130 replies to this topic

[Angel of Annihilation]

This is s simple answer. Because TT users want to play Battletech, not some other game that happens to have mechs that look and are called by Battetech names but play nothing like Battletech. Might as well call the game Robotech or Macross if the rules change drastically.

Still when translating a game from TT to PC, there are few rule that have to bend to accomodate the transition. A big one is that each turn in TT is suppose to be 10 seconds long which means that if you use the TT rules, none of the weapons should be able to be fired more than once every 10 seconds. Obviously in a PC game, many weapons are going to be firing more than once every 10 seconds so equally obvious, heat and damage are going to have to be modified accordingly.

[OrbitalshocK]

Congzilla, on 09 August 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

You win the most ignorant comment in the thread award.

thanks, brah! anything to cause a tabletop roflstorm.

[Robin Wolf]

After reading all the comments, I feel the need to have hexes drawn all over current (and future) maps!

[Tarrasque]

The Wee Baby Seamus, on 09 August 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Totally agreed. I think it's not difficult to please both the TT players and the non-TT players, when it comes to the MWO rules.

I think it's simply important to the TT lovers to seperate themselves from the general crowd, because they are emotionally attached to a high degree; most of us are well into or even beyond their 30s and have carried BT TT in our hearts for decades. It's one of those things where pride and emotional attachment drives many discussions for the pure sake of being recognized as "one from back when".

Conciously or unconciously this happens with many things we get attached to. If then an argument is perceived as an attack on your beloved childhood jewel, things just get blown out of proportion and you lose the essence of what you were really talking about.

What you said is very true and I will repeat myself here: It isn't hard to focus TT and non-TT players by establishing well working rules that keep with the spirit of the original TT game.

Everything else is just human ego...

(I logged in specifically to say)

This.

/discussion

[Ignatius Spectre]

Having a game that takes place in the Inner Sphere that doesnt follow battletech rules is like having a game in the 1920's Yankee stadium but with hockey rules.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Resist The Dawn, on 09 August 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

One thing I've noticed a lot on this forum is the Tabletop Players getting really bent out of shape about changes to the TT rules. While I will not discuss these changes here due to NDA and all that, What I don't understand is why It is such a big deal, since they change these rules to improve the gameplay. I've played a great deal of TT games for years, including Warhammer 40k. When Dawn of war 1 and to a greater extend Dawn of war 2 came out, the weapons and units were nothing like they were in the Tabletop game. The heaviest tanks could eventually be brought down by Machine gun fire, and abstraction necessary to ensure enjoyable gameplay.
And ya know what Happened? Nobody Panicked. Some of the Tabletop players grumbled a bit, but nobody acted like THQ had murdered their first born or anything. So what I'm asking is, why do Battletech players get so upset about things like this? Do you want a good game or not?

Given that the armor bonus is a fundimental change and ppl are taking it like its not ppl shouldnt really get upset
fixt

nvm

gah I cant talk we're in the wrong forum lol

Edited by 514yer, 09 August 2012 - 02:00 PM.

[CeeKay Boques]

Nice Alex, perfect. TT simulates what it would be like to drive a big Mech on a battlefield. Tons of stuff thats important in real life turns into "fluff" because there is no real way to apply to the boardgame without adding more tables or hours to the game.

MechWarrior? We're doing it. Fluff is law. We're doing what you imagine in the TT. The more detail the better.

[CycKath]

Viktor Drake, on 09 August 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

This is s simple answer. Because TT users want to play Battletech, not some other game that happens to have mechs that look and are called by Battetech names but play nothing like Battletech. Might as well call the game Robotech or Macross if the rules change drastically.

OMG so very much this

[Stormwraith]

Promptus, on 09 August 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

This thread is also the latest in a long line of similar threads.

Well, it doesn't look like the horse is complaining.....

[Fl3tcher]

Because without TT, none of us would be here

[Redshift2k5]

table top =/= real time

problem solved

[Joseph Mallan]

Death Knell, on 09 August 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

There are online iterations of the tabletop game. Hex grid turn based games where you simulate dice rolling and all this stuff. Mechwarrior: Online does not seem to be one of those games! Changes have to be made for the fact that the game is balanced around you 'playing' the pilot, not making decisions for a pilot who has a set chance of succeeding at an action in certain circumstances. The game has to be changed to balance such, and I'd personally be upset if they didn't.

For the record I Watched a grid based BattleTech Game. Someone I know has a Beta of the defunct game. It worked very nicely. It lacked the FPS flow most definely but it was fairly true to TT.

I Played TT for 22-23 years and I played MechWarrior video Games a bit. I took them with a grain of salt because they were not True to the TT game. They were very fun games. They worked as a Mech Video game. WHat will separate this game from table top is seeing how fast damage adds up! Us TT players are used to combat taking hours to complete. Killing an Atlas took an hour cause maneuvering and fire took lots of time to complete. We are not used to a turn actually taking seconds to complete. Some of us have made this connection some have not.

Hearing MechWarrior players(both sides actually) bash Laser boats as being to powerful makes me laugh. I hung out at the Heavy Metal Pro Forum where Physicists, Aerospace Engineers, and drunken ex-Soldiers(ME!) debated these same things BEFORE most of the video games were made. I knew 10 years ago that Medium lasers needed fixed for such a day that the computer games could simulate real time Mech combat. They were right. Bless their Mech loving hearts they were right! We even predicted the need to increase the armor numbers because of the "speed of combat". The Devs are on the right track. Lets see how the Ballistics work once the targeting patch happens!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 August 2012 - 02:40 PM.

[Axatillian]

All I have to say is I hope the mechs themselves stick to the rules spider=spider atlas=atlas hunchback=hunchback and the equipment works at least simular to TT. But with that said I would be very pissed if I had my retical point blank on someones backside and in the sweet spot and I rolled a pair of 1s thus missing. So I'm kinda glad they are changing some aspects of the systems.

[Yeach]

Technoviking, on 09 August 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Nice Alex, perfect. TT simulates what it would be like to drive a big Mech on a battlefield. Tons of stuff thats important in real life turns into "fluff" because there is no real way to apply to the boardgame without adding more tables or hours to the game.

MechWarrior? We're doing it. Fluff is law. We're doing what you imagine in the TT. The more detail the better.

How about lets stop skirting the issue and get down to what is most important (in beating this dead horse):
The one-shot head kill by gauss rifle or AC20

How important is that to people (both TT and Mechwarrior fans) here?

TT rules and especially novels (fluffy fluff fluff) mentions that it happens from time to time but with the double armor in MWO (must try to skirt around NDA), it might not be possible.... (or can it?)

[Lycan]

Elessar, on 09 August 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

. . . under Microsoft, when they more drifted away from it

Drifted? Hell, they boarded the Concord and flew away from it as fast a humanly possible . .

Haroldwolf, on 09 August 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Piranha decided to not follow all the TT rules.

Funny, I was under the impression that they were going to stick as close to the Table Top rules as they could. Only changing the ones that either didn't make sense and/or didn't translate well to a real time game.

This kind of change I don't think any of us TT fans are against. As, has been stated multiple times, we're only against changes that seem to be made because "LEET KID HAXXOR!!!11oneoneone!!" can't be bothered to learn NOT to fire all 3 of those PPCs on his awesome and continues to over heat and shut down.

Alex Wolfe, on 09 August 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

You're basically implying that BT books are invalid because they don't follow the original TT rules.

Actually, and I'm late to the game yet again, but yes, some of those authors DID follow table top rules. You could literally follow the combat turn through the pages, noting that when the author said X mech overheated after firing Y weapons, you could count up the heat that would be generated and go "Yup, that would do it".

Yeach, on 09 August 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

How about lets stop skirting the issue and get down to what is most important (in beating this dead horse):
The one-shot head kill by gauss rifle or AC20

How important is that to people (both TT and Mechwarrior fans) here?

TT rules and especially novels (fluffy fluff fluff) mentions that it happens from time to time but with the double armor in MWO (must try to skirt around NDA), it might not be possible.... (or can it?)

With the doubling of Armor and Internal Structure, it now takes 2 hits from an AC/20 and/or Gauss Rifle to totally destroy the head.

Due to the lethal accuracy some players posses, as well as the normal accuracy the rest of us posses and since the TT armor values weren't designed to withstand those two types of accuracy, I'm comfortable with the changes . . .

[Seraphax]

TT was balanced and FUN. Why break something that works?

[CeeKay Boques]

Yeach, on 09 August 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

How about lets stop skirting the issue and get down to what is most important (in beating this dead horse):
The one-shot head kill by gauss rifle or AC20

How important is that to people (both TT and Mechwarrior fans) here?

TT rules and especially novels (fluffy fluff fluff) mentions that it happens from time to time but with the double armor in MWO (must try to skirt around NDA), it might not be possible.... (or can it?)

Whichever is better for gameplay. If AC20 shots to the head cause 1 shot kill, awesome. If AC20 shots to the head cause a kill every single match, perhaps, as in MW4, the "can't kill with one shot" rule should apply. Gameplay rules here, not TT, not Simulation. See how simple?

[cinco]

Resist The Dawn, on 09 August 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

One thing I've noticed a lot on this forum is the Tabletop Players getting really bent out of shape about changes to the TT rules. While I will not discuss these changes here due to NDA and all that, What I don't understand is why It is such a big deal, since they change these rules to improve the gameplay. I've played a great deal of TT games for years, including Warhammer 40k. When Dawn of war 1 and to a greater extend Dawn of war 2 came out, the weapons and units were nothing like they were in the Tabletop game. The heaviest tanks could eventually be brought down by Machine gun fire, and abstraction necessary to ensure enjoyable gameplay.
And ya know what Happened? Nobody Panicked. Some of the Tabletop players grumbled a bit, but nobody acted like THQ had murdered their first born or anything. So what I'm asking is, why do Battletech players get so upset about things like this? Do you want a good game or not?

learn to phrase a question correctly. it's supposed to be "why do some people feel it's necessary to stick to tt rules? your question in its current form presumes that every tt player wants the tt rules to apply to the game.

[Holywar]

Game balance and game flow is greater than slavishly adhering to table top battlemech, a franchise that honestly a huge portion of the video game playing population has not played. I played mechwarrior 2 through 4, and thought 4 was amazing, despite its flaws. My only exposure to the battlemech universe has been the video games, like MOST of us. However having played table top does not make you a "hardcore" player that somehow has bigger e-***** than those of us who didn't.

Heat and weight management is still important and all that, but ultimately flexibility and customizability is huge in video games. It adds to replayability and makes the game more interesting. If you want to play tabletop, than play tabletop. It can't be translated into a video game perfectly because its a different medium. by its nature it will be more tactical and less strategic. I think so long as weapons are generally balanced against each other on the same scale, with similar ranges, it works. Some aspects will simply not be cannon for balances reasons and i'm 100% ok with that.

[Artix Krieger]

As a long time fan who has played every one of the TT games, read the novels, and played all of the BattleTech & MechWarrior PC video games, I have to let you know.. I LOVE these debate threads. Not because of the drama, nor the nostalgia, nor witty and hilarious comments, but because it shows how much everyone cares and loves the BattleTech Universe. I mean, the only reason you are posting your view is because you feel so strongly about something you actually care about. It honestly makes me proud to have paid for this game and become part of the community. Not sure where else this post should have been made... but I wanted to share this with you.

P.S. Someone really needs to modify that pic so it is a Mechwarrior with a stick beating the Eridani Light Horse logo.