67 replies to this topic

[Mims]

""Otherwise, this post is very much about, in the end, getting the community "on to a page together" in pursuit of a true MechWarrior Game.

Or, in short: Come, let us reason together, so that we might achieve at the least an understanding of each other, even if we do not wind up agreeing.""

Alright we have your manifesto. lets not waste your weeks or work, and begin meaningfull daialogue.

[S3dition]

Pht, on 04 February 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

That would only be true if I had been contradicting myself... and I didn't.

Surely there are better ways to make your point than snarking?

Er... no, it's true when you don't actually say anything. As someone who could write a 5 page paper in less than an hour before it's do (and score an A), I can smell hyperbole from two miles out. You really haven't said anything... :/

[Lorcan Lladd]

Pht, on 04 February 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

Ok; here's my summary: You won't get anything useful out of it if you don't read it.

Come on, just tell me what the basic point of the OP is.

Like, 'damage locations should be decided in a semi-random roll like tabletop' or 'there should be a targeting reticle like it is depicted in the books' - you know, something that lets people know what you're talking about so they can start listening.

This discussion probably won't be moving forward until you do.

Edit.
Alright, then, back to page one do I go...

Edited by Lorcan Lladd, 04 February 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[Pht]

How is this a discussion of BT vs MW instead of a discussion of what MW is and how to define it?

Besides which, I suspect that rule came about for less than stellar reasons.

That and the fact that so far, everyone's been civil.

Edited by Pht, 04 February 2012 - 08:26 PM.

[Pht]

S3dition, on 04 February 2012 - 08:24 PM, said:

Er... no, it's true when you don't actually say anything. As someone who could write a 5 page paper in less than an hour before it's do (and score an A), I can smell hyperbole from two miles out. You really haven't said anything... :/

Interesting opinion... can you back it up with some valid reasoning?

As far as summarizing the OP ... if I could I would, I cannot see any way to do so... I'm quite serious; I don't see a way to do so.

Edited by Pht, 04 February 2012 - 08:29 PM.

[S3dition]

Ghost, on 04 February 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:

Is there any good argument to be had against my intention to close this thread on the grounds that it is, in fact, yet another discussion of "Battletech vs. Mechwarrior"?

I'm fairly confident that you can lock it based on the fact that nobody, including the op, really knows what the topic of discussion is.

[Kaemon]

Ghost, on 04 February 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:

Is there any good argument to be had against my intention to close this thread on the grounds that it is, in fact, yet another discussion of "Battletech vs. Mechwarrior"?

I vote for lock, and freedom from this opressive communist totalitarian regime!

That and I'm running out of drunk and sake, so someone's going to get their lunch eaten.

[Ghost]

I'm going to go ahead and lock this down rather than delete it outright, because I'm sure the right people might be able to parse something out of it. But as a topic of discussion, no matter how one might frame it, the official posting guidelines are rather specific on the subject: No discussing the Mechwarrior games in the context of the tabletop game. I know you (Pht) have noble intentions, and I do appreciate what you're trying to do here, but the flame wars rage on. As for the rest of you, I am rather disappointed that the majority of the responses in this thread are little more than "I didn't read what you posted" or have nothing to contribute to the discussion at hand at all.