265 replies to this topic

[Aaron DeChavilier]

El Loco, on 04 April 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

I was just thinking about the exact same thing. If I was in charge of the Clans, and I had intel on the IS (though outdated), I would approach Terra from the CC and FWL, because they are the supposedly weakest of the Big 5. See how the IS would have handled the second part of the invasion when many of the industrial complexes used for the production of the new tech and 'Mechs were already under the enemy's control.
And if we are allowed to participate in the Battle of Tukayyid, and we lose, what is going to happen next? Will the invasion stop? Will they continue the war in order to establish a corridor to the Clan Occupation Zones? This would most certainly lead to the FRR's elimination. I don't think many of the FRR affiliated players would like this outcome.

sounds awesome and refreshing to me.

El Loco, on 04 April 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

Free reign of players and re-writing of the history of the IS after launch sounds less and less desirable to me.

<facepalm> but what happens in MW:O regardless is not itself canon!
nothing that happens in this game is going to be written down as official and placed into the sourcebooks! the sacred canon that many here adhere to is safe, bound tightly in a web of sourcebooks, rulebooks, and novels. Previous mechwarrior games adhered to a the story because they were linear single player campaigns. Most online leagues, ran their own versions or 'instances' of the continuity, hell the folks who play megamek - the unofficial computer version of the TT (again sacred to many) - do this all the time. There's nothing wrong with letting the player run wild in a video game. Set the starting scenario up, then say "this instance will run for X months, at the end, all land holdings will revert to their pre-scenario states" and then run the scenario again.

what is the point of playing in these scenarios: the Clan Invasion, Tukkayyid, Bulldog, Geurrero, etc if the outcome is a forgone conclusion? my reason to fight is sapped. What I am not saying is that individual players can change the course of the scenario, what I'd like to see if player factions rewarded for fighting hard, and if they fight hard enough then the timeline is changed. Also if everyone here is so intimate with the Canon, then something like MWO being a little more open is no threat to you - you already know how it goes down.

nothing personal, El Loco, just the most recent quote of that stance I could grab

and so far the poll is trending in this direction; that the timeline can be affected by the playerbase.

Edited by Aaron DeChavilier, 04 April 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[Vexgrave Lars]

After much consideration my primary concern with total adherence to the canon is technical. What if the software development cycle cannot keep pace with the expected canon dates. The canon calendar doesn't care if a developer gets the flu, or has a child, will the adherent culture out there be forgiving to circumstances beyond the developers control?

Real life comes first friends, even for the dev's.

[MaddMaxx]

Vexgrave Lars, on 04 April 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

After much consideration my primary concern with total adherence to the canon is technical. What if the software development cycle cannot keep pace with the expected canon dates. The canon calendar doesn't care if a developer gets the flu, or has a child, will the adherent culture out there be forgiving to circumstances beyond the developers control?

Real life comes first friends, even for the dev's.

Not sure what you mean Vex. Could you give an example of an event in the Canon Timeline that could be Impacted? The first Major event after Launch is the Clans, and even then, they introduce themselves at the outer edges of the Sphere first.

[Vexgrave Lars]

EVE Online, doesnt even have a canon calendar, and they still get flame bombed when their changes/updates have come in late.

A development schedule is usually regulated by a project plan... lets use the implementation of a weapon on Day X in the canon calendar. The players expect that on day X that they will be able to purchase and use said weapon. Prior to the actual code being completed, the developer who's project it was to deliver said code is out sick with the mumps... (wow, that s insane) and cannot come to work and is laid up in a hospital with an IV hydration solution in his left arm and an anti-biotic drip in the right. Somehow a communication error causes management to miss it. Stuff like this does happen sometimes even among the best of companies.

The delivery of the code slips..the weapon is not introduced and comes in 5 days late after much uproar by the community. This is the most basic malfunction in a development cycle.. a human, who is responsible, normally fabulous on-time guy, has a problem IRL that causes us to miss something expected.

Will the community as a whole forgive something like this?
Do you think the Dev's would announce it for what it is, "Bobs sick, our apologies?

So I point out from here that your example leaves "breathing room" for the clan invasion timeline, true. But what if thing go horribly wrong, and even the practical implementation of that is influenced by a bus accident, universe forbid, or some such event. What if its just more overwhelming to get the balance right than predicted... do we forgive?

Will we (Not I, but the community) simply shrug, especially those who are so iron clad that canon is law?

The short version of this is "**** happens to even the best of people.", can we as a community accept that and remain calm? I'd say 95% will do just that, but somehow, I read posts from "the way it should be's" who would indeed be up in arms.

I know there are lots of "ifs" in there, but with such a strict guideline for SOME things in canon, dates of equipment and tech releases etc.. a concrete reinforced adamantine expectation cannot take into account the variance of an earthquake, the bird flu, or even something as simple as an minor traffic accident where 4 dev's are car pooling and late to work.

This is not a question of wants and desires, but simply a fact that human involvement in developing software sometimes leave gaping holes in development cycles, and that "****, does indeed happen." Are we all ready for situations like this.

*Add... If all of the available mechs that SHOULD be in the game at 3049, are not in the game and available to the players in 3049 at launch, then is the expectation that we all "make pretend" that they are available in our minds and shrug? Will one of the Adherent Canon Nazis please explain the reasoning of the acceptance of that paradoxical crucible to me please, where all other breeches are being cast as heretical?

Edited by Vexgrave Lars, 04 April 2012 - 08:41 AM.

[El Loco]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 04 April 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

<facepalm> but what happens in MW:O regardless is not itself canon!

...

Set the starting scenario up, then say "this instance will run for X months, at the end, all land holdings will revert to their pre-scenario states" and then run the scenario again.


what is the point of playing in these scenarios: the Clan Invasion, Tukkayyid, Bulldog, Geurrero, etc if the outcome is a forgone conclusion? my reason to fight is sapped. What I am not saying is that individual players can change the course of the scenario, what I'd like to see if player factions rewarded for fighting hard, and if they fight hard enough then the timeline is changed. Also if everyone here is so intimate with the Canon, then something like MWO being a little more open is no threat to you - you already know how it goes down.

nothing personal, El Loco, just the most recent quote of that stance I could grab

I know that the video games have never been canon. And canonisation of any events in MWO is not what I am affraid of. I simply do not feel comfortable with changing the entire story, that is it. I am not opposed to having the players as a group influence minor events. I do not think we should have a say in major events. It just does not appeal to me. There is so much open space for player influence in the BT universe, we do not necessarily need to change the timeline/gamble with major events.
And as a developer, you should have a story line before you develope a game that follows a timeline. If you already have a nice story line (and I think most of us would agree that the story of BT is pretty cool until "you all know what" happens), you take a lot of work off the devs. Therefore sticking to the canon story line is viable.

Your idea is a nice alternative... and in most cases I would argue for it. But restarting something like MWO, where technological advance is scheduled, you run into a lot of trouble. Explain to thousands of players why they have to use pre-clan era weapons again, after they got used to them.

There are hundreds of history clubs in many countries, re-enacting historic events, the most famous one in my home area being the Battle of Leipzig from the Napoleonic War. For this event, thousands of people gather to play war... and everybody knows which side is going to win. They even know who of them dies, and when. Yet, they are having a blast!

Again, I am not opposed to player influence... I am just not convinced at all with having the players decide the progression of the timeline, i.e. influence the outcome of major events.

I don't take your statements personal... you have your opinions, I have mine, and we disagree to some extent. That is life.

[CCC Dober]

Historical reenactment, that's what I'm reading between the lines above. I'm not judging, but where does it state on the front page that this is what we're signing up for?

[Kenyon Burguess]

stick to the lore and the timeline please. theres wiggle room here and there for technologies, time advancement, and how mechs work, but no "what-ifs" or "historical battle replays" that actually affect the game world. otherwise everyone will end up clan and owning earth by the tuesday after release.

[Kensaisama]

Vexgrave Lars, on 04 April 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

EVE Online, doesnt even have a canon calendar, and they still get flame bombed when their changes/updates have come in late.

Thats a bad comparison Lars.

Kensai the wandering warrior

[MaddMaxx]

Vexgrave Lars, on 04 April 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

EVE Online, doesnt even have a canon calendar, and they still get flame bombed when their changes/updates have come in late.

A development schedule is usually regulated by a project plan... lets use the implementation of a weapon on Day X in the canon calendar. The players expect that on day X that they will be able to purchase and use said weapon. Prior to the actual code being completed, the developer who's project it was to deliver said code is out sick with the mumps... (wow, that s insane) and cannot come to work and is laid up in a hospital with an IV hydration solution in his left arm and an anti-biotic drip in the right. Somehow a communication error causes management to miss it. Stuff like this does happen sometimes even among the best of companies.

The delivery of the code slips..the weapon is not introduced and comes in 5 days late after much uproar by the community. This is the most basic malfunction in a development cycle.. a human, who is responsible, normally fabulous on-time guy, has a problem IRL that causes us to miss something expected.

Will the community as a whole forgive something like this?
Do you think the Dev's would announce it for what it is, "Bobs sick, our apologies?

So I point out from here that your example leaves "breathing room" for the clan invasion timeline, true. But what if thing go horribly wrong, and even the practical implementation of that is influenced by a bus accident, universe forbid, or some such event. What if its just more overwhelming to get the balance right than predicted... do we forgive?

Will we (Not I, but the community) simply shrug, especially those who are so iron clad that canon is law?

The short version of this is "**** happens to even the best of people.", can we as a community accept that and remain calm? I'd say 95% will do just that, but somehow, I read posts from "the way it should be's" who would indeed be up in arms.

I know there are lots of "ifs" in there, but with such a strict guideline for SOME things in canon, dates of equipment and tech releases etc.. a concrete reinforced adamantine expectation cannot take into account the variance of an earthquake, the bird flu, or even something as simple as an minor traffic accident where 4 dev's are car pooling and late to work.

This is not a question of wants and desires, but simply a fact that human involvement in developing software sometimes leave gaping holes in development cycles, and that "****, does indeed happen." Are we all ready for situations like this.

*Add... If all of the available mechs that SHOULD be in the game at 3049, are not in the game and available to the players in 3049 at launch, then is the expectation that we all "make pretend" that they are available in our minds and shrug? Will one of the Adherent Canon Nazis please explain the reasoning of the acceptance of that paradoxical crucible to me please, where all other breeches are being cast as heretical?

I think you nailed it yourself. ##it happens. There is no way everyone will ever all be happy at once. I think the Canon has a lot of wiggle room. As for Tech, how much new Tech comes out daily? Yearly (quarterly even) sure. So unless your worst of the worst situation materializes it is still just a "Game"

Those who see it otherwise, well they will see it that way and nothing will change that, especially their whining on some text based Game Forum.

[Thomas Covenant]

I leaned toward it should be open to player actions, but I voted
"lore should be adhered to loosely" because of this. If opportunity knocks, I don't see why not? I think the team can pull strings behind the curtains to make certain cool events more or less likely to happen, that would be fine.

[Vexgrave Lars]

Kensai, as for comparatives.. were talking about the wants and perceptions of the community, vs what is realistic and practical from development personnel. I don't thing EVE is a bad example at all, numerous times they have had to piecemeal updates, and I have read many threads on their forums about the dissatisfaction related to timeliness of a release, let alone the content.

Max, I am worried about the people who will be able to quote dates, to the day, from Sarna with unrealistic expectations of a particular Mech or tech equipment. Most of the moderates in the forums are NOT the ones I'm talking about. And really I side with you in that it is just a game. However some will always seek a reason to flame. Me personally I just felt the need to point out that with human factors in play, we can't always concede to the will of a fictitious calendar date for the sake of those who want.

[MaddMaxx]

Vexgrave Lars, on 04 April 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

Kensai, as for comparatives.. were talking about the wants and perceptions of the community, vs what is realistic and practical from development personnel. I don't thing EVE is a bad example at all, numerous times they have had to piecemeal updates, and I have read many threads on their forums about the dissatisfaction related to timeliness of a release, let alone the content.

Max, I am worried about the people who will be able to quote dates, to the day, from Sarna with unrealistic expectations of a particular Mech or tech equipment. Most of the moderates in the forums are NOT the ones I'm talking about. And really I side with you in that it is just a game. However some will always seek a reason to flame. Me personally I just felt the need to point out that with human factors in play, we can't always concede to the will of a fictitious calendar date for the sake of those who want.

Let's say, just for example, that on Sept. 23rd 3050, the Talon Corporation announced the release of the new Mech Chassis know as the RDM-2X.

So you now have people in the Community clamoring for that Mech to be available, because according to the Canon timeline it is Sept.23rd 3050.

Well that is a simple fix. The Manufacturer has indeed released the Chassis, the first Lot was 12 units, sadly your order for one of those, although filled, is currently in the hands of the shipping company you hired to deliver the Mech across the vastness of the IS to that sh&*hole of a planet you call home.

"Please be patient and Thanks you again of your business and do have a nice day."

Edited by MaddMaxx, 04 April 2012 - 10:06 AM.

[Vexgrave Lars]

Lets hope that that is indeed sufficient

[Famous]

The thing that has stuck with me through all 8 pages is that the proponents of letting the players take control of the story line feel that they will be the one's changing the whole timeline of BT. In a single player or co-op game sure I can see where you're coming from. The problem is MW:O isn't a single player or Co-Op game, it's a competitive multiplayer game and this style does not lend itself to the uber-protagonist.

Several posters have pointed out that in this game you will take the role of a Mech Warrior, now ask yourselves how many individual Mech Warriors have changed the course of the BT storyline? Yes it has happened, but why do you think that you're going to be that guy? If anything your basic Mech Warrior is the guy standing in the background of the artwork.

Right now the FRR seems to be the place where people want to go to be the guy, or the group, or the lance, whatever, that turns back the Clan invasion. If the Devs let you play this are you going to complain when the Clan Mechs are ripping you apart because of the difference in tech? How much fun will it be to watch the mech you've been working with and customizing get torn to shreds because you are that outclassed? There's a reason ComStar/ComGuards had to save the IS, they weren't so far behind the tech curve.

I honestly don't understand the position of "If I can't change everything I'm not going to play" Why should you join the FRR if they're going to get rolled over? Because you like the flavor of the FRR, anything else is meta-gaming and min/max-ing.

If they add the ability to rise in the ranks of your faction or merc company why shouldn't they also force you to work within the framework of that society. You're get to play a Clanner, great, hope you're up on your honorable fighting and proper respect on comms. You're playing Steiner and insult someone in the forum, suddenly you find promotions impossible because you've insulted the second cousin of the player who's in charge of promotions. There are so many intricasy built into this game that having that kind of control is really only feasible in a single player game.

And since everyone loves their hypotheticals when everyone has signed with the FRR and is fighting the Clans what stops a group of Clan- wannabe's from "assisting" the Clan invasion by attacking the other planets?

[Kensaisama]

Vexgrave Lars, on 04 April 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

Kensai, as for comparatives.. were talking about the wants and perceptions of the community, vs what is realistic and practical from development personnel. I don't thing EVE is a bad example at all, numerous times they have had to piecemeal updates, and I have read many threads on their forums about the dissatisfaction related to timeliness of a release, let alone the content.

Max, I am worried about the people who will be able to quote dates, to the day, from Sarna with unrealistic expectations of a particular Mech or tech equipment. Most of the moderates in the forums are NOT the ones I'm talking about. And really I side with you in that it is just a game. However some will always seek a reason to flame. Me personally I just felt the need to point out that with human factors in play, we can't always concede to the will of a fictitious calendar date for the sake of those who want.

I suppose I should have shortend the original quote, my comparison comment was strictly from a lore/canon point of view and not at all from a deliver goods on x day according to the timeline point of view. To clarify, Battletech has been around since 1984, then came the rpg aspect of the game and then computer iterations of the game. EvE has been around for 9 years and started as a computer game with limited lore/stories and a timeline of events, at the end of that timeline is when EvE launched, whereas the creators of MWO are putting us smackdab in the middle of an already established timeline of events (lore/history/canon) and not at the end. This is where I am drawing my conclusion for a bad comparison. I am not disputing your logic as far as updates and development are concerned with delivery of goods to the masses at large. I whole heartedly concur with your assesment, however I do believe the developers will or do have plans in place for the examples you have given as to why x could not be delivered in a timely fashion. Either way I will enjoy this game and blast my enemies to tiny pieces

Kensai the wandering warrior

[Vexgrave Lars]

Kensaisama, on 04 April 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:

I suppose I should have shortend the original quote, my comparison comment was strictly from a lore/canon point of view and not at all from a deliver goods on x day according to the timeline point of view. To clarify, Battletech has been around since 1984, then came the rpg aspect of the game and then computer iterations of the game. EvE has been around for 9 years and started as a computer game with limited lore/stories and a timeline of events, at the end of that timeline is when EvE launched, whereas the creators of MWO are putting us smackdab in the middle of an already established timeline of events (lore/history/canon) and not at the end. This is where I am drawing my conclusion for a bad comparison. I am not disputing your logic as far as updates and development are concerned with delivery of goods to the masses at large. I whole heartedly concur with your assesment, however I do believe the developers will or do have plans in place for the examples you have given as to why x could not be delivered in a timely fashion. Either way I will enjoy this game and blast my enemies to tiny pieces

Kensai the wandering warrior

Oh.. ok.. got it

[TheRulesLawyer]

I'm torn. I want the lore to be respected, but that really limits the impact we can have on the game. I'd almost rather they do the timeline in installments. Now we are playing the clan invasion section. Let the timeline drift where it may until we have the next big event. Reset the world, and then we're playing in essentially an expansion universe.

[Damocles]

Tell me why the lore SHOULD BE IGNORED.

Or does everyone want to be Victor Phelan Steiner Davion Kell

[empath]

Famous, on 04 April 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

The thing that has stuck with me through all 8 pages is that the proponents of letting the players take control of the story line feel that they will be the one's changing the whole timeline of BT. In a single player or co-op game sure I can see where you're coming from. The problem is MW:O isn't a single player or Co-Op game, it's a competitive multiplayer game and this style does not lend itself to the uber-protagonist.

Several posters have pointed out that in this game you will take the role of a Mech Warrior, now ask yourselves how many individual Mech Warriors have changed the course of the BT storyline? Yes it has happened, but why do you think that you're going to be that guy? If anything your basic Mech Warrior is the guy standing in the background of the artwork.

Right now the FRR seems to be the place where people want to go to be the guy, or the group, or the lance, whatever, that turns back the Clan invasion. If the Devs let you play this are you going to complain when the Clan Mechs are ripping you apart because of the difference in tech? How much fun will it be to watch the mech you've been working with and customizing get torn to shreds because you are that outclassed? There's a reason ComStar/ComGuards had to save the IS, they weren't so far behind the tech curve.

I honestly don't understand the position of "If I can't change everything I'm not going to play" Why should you join the FRR if they're going to get rolled over? Because you like the flavor of the FRR, anything else is meta-gaming and min/max-ing.

If they add the ability to rise in the ranks of your faction or merc company why shouldn't they also force you to work within the framework of that society. You're get to play a Clanner, great, hope you're up on your honorable fighting and proper respect on comms. You're playing Steiner and insult someone in the forum, suddenly you find promotions impossible because you've insulted the second cousin of the player who's in charge of promotions. There are so many intricasy built into this game that having that kind of control is really only feasible in a single player game.

And since everyone loves their hypotheticals when everyone has signed with the FRR and is fighting the Clans what stops a group of Clan- wannabe's from "assisting" the Clan invasion by attacking the other planets?

Famous (a little ironically, based on the callsign) nailed my one key point in this; not everyone gets to be Kai Allard-Liao. This is NOT MechWarrior 4, a singleplayer game with multiplayer capability tacked on. This is going to be an MMO-FPS; let me remind you what those first letters represent:
MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER

These fora have SEVENTY thousand people signed up 'to reserve your callsign'. If even only one in four of those registered actually hangs around to PLAY the game, you're still looking at almost twenty thousand active players.

That's an awful lot of 'there can be only one/you're my only hope' heroes that are gonna trip over each other - even if every inhabited system in the Inner Sphere is modelled and represented, that's still TEN uberwinner protagonists on EACH MAP.

The single-player "you are the saviour" storyline just doesn't WORK with thousands of participants in an MMO enviroment.


...especially when the game is founded on player versus player competition gameplay.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news to anyone coming into this game with delusions of being "The Liberator of Kentares IV/Rescuer of the Ghost Bear Founders' DNA/Hero of Ander's Moon" but you won't be. You're going to be a grunt soldier who is going to follow orders and work together with your team, or you're going to lose, and lose, and lose.


Yes, even a 'Canon Praetorian' like myself took the second option, because as equitable as it would be to have the players' 12v12 matches play out as tiny skirmishes that amount to very little in a universe of TWO THOUSAND PLANETS at war, it would eventually become disspiriting. (it'd remind me of my days as a Help Desk monkey clocking in with three thousand callers on hold, and eight hours of frenzied effort sees me clocking out with four thousand callers holding...)

Having SOME influence on the magnitude of the 'global' events playing out would be enough - to see the playing community alter the outcome slightly, like gains from Faction A's canon offensive on Faction B having a +/- 10% of the worlds seized.

Again, if you're looking to be The Hero, this is NOT the game for you; there are several other MW games coming out this year and I'm sure at least one of them will be a suitable salve to your ego.

I, on the other hand, have been playing 'the little cog in the big machinery' for the past twenty-odd years, never having any RP character commanding more than maybe a company, and my influence on the big events WAS ALREADY a non-issue (taking one backwater planet temporarily as a feint to draw off the defenders from the REAL targets my superiors want to take and hold, etc.) so this sort of game is EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN WAITING MOST OF MY LIFE FOR...

[Lyon]

I've watched the argument go back and forth, and as much as I would love to rip the original poster's head off...I can't. He wants to know that what he does in this game will matter, and there's no shame in that. At the same time, I've bought a ton of Battletech books, read them cover to cover several times each, and in the end I say leave the canon alone.

So, how to satisfy the OP's need to matter, yet leave the canon intact? That's the question we should be asking, not "how much can we crap on the existing canon universe?"

If you have read this far, maybe your urge to a kneejerk reaction has faded like mine. No need to nuke the EVE players who posted here, because they don't have a written canon already. They'll adjust to the fact that WE DO have a written canon. It's not the Bible, though. It's got holes, lots of them, and we can move through those, and be happy. We too can make a difference, and we don't have to screw up the canon.

It's a big universe. There are tons of sourcebooks that talk about battles between House units and pirates, other House units, and Periphery factions. Sometimes, those sourcebooks even tell you which unit wins. Frequently, they don't, and here's why: in the tabletop game, JUST LIKE HERE, people want to make a difference. So the canon stays fuzzy on details like this, deliberately, to give us all room to play in this universe.

What sets off the canon fanatics among us is the idea that some 12-year-old mentality should come in and rewrite the books, just because he didn't write them in the first place and wants to "matter" here. There's room for us all, without having to tolerate the infantile overmuch. Those canon fanatics don't look in the mirror much, and fail to notice that they've been saying "get off my lawn" quite a bit lately. I am one of them, and I say there's room. I also say you can forget about rewriting canon. It ain't happening, kiddo. Now get off my lawn.