265 replies to this topic

[Arctic Fox]

FaustianQ, on 01 April 2012 - 06:50 AM, said:

How is it company scale when a Merc group of a 100 players begins decisive actions towards a specific goal? What happens if you have thousands of players doing that? Battles are broken down into company scale for the sake of your computer, not otherwise.

Here's something to ponder, what if a Merc Group names themselves the Oberon Confederation, and manages to hold onto a very large number of border worlds between whomever?

That's my point. Allowing a player group to singlehandedly hold large areas of the map would only be possible if the players were the only deciding factor in the BattleTech universe, since logically something like that would involve significant amounts of non-player forces which would (nearly certainly) not make an appearance in the game. So either you're letting the players have free reign in major events and more or less ignore the existence of massive parts of the BattleTech universe, or you give the players a smaller part, able to influence things like border placement but not completely change the entire universe.

Edited by Arctic Fox, 01 April 2012 - 08:04 AM.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Seabear, on 01 April 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

If it were not for the Canon (yes, I do know how to spell), there is no unifying thread to the universe. We are not going to change the flow of events with a single company. It is the Lore of BT that makes it great; othertwise, it might as well be Gundam (That I don't know how to spell. Or even care for that matter.) or some other second rate Japanese cartoon game.

uhm no? what would make it some second rate cartoon game would be the game mechanics...which would have to emulate a gundam-style game; this is patently false.

Seabear, on 01 April 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

As for having an impact, the border marches of each nation/house were always in a state of flux. That has always been the area where change was constant and unpredictable. The borders of these stellar nations will change far more than the borders of nations today; but these changes won't affect the existence of any faction. The Lore/Canon will provide plenty of exciting and relevent combat for years to come.

but every MMO has their 'big events' like all those expansions to WoW. Whether players like them or not, they change the game in terms of territory, units, etc. Also big events draw in new players, and provide refreshing scenarios for current players. What does the CBT timeline have for big events? Clan Invasion, which is coming up.

How about Operation Bulldog? oh wait that's a decade from the invasion.
How about the FedCom Civil War? 15 years from the invasion.

CBT also lacks big events that involved a lot of Factions. Operation Geurrero only pertains to Liao and Marik. Battle of Tukkayyid is only Clan/Comstar. If the game sticks to lore like glue, then many players have to be shut out from these events simply because they're not in the right faction, which isn't fun for them.

These events work in a TT system because the players involved in any game can quickly agree on a scenario, and jump around the timeline, video games can't really do that. I love the canon as much as anyone here, but I don't want to see it rehashed endlessly when the video game medium can provide more. Treat this like an 'Instance' of the Canon, where things may change. Besides, as a player, wouldn't want to know/see that your battles actually can change the landscape of the universe? I know I do!

Edited by Aaron DeChavilier, 01 April 2012 - 08:21 AM.

[Opus]

Lore/Law/Canon/Smanon


Its an Evolutionary game guys, it always has been -deal with it, Lore changes, UnSeen will be Re-Seen, fact is not fiction, and fiction is a dream.

I hope to Hell and Back; that MWO forces some new evolution's into the life blood of a game I have loved for over 26 years....

[Mchawkeye]

The lore is the scaffolding surrounding the game, not the bricks that make it up. It should be there to help support and inspire the game and game elements, but not restrict the player base or any good ideas; surely the primary aspect of this game is to be a good game? if that means, maybe introducing a mech earlier than stated (or weaponry. whatever) as it would help to balance the game or excite the player base (oo-er) then do it.

I love the lore, but to adhere to it completely strictly without deviation is a movie, not a game.

[Trevnor]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 01 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

but every MMO has their 'big events' like all those expansions to WoW. Whether players like them or not, they change the game in terms of territory, units, etc. Also big events draw in new players, and provide refreshing scenarios for current players. What does the CBT timeline have for big events? Clan Invasion, which is coming up.

How about Operation Bulldog? oh wait that's a decade from the invasion.
How about the FedCom Civil War? 15 years from the invasion.

These events work in a TT system because the players involved in any game can quickly agree on a scenario, and jump around the timeline, video games can't really do that. I love the canon as much as anyone here, but I don't want to see it rehashed endlessly when the video game medium can provide more. Treat this like an 'Instance' of the Canon, where things may change. Besides, as a player, wouldn't want to know/see that your battles actually can change the landscape of the universe? I know I do!

Hrrm... there is something you are ignoring, because it is a video game, and it's been mentioned before, the devs could very easily accelerate the timeline, with really no issue. I'd just be like you were reading one part of a long book, and then skipped all the political talk to the next action scene. You can jump around the timeline a lot in any video game, and as long as that is a linear progression in MWO, I won't have a problem with it.

[Felbombling]

Lucifer Black, on 01 April 2012 - 03:07 AM, said:

My personal preference would be for a MWO where the timeline loosely connects to the established canon in terms of major events and battles but where the outcomes are determined by the players, resulting in what I think would be some pretty interesting 'what if?' scenarios.

LB, I don't know how much reading of the dev posts you did before you made this post, but isn't this exactly how the dev team said the game was going to work out? Sure, there are people on the boards saying, "I want this!". We've even had people saying, "I want this, and if I don't get it I'm gone!" These people are excited for the game, based on snippets of information the dev team have handed out. They have played multiple computer games that were advertised as 'Battletech', but often found the game lacking in many ways and way off canon. With this game the dev team has stated that they love the game and want to stick as close as possible to the lore and canon. If you find that to be boring or stupid, so be it.

[KageRyuu]

I don't believe our actions in game should effect in any way shape or form what is already heavily documented cannon, however saying that, there are still plenty of minor skirmishes and battles that occurred throughout the Pre-Clan Invasion Era that were never documented.

[Opus]

Lt Trevnor, on 01 April 2012 - 08:23 AM, said:

Hrrm... there is something you are ignoring, because it is a video game, and it's been mentioned before, the devs could very easily accelerate the timeline, with really no issue. I'd just be like you were reading one part of a long book, and then skipped all the political talk to the next action scene. You can jump around the timeline a lot in any video game, and as long as that is a linear progression in MWO, I won't have a problem with it.

just a friendly note; it was rpg, similar to DnD. so hence that is Lore/Canon is based off the TT game that I started playing back in 87

BattleTech is a wargaming and science fiction franchise[1] launched by FASA Corporation in 1984, acquired by WizKids in 2000, and owned since 2003 by Topps.[2] The series began with FASA's debut of the board game BattleTech (originally named Battledroids) by Jordan Weisman and L. Ross Babcock III and has since grown to include numerous expansions to the original game, several computer and video games, a collectible card game, a series of more than 100 novels, an animated television series and more.[3]

Edited by Opus, 01 April 2012 - 08:32 AM.

[Doomsday]

I absolutely agree with minor actions taking place in between the major events; obviously as long as they're unable to affect history. This prevents the ridiculous notions such as the "the Lost Iron Panda Clan" from having any influence whatsoever and remain fated to die their ignominious end as they should.

Here is another EXTREMELY important reason to follow canon, and fluff for that matter, take the original Banshee for instance, it ONLY has one purpose and that is it is meant to survive long enough to wade into melee and the do what it does best. However there is no Mech physical combat yet so that version should not even be allowed. Developers and the player base alike must adhere to this for it to work as intended

Also anything that keeps the original Charger from is INTENDED heavy scout role (scout weight restrictions etc.), or a Firestarter that cannot start fires is also folly. This ia also an aspect of canon.

[HeIIequin]

Eh, I vote indifferent. I'm not a Lore fanatic, but then again the Lore allows for a much richer and deeper experience, especially since, as Arctic Fox pointed out, we the players can't (and shouldn't) have control over politics. This would either leave our galactic conquest mode devoid of politics entirely (which seems rather bland and flat), or the devs would have to take over the role of leader for each faction. They might not want to.
Right now the game looks like an online Team Deathmatch with a few objectives, persistent character progression, and a few 'nameless' worlds we can fight over for our epeen (and a few bonuses). That's for launch. What will we see after launch then?

When I first envisioned MWO, I sorta pictured something similar to Chromehounds or other games which have factions duking it out until one of them controls everything. Afterwards, the devs reset and we go again. I quickly realized that this would not work, since the timeline determines the tech, and the devs could not reset everything back to square 1, when it would be taking away all the precious mechs and gear a player had accumulated to that point, since many of them wouldn't exist yet. I don't see players enjoying that.
The other option is to make a few core faction worlds untouchable entirely, and factions can duke it out for the others forever. Sounds like how the game is now, except instead of 10(?) nameless worlds to fight over, we get 100+ minor ones that don't mean all too much. All for our epeen (since there can never be a 'winner').
Unless (as I think a few others here have alluded to), the devs skip ahead to the end of established canon, and let us do whatever we want. Resetting territory after someone wins would still let a player keep all their stuff too. It's the only viable option I've seen for 'galaxy control' so far.

It's possible we'll see something involving dynamic galaxy control in the future, but for right now and the near future, I doubt Piranha has, or wants to put funds into developing a complex system like that when they still want to improve and add upon core gameplay mechanics.

Edited by HeIIequin, 01 April 2012 - 09:40 AM.

[Trevnor]

Opus, on 01 April 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

just a friendly note; it was rpg, similar to DnD. so hence that is Lore/Canon is based off the TT game that I started playing back in 87

Um, I'm completely aware of the origins of Battletech and what TT game you were referring to, thank you. I was referring to your statement about the timeline, that was it and how it could be switched up some by the devs in relation to this game. Sorry for the confusion.

[Rogue Jedi]

the lore means little to me, yes I played Mechwarrior 3&4 along with the expansion packs and the Mechcommander games, and enjoyed them all, but beyond that I know little about the timeline. i suggest avoiding any pivotal battle which would mess up established continuity.

If a documented battle is featured throw in infinite waves of the side which is supposed to win until they do, making the objective to take as many down/hold as long as possible. if there are a limited number of mechs with limited capacity to reload and no way to repair, overwhelming force will eventual win no matter how good they players are.

another option is for key battles leave a limited window when people can join on the side of the "looses" or only allow them to fight in a small part of the battle possibly finishing with a "great you defeated your opponents but the rest of the defenders were defeated and the planet is over-run we must retreat"

[Morashtak]

From Dev Q&A1

Quote

What do you consider the fundamental core of the BattleTech® Universe that you feel can't be touched during a reboot? What do you feel needs to be changed the most?

[PAUL] I don’t think we want to change anything behind the lore of the BattleTech® Universe. The story lines and rich history of the Great Houses and families that drive them along with the politics and controversy are just something we think is at the heart of every MechWarrior® fan. You can even see this right now in the MechWarrior® Online™ forums where the various House discussions show how the community can identify themselves with one of the factions involved in the universe. Another thing we wouldn’t want to change is the elite status of the MechWarrior® themselves. To say a MechWarrior® is just a pilot/driver of a ‘Mech is like saying that a ‘Mech engineer is just a tinkerer. As for what would need to be changed the most, I think some of the technology and industrial designs need to be updated to meet today’s understanding of future technologies.

From Dev Blog 1 - Community Warfare

Quote

At its core, the territory battle is a fight for resources – planets. Planets are divided into three types. Each type requires a more active level of participation by the player and as a result earns a greater reward.

• Core Worlds – Are managed by the dev team. These are worlds that necessary for future planning and part of major historical events.
  
• Faction Worlds – Are fought over by Faction players. These planets buffer core and border worlds, and do not play a significant role in major historical events. Rewards for controlling these planets are directly linked to global bonuses and abilities associated with a player’s Faction.
  
• Border Worlds – Are fought over via a contract bidding system by player run Mercenary Corporations. These planets change hands on a regular basis, and have no impact on historical events. Rewards for controlling a boarder world are significant and go directly to the occupying Merc Corp.

Doesn't look good for the "we can change anything" crowd.

[Trevnor]

And there we have it. The devs have decided.

[Storm McIntyre]

The only problem I have with events that are canon is that we as players know them. Honestly, how many of us go through life on a day to day basis and know exactly what the future holds? Our actions as players in the game will reflect this knowledge of the universe's future. I don't know what they Dev solution is, but I do know that they know this one fact, and its very hard to create anything that's really engaging when the player base is all "Oh, yeah. We were expecting that. About time."

Don't get me wrong, I love the Battletech universe story, and I always have. But I think we as players want to write our own chapters to that story through this game. The Devs know this, and I think I will wait and see what they come up with before decrying something as either "canon" versus "non-canon". That being said, I am firm believer in the concept that "A little revolution, now and then, is a good thing" -Sean Connery as Captain Ramius, from "The Hunt for Red October".

[Woodstock]

woodstock, on 01 April 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

Personally I think that if we do have free will ... it should ONLY be as mercs ... and then we should have the resources of mercs ie living from hand to mouth, from contract to contract, trying to keep the holes in our mechs plugged ...

You might say ... I want to rebuild the capellan conf. ... okay great ... you are a mechwarrior ..you follow orders. So no free will there.

and if, as mercs, we get big ... then we should draw the attention of one of the great houses and ... be bi t ch slapped!!! mercs are small fish.

The problem is though that people want to be free to make choices and rework the universe but they dont want the universe to fight back.

Sure we should be able to take a planet from liao, kurita, davion, steiner marik etc ... but when the multiple battalions they sends to wipe you out arrive people will say ...no fair.

Also ... if we have free will there should also be consequences for death ... ie ... you can die. Otherwise where is the fun. The challenge?

When the universe marches in and kicks your but then ... you are dispossessed at best and most likely dead. Start a new character with 0 xp. You will get a universe like EvE where people run away rather than fight unless they have overwhelming numbers. For fear of losing their shiny ride.

How long will a regiment of mechs last against the armed forces of the dragon?

Sure introduce a patch at some point in the future that allows us to ride off into the the periphery and start wars over backwards dustballs. but we will never be able to match the successor states.

So for me ... I would want to be able to 'be there' when the big stuff happens ... but not be a mover and a shaker ... it should be on the fringe ... we raid an ammo dump ... then find out that, while out ...the clans over ran our staging area ... so we are being evacuated off world.

something I said in a similar thread

[Requital]

I think the timeline should be followed, especially at first. However, as the game moves into the timeline where there is less information and "cannon", more can be affected.

We know that not every world that changed hands in border skirmishes was documented, and fighting was common, so it isn't a stretch for the border lines to slightly change back and forth. Major offenses should not be launched, key worlds should not be taken, and the over all timeline really shouldn't be messed with too much IMO.

Even if we can constantly bicker over border worlds, that will give each house and merc corp bragging rights and allow us to see progress and defeat and have something worth fighting for rather than our own personal score.

[Aegis Kleais]

Voted "No". If the game was BattleTech Online, I'd have voted 'yes'. Adjustments have to be made to translate into a simulation style game that isn't a table top simulation. I would think MWTactics would adhere closer to strict BT law.

[NameTheftVictim]

Well, considering the fact that MWO is going to have 'Mech customization and OmniMechs are canonically Clan tech...

[GaussDragon]

Lucifer Black, on 01 April 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

I agree with your 'just chill' sentiment entirely, I don't post often and I'm generally pretty laid back but I just got sick of noobs and non-Battletech historians getting shut down by people who seem to be determined to make the MWO community as inaccessible as possible.

I'm happy you came out of lurkerdom to point this out. +1