86 replies to this topic

[Bryan Ekman]

Mchawkeye, on 04 January 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

Bryan, thanks for the clarification, but did you just suggest to us that the mechlab, in in full and total glory would be making a reappearance?

I've been told by Paul to deny deny deny.

[Mchawkeye]

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

I've been told by Paul to deny deny deny.

*sigh....such a cop out....

[GaussDragon]

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

I've been told by Paul to deny deny deny.

Sometimes I feel like your media strategy has been copied from a KGB field manual

[ice trey]

Mchawkeye, on 04 January 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

Or it could be terrible and painfully simplistic and treat us like five year olds.

Probably this.
People who'd never read a single Battletech rulebook sqawked the loudest, and though there was an amazing way to both use standard Battletech style customization without the "Gunboxes" people complained about and feared (Strategic Operations - Pages 166-199), we are getting this.

Honestly, I'm just waiting for them to follow through on their statement that they're being true to the boardgame and fiction. So far, it looks more like they're just making Mechwarrior 4 again with some Fog of War.

That, or they're just planning to blatantly copy MW:LL and will have interchangeable arms. The hint at their using the Cry3 engine seems to point in that direction.

Randall should have sat the entire staff of MWO down for a game of Battletech before they ever started programming.

Edited by ice trey, 04 January 2012 - 03:41 PM.

[Mason Grimm]

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

While I don't like being called a weasel, call me mad then. Because I wrote the blog with contributions from two others.
Modules are a new layer that sits on TOP of the existing BT rules. All of the familiar tonnage rules still exist and need to be managed, so fear not.

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Just to be clear on this. If it exists currently in the BT universe, ECM/C3/TAG/Artemis etc. MWO will use it as is, including the rules associated with how it's installed on the Mech. As always, there is a slight interpretation when converting TT rules to a live simulation.

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

Less about modifiers, more about functionality/ability/role. The QNA will help, and our Role Warfare Blog will put a nice bow on the concept of modules when we go into detail about the Pilot and Mech Trees (rest assured this tree does not determine Mech availability).

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

I've been told by Paul to deny deny deny.

Bryan, in the future please resist the urge to steamroll threads to boost your post-count

(runs away and hides in the dungeon)

[ice trey]

Tweaks, on 04 January 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:

Can't be... Modules like C3 Master/Slave take up a lot of space, and require antennas and other external equipment. It's not just a simple slide-in card you just plug into the dashboard!

...That said, though... it sounds like they're saying "You get the features of C3 networks without having C3 networks"

And yet, The Draconis Combine comes up with C3 networks in the early 3050s, so it's definitely something I'd expect to crop up in-game within the first two or three years of MWO. I can't help but wonder how C3 Masters/Slaves would work down the road.

[Soturi05]

ice trey, on 04 January 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

Probably this.
People who'd never read a single Battletech rulebook sqawked the loudest, and though there was an amazing way to both use standard Battletech style customization without the "Gunboxes" people complained about and feared (Strategic Operations - Pages 166-199), we are getting this.

Honestly, I'm just waiting for them to follow through on their statement that they're being true to the boardgame and fiction. So far, it looks more like they're just making Mechwarrior 4 again with some Fog of War.

That, or they're just planning to blatantly copy MW:LL and will have interchangeable arms. The hint at their using the Cry3 engine seems to point in that direction.

Randall should have sat the entire staff of MWO down for a game of Battletech before they ever started programming.

The modules as i have read are only for electronics upgrades and not for weapons, armor, or heatsinks as clarified on the other page and as far as i'm aware of using a similar engine to another game(or a mod in the case of MW:LL) does not instanly make it a ripoff of it.

[ice trey]

GaussDragon, on 04 January 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

Maybe computer games just aren't for you?

Considering that my PC has been my entertainment venue of choice since 1993, and prior to that, a Commodore 64, I'd say no. Considering that the whole reason I play tabletop games in the first place is because I cut my teeth on Mechwarrior 2, again, I'd say no.

But if you're going to do a Mechwarrior game (which is by extension a Battletech game), they might as well do it right. Mechwarrior 2 and 3, which more closely followed the Battletech rules, were by far more popular than Mechwarrior 4 ever was.

The only thing that MW4 had going for them was a fan community that expanded the lackluster roster, no newer alternatives in a decade, and being the only game in the Mechwarrior series that is still compatible with modern windows OS'es without huge amounts of tinkering.

Edited by ice trey, 04 January 2012 - 03:52 PM.

[Alekto Serenis]

Bryan Ekman, on 04 January 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

I've been told by Paul to deny deny deny.

WHY do i just believe you guys just made my bf a very very unhappy and lonely man for a long long time

(PS highlander ecm still on my list of crazy stuff to hope for, wanna play pipes over comm to my enemys)

[Brakkyn]

Modules are probably what they meant by customizing BattleMech loadouts, meaning weapons and other equipment are fixed.

[Orzorn]

Thanks to the new information I suppose what modules actually do is to tweak and customize what the mech can do. So if I put a module for night vision into my mech, then it gains night vision. I could put a module in that allowed me to use sattelites, or, as someone suggested, perhaps a module that improved the gyro's control systems to allow for greater balance, making one's mech harder to topple over.

So the module system is a way to tweak and personalize a mech for specific roles.

[Liam]

Quote

Modules allow players to customize their BattleMech with functionality without having to deal with the existing slots and tonnage rules.
Each BattleMech will come with a Module Board. Players can insert modules of their choice, provided they have space. Each module adds a layer of functionality. Modules are linked to the Pilot Tree and are unlocked by training various skills.
Modules are also a very important part of Role Warfare - a topic for a future blog.

To me sounds it like limited module(slot-) system. Limited by available slots. Something what I suggested in my suggestion topic.
Maybe something similar to:

Liam, on 02 November 2011 - 08:42 AM, said:

Electronics:

Battletech has here some good stuff, but as always some things are overrated, especially in mass. In my opinion a Gyro weights a bit too much. Why not to make it bulky and less heavy? I mean the equipment slot systems should be less limited by weight and more by volume or even better by slots, as electronic have bulky built and not so heavy as weapons or ammunition (which is also to heavy in battletech).
It’s better to limit by volume (m³) and by mass (kg). However an addition of mass is important because all stuff together would weight also more a less couple of tons. But things like improved optics such as in MW4 Clan pack is nonsense, a better optic would weight maximum 100 kg. But as I said it is better to make it bulky limited and not weight limited, because it makes more sense. Btw. AMS, how much a MG would weight? It depends of cause which caliber and how much ammunition on board, any presence of active cooling? But again if AMS is Vulcan based MG, so it would weight more than 0,5, so 1,5 is a good estimation.
I think it is not a good idea to say LAMS is cool and AMS is **** … its better to say, AMS allows you to put extra ammunition if you have rest slot space in your torso or rest mounting points on it. And it is better to say it is as effective as LAMS, but looking over time, because you can switch AMS on till you are out of ammo, and LAMS need cooling time of laser, but at the same time LAMS would be very precise. Everything should have purpose and it is up to developer to allow additional stuff, which isn’t difficult but became more complex because of the variety and overflow.
BAP – why not a flying destroyable advanced BAP, which can cover more terrain. Better sight “through” rocks etc.
Target computer of battletech, why it is so heavy? Does it make sense? I think not really, why not let choose the pilot between targeting computer and better gyro (only because you have only for one electronic slot, except for scout mechs or command mechs) Slot limitation for electronics. Take your electronics you like … for example 4 of 10 possible! This makes sense. And let them let say weight together about 1 – 2 t.

+ linked with pilot skill tree (unlocking electronics by filling the skill tree)

Edited by Liam, 04 January 2012 - 05:15 PM.

[Red Beard]

SquareSphere, on 04 January 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Pretty ingenous way to make sure winning is tied more to pilot "skill/time invested" rather than how big the asset is.

Precisely. Well said sir.

Kaemon, on 04 January 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

Troll card played sir, defend your reasoning or remain labeled as such for the next turn

Perfect.

verybad, on 04 January 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

It looks like essentually internal functions for the mech tying into training needed to use those functions.

So you are a Command Tree training warrior. You might start off able to use very little in terms of equipment. You don't know how, and you aren't high enough ranked to have access.

You learn a bit, and decide to train a UAV skill, and add that to your Atlases cockpit board.

It's great, and it's helped the Lance a lot, so you decide to train further and eventually get acess to the Regiment's Satellite network. Now you have an almost perfect view of the battlefield and other lances are working with you to get enough C3 systems to give the company a look at what's happening. Unless a scout gets close enough to cover you in an ECM bubble and disrupt the com network.

To people that are worried about it not being somethign that's already in battletech.

Have you EVER played a blindsight game? Theyr'e the most exciting, most tension filled games around. This sort of system is brilliant, and it's treating people like they're adults and can understand and appreciate a bit more complex of a game than Point. Shoot.

For those concerned about Poptarting, it's no longer a concern unless you've got a forward observer with active coms. You can kill the scout, or simply cover him in an ECM bubble, or call a support strike (likely Aerospace or Artillery) on the sniper.

It's the absolute opposite of what some people's concerns seem to be. MW4's simple, but improved detection system added some complexity to the game, this is taking it to a whole new level, and is the most exciting thing that's been released about this game to date.

In addition, if you're STILL concerned that this isn't soimething mentioned in btech core rules and so must be rubbish, there are quite a few advanced rules that cover things of this nature, including Satellite detection, other observation tech, quirks, and so fort. This allows you to make a mech truly yours, it makes firepower not the only concern. I can see enormous uses for a skilled scout, and the fact that they can advance their career through methods other than just killing mechs shows that the design team for this game is actually putting a lot of thought into gameplay, not simply cutting and pasting.

Statement of the month. I hope it is EXACTLY like this.

Orzorn, on 04 January 2012 - 04:54 PM, said:

Thanks to the new information I suppose what modules actually do is to tweak and customize what the mech can do. So if I put a module for night vision into my mech, then it gains night vision. I could put a module in that allowed me to use sattelites, or, as someone suggested, perhaps a module that improved the gyro's control systems to allow for greater balance, making one's mech harder to topple over.

So the module system is a way to tweak and personalize a mech for specific roles.

I think you are almost exactly right. It is a new SUB set of role customization.

Edited by Red Beard, 04 January 2012 - 10:13 PM.

[Nowan123]

GaussDragon, on 04 January 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

Sometimes I feel like your media strategy has been copied from a KGB field manual

Being from a former USSR country, heh.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

Until there is more info i'm going to say I'm neutral. the idea players can not deal with the tonnage, slot rules seems a bit far fetched to me. Sounds more like a programming limitation, but as long as it doesn't dumb down the game to the point of WoW or some other lameness I'll stay open minded.

[Omigir]

Didn't read through everything, its like 3 am.. so im just going to put down what I thought I read from DevBlog 2, agree or don't.

What im seeing, is that its probably going to be as suggested before, a cercit board like idea. What sensors and how many will be dictated by the Mech Chassis, the Pilot experience in sensors, and level a player has invested into that mech. So as you level up, you get more sophisticated sensors and more options if not just more slots for sensors to aid you.

So at first, you wont be able to do much. I also dont think that tonnage has anything to do with it, but to me it would suggest there will be some form of mechlab and minor tweaking we can do.

[Leonardo Monteiro]

Come on bryan, don't be sad you're a weasel, they ARE kinda cute



and i do appreciate the effort you took to write all that with your tiny claws

[MaddMaxx]

I would love to see the module system allow a Lance to have some system redundancy in place. If they only allow certain Mechs, typical Scouts say, to mount specific modules then once a Lance loses that Scout, for any reason, then they become near Blind except on the individual Pilot/Mech level.

Having redundancy, as in non Mech weight or type based restricted module availalbity, a Lance or 2 could still have proper scouting abilities if 2 Pilots skilled up a little in the same modules but not enough to be the same ROLE within the confines of the group of 4 or 8 or 12...

Someone mentioned a possible need for a more diverse garage. I could see it also as a need for a more diverse Lance or Company configuration.

We won't need 2 specialists, but it would be good to have a back up unit in case of an unfortunate battlefiled catastrophe.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 05 January 2012 - 08:44 AM.

[Dlardrageth]

Kaemon, on 04 January 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

great now my mech can get screwed out of ECM because I only have a PCI-E slot left!



must...make...card...fit..in...chassis...*hammers*

Hahahaha, OMG, we so need a webcomic for stuff like that! Okay, back to the matter at hand...

So let's see, we got the CBT rules of old for customization etc. confirmed as to be somewhat vaild still and on top of that the "new" module system. (Which actually sounds a bit to me like the plugins the characters themselves could have in ShadowRun, which happened to be by FASA as well back in the day... dun-dun... Basically plug in a chip/module and you get access to a new skillset.) Now it has also been stated you can use these module slots without having to care about slots & tonnage.

Does that now mean that the BAP or the GECM will all of sudden weigh nothing and tie no slots up inside the Mech any more? Or does it mean that those won't be able to be customized, due to not being part of the new module option, but rather oldskool BT? Because unless we are getting here towards a true split between hardware (aka actual tech) and softskills (aka modules/skillsets), it sounds somewhat confusing, tbh.

[Mason Grimm]

Dlardrageth, on 05 January 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Hahahaha, OMG, we so need a webcomic for stuff like that!

Totally +1