27 replies to this topic

[Magnus Santini]

Shifty, did you play the Wasteland game which was the predecessor to Fallout? The maker did a sequel about a year ago, Wasteland 2.

[Ade the Rare]

Prosperity Park, on 05 May 2017 - 06:35 PM, said:

I want to clarify something for all you who complain

I'm an IS player! Complaining is all I have dammit!

[Mawai]

To be honest, the table top numbers are completely meaningless for a online multiplayer aimed shooting game. In my opinion, it was an utter mistake on PGIs part to even try using the numbers in terms of damage and heat taken directly from the table top values. (at least HBS appears to be avoiding this issue).

Why do I say this?

1) TT damage allocation was random ... you rolled to see if you hit at all ... you rolled to see which component was hit ... you rolled to see if any critical hits occurred. Damage from certain weapons was split into multiple groups so it would likely hit multiple components (eg LRM/SRM).

2) Damage and heat from TT weapons were allocated over a 10 second game turn.

3) Fire, movement and turning are all discrete in TT. You move one hex, you turn one hex face, you decide to fire or not. To hit chances are modified by terrain, your movement, your target's movement and the weapon you are firing. The base chance to hit in many cases once you include all these factors are actually pretty small compared to the chances to land a hit in MWO.

So ... we now come to translate this to a first person shooter and this is where it becomes obvious that just taking the TT values fails. MWO involves aiming. There is no random allocation of damage, no cone to spread damage, damage hits where you aim it. This means that damage which in TT would be spread over the entire mech can be used efficiently to core out the target, remove an XL ST or focus on destroying critical weapons. In addition, good team mates also focus fire on the same component .. something that could never occur in TT.

It is immediately clear than damage numbers from table top used directly in a team first person shooter will result in much more efficient kills due to focused fire. As a result, PGI doubles the armor rather than actually looking at the weapon balance and the numbers.

Next, even taking the TT numbers as a starting point, PGI then arbitrarily adjusted the firing rates of the various weapons. As a result, the amount of damage that each does in 10 seconds is no longer even remotely related to the TT values. So they pretend to use TT as a guideline and then completely blow it away by introducing mostly arbitrary firing rates that change the average balance between the weapons.

Anyway, in response to the OP, I completely agree ... MWO IS a "Battletech game". It is based in the universe, uses the lore and implements a system of mech combat that has the look and feel one would expect from Battletech. The specific numbers and balance are concerns but they in no way change that MWO is a game based on Battletech/Mechwarrior.

[MischiefSC]

If it was a single player game then balance is irrelevant - the player constantly upgrades to the best tech and beats hordes of bots. MP in MW4 was so broken that it's a poster child for why 1 to 1 balance is critical.

Then of course there's the fact that TT considered OP clans bad and went to 1 to 1 balance or, in the case of pretty much every new game, moved to pre-Clans timeline.

Because OP clans is a **** game environment for everyone who isn't a complete munchkin.

[Coolant]

agree totally with OP, but that has never been an issue for me.  I play MWO because I played multiplayer MW4:Mercs (greatest game of all time) for about 8 years.  It was natural because it was the next game in the series.  I never cared about Battletech really, wasn't really into the lore, the game play caught me.

It will never be about the lore for me

Edited by Coolant, 06 May 2017 - 07:38 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

RedDragon, on 06 May 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

Well, all those Star Wars game had some kind of story line that bound them to the Star Wars universe. It does indeed not matter that much how fast a blaster bolt is flying when you feel emerged in the universe apart from that. But MWO? It's just a generic shooter with some BT skins tacked on and BT names plastered on it. No story line, not even the slightest attempt to keep true to the lore. By now, MWO has nothing that would make it special as a BT game apart from the names and the mech models. I mean, look at the current event. Does it have ANYTHING at all to do with the battle of Tukayyid? Nope, you could as well call it "Battle of Mississippi", would make absolutely no difference.

You're absolutely correct in that PGI has either failed to or chose not to create any Universe Immersion tools for this game. The FW map has no bearing on the politics/economy of the Inner Sphere. The planets have no value other than MC; there are no factories, faction-specific economical consequences, etc. The Battle of Tukayyid this weekend is nothing other than a bunch of FW Personal Challenges - it is truely meaningless from a BattleTech perspective aside from the fact that we get to use BattleTech vehicle and weapon assets.

However, a meaningless X-Wing game with no ties to the Republic or the Empire is still a Star Wars game.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 06 May 2017 - 08:48 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

@OP

I'd like to clarify smth as well.
True BT fans know what BT is without your enlightening-wannabe. And since this game has little to nothing to do with BT and yet advertises itself as a BT game we'll reserve our right to complain whenever we want. If you think it has smth to do with TT rules and values, I suggest you think again.