50 replies to this topic

[UraniumOverdose]

There is nothing wrong with staying with the SPIRIT of TT, they don't need to stay to the letter of the TT Ruleset. Dawn of war is a perfect representation of the 40k universe, but none of the rules equate at all, it still has all the units and abilities though. Crimson skies was another good example of a game that held the spirit of the universe but not the rules (PC version, the Xbox version was meh.) Most D&D games are bad because of how closely they stick to the rules from TT.

Trying to translate a turn-based TT game to a real time video game directly is always going to be a problem. Deviations have to be made for gameplay.

[RobinSage]

Clasbyte, on 09 September 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Salve,

if the TT rules would be adapted correct there would be a lot less need for balancing of any kind.
It has been written by several already on the forum how it could be done. I hope the game stays as close
to the TT as it is possible without making it impossible to play.
If something has to be dropped because it reduces the fun in a game then by all means get rid of it.

But the whole problem starts with, that heat dissipation is based on the 10 second time frame that is given
as the time that passes in a TT round. But all weapon fire nearly as 3 times as fast, but dmg and heat stay
at the 10 second base.
And there is a shocker, 3 times as much dmg in the air, kills a lot faster so we need more health aka armor.
Point is when the time frame would have been adapted from the start to a 5 second window, and adapted the
numbers accordingly.
Ex. A PPC could be fired every 5 sec with dmg of 5 and heat of 4.5, that would give us the balancing of the TT to build on.
At the moment we struggle with stuff in the balancing section that is totally unneeded.

If this is kept in mind, nearly everything of the TT can be adapted MWO.

brgds

CB

Just to let you know the TT wasn't exactly balanced either....in fact, I really never cared for many of the TT rules, and that is another reason why I can't stand people quoting TT for this game. If anything hopefully they will come up with the best balance possible.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 September 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

so group or dont play?
Group or "ur doin it wrong"?



totally why we have 16 armor per ton an not 8 lol

To answer that I would say, YES. If you're not in a group, you ARE doing it wrong. Suck it up.

[RobinSage]

Sean Casey, on 09 September 2012 - 07:07 PM, said:

What comes down to is this:
The "exact" value isn't what is important, since behind the scenes in the code that value could be 32 for all we care and they could just tell us that it is "5", and unless there was something not matching up we wouldn't know. However, If an MLAS does 5 damage and 3 heat per shot TT and an AC/20 does 20 damage and 7 heat, then that exact balance should be maintained. If something is changed that gives the MLAS a greater apparent effectiveness compared to the AC/20 then there is an issue and that is what should be tweaked, not reducing MLAS damage, or giving it more heat, or speeding up the reload of the AC/20. I think that is what the hardcore TT people are looking for, if 5 damage is represented by 32 points, it shouldn't matter so long as it converts to 5 points when relative to everything else.

Where this fails is what you said in the first sentence. The DEVS aren't using EXACT values from TT, and the NEVER WILL. They have already coded by their own balance system, they have their own divisible equivalents built into the engine to account for variations. I'm sure the actual numbers are much higher. Programming games like this HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH TT VALUES. NOTHING.

They will tweak the balance to try to make those values "inherently" similar, so that the weapons have the "correct" intended effects. Again, this is a mute argument, the devs have their own system, and it's not TT. FACT. PERIOD. So again, the spirit of this post was not to debate whether the rules should be exactly like TT, close to it, or far from it......it was to inform all of those who are bleeding hearts for Canon, to chill the f out, and be more welcoming to the new players and especially to stop whining about balance and take the game for what it is and will be. If the Devs alienate any of the old timers (which I'm sure IS NOT their intent) so be it. If they cater to all the BS about TT, I guarantee this game will be a mess.

If you're not a game programmer or game designer yourself, and you can't specifically inform the Devs as to how to both implement, and afford to implement something, then there is NO point telling them to change something. Because, they're not going to.

Edited by RobinSage, 10 September 2012 - 12:19 PM.

[Sean Casey]

RobinSage, on 10 September 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

Where this fails is what you said in the first sentence. The DEVS aren't using EXACT values from TT, and the NEVER WILL. They have already coded by their own balance system, they have their own divisible equivalents built into the engine to account for variations. I'm sure the actual numbers are much higher. Programming games like this HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH TT VALUES. NOTHING.

They will tweak the balance to try to make those values "inherently" similar, so that the weapons have the "correct" intended effects. Again, this is a mute argument, the devs have their own system, and it's not TT. FACT. PERIOD. So again, the spirit of this post was not to debate whether the rules should be exactly like TT, close to it, or far from it......it was to inform all of those who are bleeding hearts for Canon, to chill the f out, and be more welcoming to the new players and especially to stop whining about balance and take the game for what it is and will be. If the Devs alienate any of the old timers (which I'm sure IS NOT their intent) so be it. If they cater to all the BS about TT, I guarantee this game will be a mess.

If you're not a game programmer or game designer yourself, and you can't specifically inform the Devs as to how to both implement, and afford to implement something, then there is NO point telling them to change something. Because, they're not going to.

The problem is their changes have modified the balance of certain weapons from the TT to a whole different balance. In another thread someone compiled a table that shows lighter weapons in some cases have a nearly 10x buff in damage where some heavier weapons are only 3x. That is a major issue. If a certain weapon in TT is accepted to do 4 times the damage of another weapon, then the balance of 4x damage should be maintained at the least. that is what most of the people comparing to TT want, "equivalency".

That said, telling people to "chill the f" out, is generally not an acceptible tactic for having your voice heard. quite simply put, there are an array of ideas here, some better than others, simply put you dislike the canon and TT rules, other disagree. If you are unable to acecpt other opinions without getting riled up, perhaps the issue is not with other people.

Ultimately we are in beta to provide feedback and discuss changes and to ensure this game is successful. The devs are mindful of a variety of opinions and they have their own, and they have show that in some cases they will take out advice, and other they wont. The moment anyone from any view point stops sharing their view, that is when the game and the beta fails the devs.

And programming games based on another game has a lot to do with carrying over the values, or at least the relative balance. At least in a more sim based environment which Mechwarrior has typically been. Some of the very earliest PC MW games actually were much closer to the relative balance of TT, the fact that the series continued as long as it did shows some merit in those values.

I don't think either the hardcore TT or the harcore "drop TT and canon" side will get completely what they want, but both camps should at least share and discuss their approaches so that those in neither camp can weight in on them. I bet some of the things we discuss here the devs have probably tested in their own internal builds just to see if it is worth releasing for general consumption.

[Raidyr]

As someone who has played the older Mechwarrior PC games but hasn't had any experience with the tabletop or lore side of the universe, I understand that it's important for it to feel like a Battletech game.

That being said it gets annoying when every design decision is either attacked or defended because "the tabletop does it".

[Hodo]

While MWO is good, it is not the best Battletech sim out there to me.

I think MPBT:3025 was a far better game in many ways, it actually implemented a fair amount of TT rules into the gameplay and made it fun without having to spend hours in a mechlab customizing a mech that couldnt be customized in Battletech anyway.

It had functional Houses, with actual battles over planets. It was truely BATTLETECH!

Now this comes along and most of us got our hopes up for either the MW5 replacement or the MPBT:3049. But trueth is its more of a MW5 replacement to me. Which means I will most likely stick out the beta see how it progresses and leave if it doesnt change direction from MW, and hope someone sets up an Emulator Server for MPBT:3025.

Edited by Hodo, 10 September 2012 - 12:43 PM.

[Clasbyte]

RobinSage, on 10 September 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

Just to let you know the TT wasn't exactly balanced either....in fact, I really never cared for many of the TT rules, and that is another reason why I can't stand people quoting TT for this game. If anything hopefully they will come up with the best balance possible.



To answer that I would say, YES. If you're not in a group, you ARE doing it wrong. Suck it up.

Basically you want to reinvent the wheel.
Good luck with that

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

RobinSage, on 10 September 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

To answer that I would say, YES. If you're not in a group, you ARE doing it wrong. Suck it up.

Then they need to remove Lone Wolf play and force grouping

Raidyr, on 10 September 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

As someone who has played the older Mechwarrior PC games but hasn't had any experience with the tabletop or lore side of the universe, I understand that it's important for it to feel like a Battletech game.

That being said it gets annoying when every design decision is either attacked or defended because "the tabletop does it".

Like the Criticals threads tend to go

Hodo, on 10 September 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

It had functional Houses, with actual battles over planets. It was truely BATTLETECH!

Which is why this is beta. That stuff isnt in yet because its being worked on
It WILL be callede Community Warfare

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 10 September 2012 - 04:45 PM.

[Assius]

The Tetatae are canon and that is all I will ever need to know. Squawk.

[TheCrazyness]

I still find it funny that I hear more about Warhammer 40k on MWO than Battletech.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

TheCrazyness, on 10 September 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

I still find it funny that I hear more about Warhammer 40k on MWO than Battletech.

Odd I hear less. Guess it depends on what youre looking to see