219 replies to this topic

[ApathyZer0]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Really? Cause this is BattleTech Online as far as I can tell. There is minimal work invested in the pilot of the vehicle... you know The MechWarrior. In MechWarrior there are Character Trees and background for the characters we are playing... you know the MechWarriors. As I see it, this is BattleTech OnLine. See, In Battletech a Character is little more than a name and a Pilot and Gunnery skill. The Mech is what is important. The Mech is what the game is about. 25 years of playing TT involved questions like , Who shot the Seraph? I moved my Battlemaster up to the top of that Lvl4 hill. Is that Marauder dead? We are playing BattleTech on line. You really don't want to play MechWarrior on line cause there is so much involved in creating the MechWarrior we would be on the keyboard typing for hours!

I'm not 100% on what you're trying to articulate. I think this may be a pitch for a new game, in which case we need to get a kickstarter going for you.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

This argument is why I cringe every time I see a company try to make a MMO or game at all based off of a major, set IP.

That bad feeling started when I got a lifetime sub for Star Trek Online
Then I went into SWTOR with the idea that noone could **** up Star Wars

...yeah

Its TEN TIMES worse at least for any game thats competitive and based off a game system thats different from the game its trying to be though, like we're seeing here.

[ApathyZer0]

It really shouldn't be an issue as long as you can have realistic expectations. If you can't then why bother with anything other than the original?

EDIT
When I saw Jurrasic Park in theaters I was horribly dissapointed because they left out most of what made the book good. When they butchered Starship Troopers, I Robot, and I am legend, it didn't matter because that's way some translations go. It didn't diminish the source material.
What people love about Battletech will still be there regardless of what this game does.

Edited by ApathyZer0, 04 January 2013 - 09:30 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Really? Cause this is BattleTech Online as far as I can tell. There is minimal work invested in the pilot of the vehicle... you know The MechWarrior. In MechWarrior there are Character Trees and background for the characters we are playing... you know the MechWarriors. As I see it, this is BattleTech OnLine. See, In Battletech a Character is little more than a name and a Pilot and Gunnery skill. The Mech is what is important. The Mech is what the game is about. 25 years of playing TT involved questions like , Who shot the Seraph? I moved my Battlemaster up to the top of that Lvl4 hill. Is that Marauder dead? We are playing BattleTech on line. You really don't want to play MechWarrior on line cause there is so much involved in creating the MechWarrior we would be on the keyboard typing for hours!

Is that sarcasm?
Given all the mechs youre using for examples arent in the game and are Unseen (and there are no levels of hill here)

[Joseph Mallan]

ApathyZer0, on 04 January 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

I'm not 100% on what you're trying to articulate. I think this may be a pitch for a new game, in which case we need to get a kickstarter going for you.

MechWarrior before becoming a Video game was the name of the RPG version of the BattleTech game. The Video game is closer to the TT game than the RPG it is named after. As I referenced In BattleTech your "Pilot" was a name and 2 numbers. In MechWarrior there was lots of dice tossing before you even got to play your character.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

ApathyZer0, on 04 January 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

It really shouldn't be an issue as long as you can have realistic expectations. If you can't then why bother with anything other than the original?

when the expectation they set is "it will be as close to battletech as we can make it" they set up the argument themselves to start with. I think thats the inherent issue

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

MechWarrior before becoming a Video game was the name of the RPG version of the BattleTech game. The Video game is closer to the TT game than the RPG it is named after. As I referenced In BattleTech your "Pilot" was a name and 2 numbers. In MechWarrior there was lots of dice tossing before you even got to play your character.

Wasnt it a allocation system not a dice rolling creation system?
IE I choose attributes as my first priority, skills second, wealth third (or something to that effect)?

[Felix]

ApathyZer0, on 04 January 2013 - 08:23 PM, said:

So, you're saying you don't know what a spinoff is?

Without the TT there would be no spinoff kiddo

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 04 January 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

Is that sarcasm?
Given all the mechs youre using for examples arent in the game and are Unseen (and there are no levels of hill here)

Maybe so but in game do you shoot Randy Rucksack(MechWarrior) or Atlas Alpha(BattleMech)?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Maybe so but in game do you shoot Randy Rucksack(MechWarrior) or Atlas Alpha(BattleMech)?

the thing in my crosshairs. Dont tend to look at names
Though I technically tend to shoot the trees and ground rather than whats actually IN my crosshairs. I suck at this game lol

And I think the argument comes about more due to 2.0 dhs breaking the game so the ONLY way they could possibly fix that was to deny them to us (not fix refire rates, heat, hardpoints, or anything else in the game ofc)

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 04 January 2013 - 09:31 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 04 January 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

when the expectation they set is "it will be as close to battletech as we can make it" they set up the argument themselves to start with. I think thats the inherent issue



Wasnt it a allocation system not a dice rolling creation system?
IE I choose attributes as my first priority, skills second, wealth third (or something to that effect)?

Dice roles determined your level of education, military experience... did you know if you rolled the wrong set of numbers your MechWarrior went from a soldier to civilian and you had to start again!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

Dice roles determined your level of education, military experience... did you know if you rolled the wrong set of numbers your MechWarrior went from a soldier to civilian and you had to start again!

You had a different game than I had O.o

http://www.valoreboo..._source=Froogle

Thats the one I remember

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 04 January 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

the thing in my crosshairs. Dont tend to look at names
Though I technically tend to shoot the trees and ground rather than whats actually IN my crosshairs. I suck at this game lol

And I think the argument comes about more due to 2.0 dhs breaking the game so the ONLY way they could possibly fix that was to deny them to us (not fix refire rates, heat, hardpoints, or anything else in the game ofc)

Or the BattleMech just like we did in BattleTech we shot at the Mechs. We are playing something more like BattleTech than MechWarrior.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

Or the BattleMech just like we did in BattleTech we shot at the Mechs. We are playing something more like BattleTech than MechWarrior.

ah thats the angle youre arguing. Yes youre right lol
Cause if it was true MW it would be ironically less about the mechs

but then the MW games were never traditionally about the MW RPG, ironically THERE the most Mechwarrior like PC game that I can think of was Battletech: Crescent Hawk's Inception

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 04 January 2013 - 09:37 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 04 January 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

You had a different game than I had O.o

http://www.valoreboo..._source=Froogle

Thats the one I remember

Then you missed
This one?

Which eventually became this one in 2006 but was merely a re branding of the 1999 Mechwarrior Rulebook!

[Justin Xang Allard]

Chaldon, on 04 January 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

This is a VIDEO GAME... NOT a dice game.

Quit whining about how game balancing is effecting your precious memories of your board game. There are more things to consider than (ie) OMG they can't give legs 3 open slots because they didn't have it in the TT game....

In my opinion:
Game development and balance overrides all things TT, MW & BattleTech canon aside from storyline.


There you are folks! Discuss.

i like games that have rules and history behind them. if you play star wars you would expect that they would have starwars history somewhat accurate, and the same for gundam, or startrek. some deviations are fine, i am mostly happy with the changes they have made. i am happy that they are trying to stay close to the intent of table top. some things do not transfer....... i understand this. also the game is still being sold today and people still play it along with dnd, rifts, and other rpgs.

by some of the posts logic moving chess into a computer form means it needs to be adapted because the old wood and stone along with the 500 year old rules make it unplayable and the figures need to be adapted to allow for different awesome new combo moves like in mortal combat or change that ww2 flight sim so that the air planes are able to mount 2 extra guns.

this game is simular to table top, like a ww2 fighter is simular to flying a ww2 plane. it will adapt, change, and overcome many obsticles. some of them will be different from tt. using tt as a basis is a good idea.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 04 January 2013 - 09:35 PM, said:

ah thats the angle youre arguing. Yes youre right lol
Cause if it was true MW it would be ironically less about the mechs

but then the MW games were never traditionally about the MW RPG, ironically THERE the most Mechwarrior like PC game that I can think of was Battletech: Crescent Hawk's Inception

i liked inception, i liked revenge better tho..... both were awesome fun!

[ApathyZer0]

Felix, on 04 January 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Without the TT there would be no spinoff kiddo

Glad you're catching up. Spinoff implies that it comes from an established source.

[Helbourne]

Well just so the OP knows and addressing the title of this thread, TT is always going to be in the discussion. You do know that the devs are fans of the TT games, books, and of course the previous video games.

So to all you haters of the TT games, you might as well relax, and just accept the fact the TT games are going to influence this online game.

Its here to stay! <evil laugh>

[Justin Xang Allard]

Lucian Nostra, on 04 January 2013 - 09:13 PM, said:

Come on man just pick your life modules quickly you know your gonna die to the first pack of npcs to fire gyrojet guns at you anyway..

omg you went there................
splat

[ApathyZer0]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 January 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

MechWarrior before becoming a Video game was the name of the RPG version of the BattleTech game. The Video game is closer to the TT game than the RPG it is named after. As I referenced In BattleTech your "Pilot" was a name and 2 numbers. In MechWarrior there was lots of dice tossing before you even got to play your character.

That's an interesting bit of trivia.
So you're saying that mechwarrior follows the mechwarrior rpg rather than battletech TT? Do they follow the same rule sets?
Does it even matter?

All I want is for the devs to make this game as enjoyable as they can. If that means following TT rules so be it. If it means changing things that's fine too(Like Double Armor and 1.4 DHS).

[DocBach]

What the hell is this Battletech I keep seeing people whine about? Where do you guys see that word anywhere in MechWarrior?

Also, when do I unlock tank tread legs for my 'Mech?