OP... no Battletech? This game would never have gotten off the ground at all. And while some might claim that to be a good thing, those with clearer vision realize that without MWO, we most likely would be without a lot of other really cool Battletech products, now and upcoming.

Sorry... No Battletech, this game never happens, and the playerbase certainly would have bailed on the incompetent running of the game, long ago.

[Bishop Steiner]

Probably Not, on 18 February 2017 - 05:22 PM, said:

First: Mechwarrior draws heavily from Battletech.
Second: Which Mechwarrior crowd? There are people who loved MW2 and/or 3 but hated MW4, and vice versa. There are even people who were fans of the pen-and-paper Mechwarrior.
Third: There's a ton of overlap between the Mechwarrior crowd and the Battletech crowd.

relatively certain the highest percentage of Founders are the original Pen and Paper crowd. Many of us also enjoyed the various iterations of Mechwarrior to varying degrees.... but considering how close MW2 and 3 hewed to the TT game? Obviously I can only assume he is referring the the MW4 crowd, which, for a few years, before Mektek's Devs Ego's collectively jumped the Shark, was probably the best iteration from a pure FPS point of view.... even if it was the worst "MW" title from an actual lore PoV.

Without those lore grognards that these players seem to despise, probably not enough Founders Pack sell... and again, probably no game... since the huge sales pitch was the Trumpian "Make Mechwarrior Great Again" pitch, claiming that this would be the iteration of MW closest to TT. (something constantly overlooked by the needy MW crowd).

But whatever, we know that ship has long sailed. I'm just hoping it doesn't complete the journey to MechAssault territory. (not a terrible game... just a terrible MW/Btech game)

[Mystere]

Did people even stop for a mere minute and think that maybe, just maybe, MWO is in the sorry state it is in right now precisely because it is "A BattleTech Game" only in the most superficial sense -- it only uses BT lore names and general Mech shapes and almost not much else?

Edited by Mystere, 18 February 2017 - 06:25 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mystere, on 18 February 2017 - 06:24 PM, said:

Did people even stop for a mere minute and think that maybe, just maybe, MWO is in the sorry state it is in right now precisely because it is "A BattleTech Game" only in the most superficial sense -- it only uses BT lore names and general Mech shapes and almost not much else?

[patataman]

Being a BT game was a good thing for MWO, else, many players wouldn't have played it, or put money in it. Probably it would not exist.

Honestly i couldn't care less about the TT rules since this game is not a TT game, it's a FPS. If an AC20 should do 83 dmg/shot and have a range of 2917 meters to make the game better, i'm all for it. If a paperdoll doesn't reflect damage well for a FPS, change the system and damage specific components of the mech. Actuators, gyros, radar.. etc and make damage affect the way you handle the mech. There are a lot of ways to make a giant stompy robot game and still making it BT.

What i really miss in this "BT game" is what makes BT great in the first place: The universe surrounding mech battles.
There is no story or context, all factions ( the 2 of them now! ) are the same with different mechs and logos. They didn't even bother with ultra easy things like copying mech descriptions from sarna. The MVP syndrome is the real problem IMHO.

Shiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

Instead of having a bajillion factions and ~2 base techs, what if we only had ~5 factions but each faction plays a lot differently from the other?

How about 5 succesor states, with the same base tech and restricting the available mechs for each one? Then give the ones that lost the mech lottery (ahem, Liao, ahem) some buffs in other areas like extra artillery strikes or improved <insert tech here> or whatever.

[General Solo]

Probably Not, on 18 February 2017 - 05:22 PM, said:

First: Mechwarrior draws heavily from Battletech.
Second: Which Mechwarrior crowd? There are people who loved MW2 and/or 3 but hated MW4, and vice versa. There are even people who were fans of the pen-and-paper Mechwarrior.
Third: There's a ton of overlap between the Mechwarrior crowd and the Battletech crowd.

Yeah I know MW is based on BT.
The mechwarrior crowd Im speaking of are the ones that played the mechwarrior video games (Including the Mech Sim found in shopping centers of yore) but don't give a rats about tabletop, that crowd.

I mean repair and rearm got removed cause not that many people liked it, even though some were very vocal about having it added to the game.

I don't have the patience to TT, but I read the compedium and source books, cause they are kinda interesting, even read a few novels (Big Ulric Kerensky and Kai Allard fan) but for me the mech sim (video game) is where its at.

I'm a Legendary Founder to boot

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 18 February 2017 - 06:48 PM.

[DaZur]

Mystere, on 18 February 2017 - 06:24 PM, said:

Did people even stop for a mere minute and think that maybe, just maybe, MWO is in the sorry state it is in right now precisely because it is "A BattleTech Game" only in the most superficial sense -- it only uses BT lore names and general Mech shapes and almost not much else?

Yes and no.

The BT universe is inherently unbalanced and much of the core lore and fluff is the origin of that imbalance... More accurately, the tighter PGI clings to MWO's heritage the harder it actually becomes to balance.

IMHO it's all the fudgery that's effort TO force elicit balance is what's got MWO in the state it's in.

[Mystere]

DaZur, on 18 February 2017 - 06:39 PM, said:

Yes and no.

The BT universe is inherently unbalanced and much of the core lore and fluff is the origin of that imbalance... More accurately, the tighter PGI clings to MWO's heritage the harder it actually becomes to balance.

IMHO it's all the fudgery that's effort TO force elicit balance is what's got MWO in the state it's in.

The BT universe during the Clan invasion is inherently an asymmetric environment. Totally rejecting that inherent attribute is mistake #1.

They should have either embraced it or chosen a different era.

And by the way:

**** eSports!

That is mistake #2.

Edited by Mystere, 18 February 2017 - 06:49 PM.

[DaZur]

Mystere, on 18 February 2017 - 06:47 PM, said:

**** eSports!

I could not have said it better...

[Mystere]

Probably Not, on 18 February 2017 - 06:51 PM, said:

I adamantly believe that if they wanted to do the Clan Invasion at ALL, they should have put in the effort to get 2 stars vs. 3 lances working properly for FP. QP is a total crapshoot anyway, but FP by all rights should have been what made this game stand apart.

Also, Esports is ******* cancer, as evidenced by its most popular games being crap-ola like League. The sheer epeenery in the LoL community is absolutely horrific, and the community is generally absolutely awful with few exceptions.

Apparently, according to a not so insignificant number, in a 10 vs. 12, the latter is nothing but cannon fodder.

[Hit the Deck]

Mystere, on 18 February 2017 - 06:57 PM, said:

Apparently, according to a not so insignificant number, in a 10 vs. 12, the latter is nothing but cannon fodder.

Assymmetric force (in number) is fine if you can control more than one 'Mech in a match.

Either at a time (like the original TT game, MechCommander, or BattleTech the game) or to a lesser extent, FPS with respawn (one side gets more respawn while the other one has less).

[Mystere]

Hit the Deck, on 18 February 2017 - 07:15 PM, said:

Assymmetric force (in number) is fine if you can control more than one 'Mech in a match.

Either at a time (like the original TT game, MechCommander, or BattleTech the game) or to a lesser extent, FPS with respawn (one side gets more respawn while the other one has less).

People keep repeating the underlined sentence ad nauseam and yet it still does not make it true.

[Hit the Deck]

Mystere, on 18 February 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

People keep repeating the underlined sentence ad nauseam and yet it still does not make it true.

Nothing is true because it's just a game. That's just the most reasonable argument that I can think of.

[rollermint]

We've had some stompy robot games during the heydays of the early Mechwarriors, Heavy Gears and Earthsiege 1/2/Starsiege. I enjoyed them all, particularly Earthsiege.

If some reputable studio/company decides to kickstart a new mechsim, would the MWO crowd even support them? Lets say that they do have a solid portfolio and have very sound ideas and concepts for their new game?

[Shiroi Tsuki]

rollermint, on 18 February 2017 - 07:56 PM, said:

If some reputable studio/company decides to kickstart a new mechsim, would the MWO crowd even support them?

If the game is aimed at a more broader audience, then you may just get support from more than just the MWO crowd. Target audience is just as important.
If you're gonna develop a Mech game that is not related to BT and have BT fans as your primary target audience, you're most likely not gonna do well. But if you develop a Mech game that is not related to BT but have a more broader target audience, regardless if you're gonna hook in BT fans or not, you'll most likely have more success.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

Imagine MWO, but it's not a BT game. Imagine all BT stuff are removed, but the concept and premise stays the same.

-Giant stompy robots
-Slow paced, "A thinking man's shooter" and is closer to simulation that it is to arcade
-Massive depth on customizations
-Role warfare
-Faction battles in a galactic scale
-Tech differences that offer different playstyles
-Role play elements

What do you see?

What I see is a great potential and a LOT of opportunity

"But Shiroi, MWO ISN'T a BT game, PGI killed all BT elements and turned into a complete monstrosity"
No


IMHO, making the game into a BT game and following the lore is more of a restriction rather than a potential in the grand scheme of things. While following the lore, you don't really have to worry a lot about creating new things as the stuff you already need are already there; the weapons, damage values, mech designs, their loadout, factions etc. That's like half the game right there.

By lore, the Clans have the better equipment, hands down. The way PGI balanced this is by making IS more "tanky" (inb4 XL balance hurr durr) and the Clans better at DPS.

Instead of having a bajillion factions and ~2 base techs, what if we only had ~5 factions but each faction plays a lot differently from the other?

For example;
Faction A relies on ballistic based weapons. Cannons, shells, stuff like that. While they have to aim a little higher above their target to compensate for bullet drop over long distances, they can also use this to their advantage by firing them like mortars, being able to shoot behind cover and damage enemies without LOS. Their support weapons will include artillery strikes that can do a lot of AoE but may have little effect on targets hiding behind a hill

Faction B emphasizes a lot on energy based weapons, stuff like lasers and plasma rifles. Gameplay wise, they do a lot of LOS.
Support wise, they can have an orbital laser platform that can shoot targets hiding behind a hill, but will have no effect against those that have cover above their heads.

Just by these 2 different examples, I can already see a diverse gameplay that can rival the IS/Clans that we have right now. Now add 3 other factions each with their own unique play style, gameplay depth and variety increases a lot. Of course, they will have to introduce new mechanics and new weapons as well to add more to what we already have.



One of the problems with MWO's current state is that it's a modern game with modern players with ~80's gimmicks. The lore balance doesn't also translate well to game balance. I guess part of this is because table top that heavily relies on RNG won't necessarily be the same for players with reflexes and quick thinking. Without quirks, an IS Gauss is pretty much superior to an IS AC/20. Less slots, practically has no heat, and most importantly, SUPERIOR RANGE. This is especially important since MWO/BT has quite a few weapons that literally do no damage at certain ranges. That sort of restriction is not really common in a lot of modern games of the same genre.


Like most other games, there has to be a story or a background setting. Like the gameplay, this also opens up a LOT of potential and opportunities to create a great universe. While they may not be able to create one that is as deep as BT in a short period of time, they can add to it as time goes on. They can even introduce new factions with new tech, making the game more deeper. By following the lore, MWO is RESTRICTED to what BT has laid out a few decades ago.This means certain factions will be **** on simply because lore said so lole.
The FRR was fighting 6 other factions at once and we were down to two planets at some point in Phase 1. Factions like Liao on the other hand only have 2 Factions to go up against at the start (though I think they manage to fight Steiner too, can't remember) This might be interesting on the political and narrative side of things, but in the end, MWO is a game, not politics.


While I understand that PGI is a small team, I do believe that with proper investments, decision making, marketing and funding, they could have developed an even better game and a new IP.

TL;DR: More freedom and variety, less BT restrictions

Then this game never would have gotten off the ground to begin with.

or Hawken would have been the superior "mech" game that released.

Or maybe Titanfall would have gotten bigger attention, or MekTek's Heavy Gear would have done better.

But MWO, wouldn't be ANYTHING, without the BT franchise to pull from. the fact we're even here, is because of the founders program. You really think it would have gotten the support it did if it wasn't attatched to a 30+ year old IP with entrenched, dedicated fanbase?

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

OZHomerOZ, on 18 February 2017 - 05:05 PM, said:

I thought the game catered more to the mechwarrior crowd than the Battletech crowd
Dat is why I signed up
The games called Mechwarrior Online not Battletech Online

Stop this.

Stop this right now.

You KNOW better.

[Cptn Goodvibes Pig of Steel]

Yes, I kind of agree with the sentiment in the title of the post. For me, MWO is just a "placeholder" till something else comes along. I do like piloting mech's, but the meta, the same 12 v 12, the rinse and repeat repetiveness with no real meaning does curtail my involvement after awhile. There's just enough names and stuff to have thin veneer of Battletech lore and that's about it. I don't really hold out much hope for MW5. If they haven't been able to significantly change the MWO game plan in five years, then I really don't think they have the ability to figure it out now. At the end of the day, it's pretty much a program to raise revenue cash flow through selling mech's. I guess this is fine for most customers. Maybe HBS has the answer. Who knows? For true Battletech fans, It certainly has been an opportunity missed.