130 replies to this topic

[Xathanael]

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?

I think it's because people are whining for 1 ton AC/20s and 4 slot XL engines and Endo Steel that takes no slots and 1 sec cooldowns on PPCs and Infinite Ammo and Shields and Jump Jets on everything and no weight limits and laser beams and close range LRM damage and Clan Mechs from 3060 TRO and etc etc etc... Now compared to the crap that people want in this game I prefer TT rules.

Also think about it. PGI is gonna cater to TT players since they are fanatical and they will pay the most for MC. Yes they really want to make a profit and casual players who have no idea about anything do not keep the lights on.

But seriously it's whatever

[MarshmallowRampage]

VxSaAgE, on 09 August 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

did TT players whine about MW1-4 too? I'm curious to know.

I did a little bit, more so when the games went with this horrable grid thing and you could only take as much modifications to your mech as you could jam into that grid or the "you can only put weapons of this type here" system

[Sychodemus]

VxSaAgE, on 09 August 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

did TT players whine about MW1-4 too? I'm curious to know.

Whine? Some did.

Call B*******? You bet.

Even then, not so much until MW4. While the weapon slot/templates took many aback, it was the absolute disconnect in regards to weapon balance, equipment function, story and a number of other things that really set some on edge. This is not so much a measure of how good a MW game it was, more that it just wasn't a good game, period. It was fun inasmuch as any shooter game is, but not all that great.
MW4: Mercenaries was more well-recieved though

[Shai tan]

Ya know, I never could get into TT. Imho, TT players are indeed in another universe. Compared to them I guess you could say I am sort of a neanderthal. hehhehhhe I am pilot immersion based. So as long as the TT stuff can translate well to actual piloting gameplay, and it is immersive and above all FUN? I am cool with that. And I MEAN fun. If it got so anil that the fun got effected, well that wouldn`t be cool at all.... right?

Edited by Shai tan, 10 August 2012 - 10:05 AM.

[Rotten Karma]

You can't take a TT game and directly turn it into a real time game.

For example, let's look at D&D, a game many of us know and love. many years ago, a company decided to take the 3.0/3.5 ruleset and make it into a MMO game. This game was called DDO. DDO has real time combat. In the PnP version full when using a full round attack action a player gets several attacks with the later attacks having a much greater miss chance. This was the initial implementation in DDO. However players were soon attacking once and then sidestepping so that their second attack would be at the same bonus as the first attack in a technique called twitching. This pretty much broke the melee attack system allowing melees much greater damage per second than their counterparts damage per round in PnP. Now keep in mind that this is a system where attack rolls must still be made.

If you go to a FPS system that makes the player aim, then players are pretty much guaranteed to hit on every attack. This again further increases the DPS difference from table top. Basically every single one of us has max gunnery and piloting and then some, so even weapon systems and mech setups with penalties to a pilots skills, do not have much effect on our ability to put all weapons on target. This is the cause of many balance problems moving from TT to FPS and HAS to be dealt with.

[saber15]

Ashnod, on 09 August 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

Because maybe the TT was balanced?.. And that some of us would like to finally see a mech warrior based somewhat off it?

Maybe if MWO was a top-down RTS game that could work, but it's not.

MW3 used almost direct translation in regards to weapon balancing from the boardgame, and that game was a ******* balance train wreck.
FPS and Battletech don't work with significant modification; and few people want a top down battletech game, and those that do can always play MW Tactics or MegaMek.

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

That´s true of course ...
IIRC not a single MW title so far has managed efficiently, to really implement the inaccuracies of weapons at (for the respective weapon) longer ranges, like we have it in TT (with < 50% to hit probability at long range, even when firing at stationary targets) or the spread of weapons among hit locations, even when firing an Alpha strike

Assault Tech 1: BattleTech has an extremely difficult to master aiming system, and is one of the hardest MW games to play due to it. I highly recommend trying it out - it's available on the MekTek website for free.

The balance numbers in the game and mostly everything is a 1:1 translation from BattleTech.

But it's not a commercial game, so therefor it's ****. At least it's not a filthy... mod.

Edited by saber15, 10 August 2012 - 12:55 PM.

[Archaegeo]

TT is balanced.

Now yes, some things have to change going from 10s rounds to live play, but other than that, leave things be.

[Yeach]

Archaegeo, on 10 August 2012 - 02:51 PM, said:

TT is balanced.

Now yes, some things have to change going from 10s rounds to live play, but other than that, leave things be.

Aha. Thanks the opening.
TT is NOT balanced.
Thats why TT has to institute a BattleValue system.

Level 2 tech > Level 1 tech
Clan tech > IS tech
Assault mechs (in general) > Light mechs (in general)
Larger weapons > smaller weapons
etc

It is ironic that the mechwarrior game that most TT hate which was mechwarrior4 changed some TT rules to try to make the games more "balanced".
ie
-IS weapons firing than Clan weapons,
-IS weapons generating less less heat than Clan weapons
-No distinct differences between IS chassis and Clan chassis (other than 1 or 2 Omni slots).
-tonnage bonus games in attrition battles (to help out lighter mechs)

If you want to look at an unbalance game look at mechwarrior3 with optimized design using only Clan tech.

[Shad0wsFury]

I'm a long time (15 year) tabletop player. I appreciate PGI wanting to stay as close to the original rules as possible, but as a gamer I understand that some things will need to change for the sake of game balance, and I'm ok with that, as long as PGI is keeping the "spirit" of the tabletop game alive, and I believe they're doing that with every deviation from canon rules.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Why are you "discussing" aspects of the beta outside of the beta forums? Can you not read or do you just think the NDA doesn't apply to you?

I can't address some of you misapprehensions because this is not beta forum.

[Ghost]

Thread closed. Someone didn't read the guide to posting etiquette.

Specifically where it says:

• Tabletop vs. Video Game MechWarrior – Which is better?