219 replies to this topic

[Herodes]

Mechwarrior is Battletech. It is a fantastic translation of the TT rules in a simulation video game. It uses the fiction and rich story of Battletech. Which is uber-cool.

I would not pay anything at all for a stomping-robot game. I will pay a lot for a Battletech game. And it seems I am not alone with this around here

It matters a lot that this game is in fact Battletech. It matters for lots of long-term fans. Who are willing to drop some cash for it and who can afford it.

[Throat Punch]

Herodes, on 05 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Mechwarrior is Battletech. It is a fantastic translation of the TT rules in a simulation video game. It uses the fiction and rich story of Battletech. Which is uber-cool.

I would not pay anything at all for a stomping-robot game. I will pay a lot for a Battletech game. And it seems I am not alone with this around here

It matters a lot that this game is in fact Battletech. It matters for lots of long-term fans. Who are willing to drop some cash for it and who can afford it.

Agree'd and well said.

[Pht]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 January 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

I still cover my hear and and close my eyes and repeat "not listening" like Gollum whenever the Jihad Uber-Mechs and Cyborg troopies and all the things leading to Dark Age come up... trying to NOT remember how far Btech fell from it's once interesting story arcs to the outright Gundamish feel of late 3060s Btech....

Funny. That's the exact same reaction I had to "far country."

Herodes, on 05 January 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Mechwarrior is Battletech. It is a fantastic translation of the TT rules in a simulation video game. It uses the fiction and rich story of Battletech. Which is uber-cool.

I would not pay anything at all for a stomping-robot game. I will pay a lot for a Battletech game. And it seems I am not alone with this around here

It matters a lot that this game is in fact Battletech. It matters for lots of long-term fans. Who are willing to drop some cash for it and who can afford it.

Um .... it's battletech ... MINUS the MechWarrior's Piloting dice rolls and Gunnery dice rolls.

[Dudeman3k]

Hahahahaha, well, considering how this games origins are from TABLE TOP, and all the existing mechs, weapons, and equipment are from an existing GAME MANUAL.... i would say PGI has a pretty firm "guideline" as to how to work an ALREADY EXISTING game.... but they still managed to **** that up!!!! Hahahaha.

seriously, you wouldn't have MWO without the Table Top BT...... this game would simply not exists. Yes, things have to be changed for FPS reasons, but to COMPLETELY alter a function to an item (ECM) is completely wrong... it was set up in TT that way for balance, and as we can see.... PGI's version isn't balanced at all.... thus, going to TT as a template would have been the best place to start.

[Felix]

Dudeman3k, on 05 January 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Hahahahaha, well, considering how this games origins are from TABLE TOP, and all the existing mechs, weapons, and equipment are from an existing GAME MANUAL.... i would say PGI has a pretty firm "guideline" as to how to work an ALREADY EXISTING game.... but they still managed to **** that up!!!! Hahahaha.

seriously, you wouldn't have MWO without the Table Top BT...... this game would simply not exists. Yes, things have to be changed for FPS reasons, but to COMPLETELY alter a function to an item (ECM) is completely wrong... it was set up in TT that way for balance, and as we can see.... PGI's version isn't balanced at all.... thus, going to TT as a template would have been the best place to start.

They also have mech variants in the game that dont exist in the TROs and tabletop

[Bishop Steiner]

Pht, on 05 January 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

Funny. That's the exact same reaction I had to "far country."



Um .... it's battletech ... MINUS the MechWarrior's Piloting dice rolls and Gunnery dice rolls.

F-f-f-f-ar c-o-o-untry?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
you're not my father..........

[Pht]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 January 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

F-f-f-f-ar c-o-o-untry? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! you're not my father..........

LOL!

At the time I bought the book I wondered why all the copies of it looked mostly unread, even though they were not new nor unowned.

I learned my mistake quickly...

[Throat Punch]

Felix, on 05 January 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

They also have mech variants in the game that dont exist in the TROs and tabletop

Wellllll sorta, since level 2 rules have directions on construction and modification of a mech given enough time and C-bills these variants could technically exist even if they aren't official variants.

[Herodes]

Pht, on 05 January 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

Um .... it's battletech ... MINUS the MechWarrior's Piloting dice rolls and Gunnery dice rolls.

Of course. And there are other changes, most of them quite good or necessary for the game to work.

But in the end, it is Battletech. It is just another look from a different angle.

[Felix]

Morsdraco, on 05 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Wellllll sorta, since level 2 rules have directions on construction and modification of a mech given enough time and C-bills these variants could technically exist even if they aren't official variants.

I was more meaning 3/4 of the "official" variants they have tossed out that mount ECM....never had ECM anywhere near em

[Pht]

Herodes, on 05 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Of course. And there are other changes, most of them quite good or necessary for the game to work. But in the end, it is Battletech. It is just another look from a different angle.

I only made that reply to your post just to help stave off much FUD...

[8RoundsRapid]

SJ SCP Wolf, on 05 January 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

Great post. The rulebook is useful for source material, and all the great equipment and creativity. It serves a huge base. However that does not mean it has to be taken as a literal or near literal translation for no better reason than 'because'.

Ok, this right here. This is where you non-TT'rs lose whatever argument you are trying to make. I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

Not one TT lover wants this game to be a literal translation of TT. Where do you guys keep coming up with this? I've seen it repeated over and over again in this and all the other threads on this subject. You put words in our mouths then argue with us about what we didn't say. Everybody knows things have to change to make this vid game appealing and playable, and most importantly, fun. What the TT guys think is that the game is already balanced and why make such sweeping, game breaking changes that will only cause further game breaking changes down the line? ESPECIALLY when PGI spcifically said they wanted to stay as close to TT as is possible. Is ECM breaking missile lock as close to TT as possible? I seriously don't think so.

The title of this thread is 'Tired of Tabletop Even Entering Discussion.

And that premise is complete and utter BS. It is impossible to divorce BT and MWO. Can't be done. If it is done, this game is no longer a game based on BT the tabletop game of armored combat.

This isn't that hard of a concept to understand.

Edited by 8RoundsRapid, 05 January 2013 - 06:15 PM.

[Pht]

8RoundsRapid, on 05 January 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

It is impossible to divorce BT and MWO. Can't be done. If it is done, this game is no longer a game based on BT the tabletop game of armored combat.

Oh, come on, didn't you think that MechAssault was a great simulation of what it'd be like to pilot a BattleMech?

*rimshot*

[Solis Obscuri]

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

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

roll for accidental fires

Abivard, on 05 January 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

You didn't have to knock the table over because you made a bad roll

Uhhh... you know why our TS is always set on PTT?

ApathyZer0, on 05 January 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

Could be titled "every fandom ever"...

Bishop Steiner, on 05 January 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

But you forget the modern entitled spoiled kiddy mentality, where everything should be changed to suit their wants, ignoring anything they dislike, or disagree with. To them, it doesn't matter that the intent, the stated internet, the stated promise of the game was a true to TT rendition of the game (with the changes being for what was needed for game mechanics, not what would make kiddies who neither know or care to know about the IP happy, because it makes it easier to make their uber stompy robots).

They play a million other braindead FPS games, and can't cope unless this one become another braindead FPS.. they are already asking for "Healer Mechs" and other nonsense... pretty soon it'll bye "why can't my Atlas fly?!?!?!" This game sucks, they should make my Atlas fly, because Giant Gundams can.. so this one should too!

Let's not start the ad hominem train again...

[Teralitha]

I have played TT, and I could care less about the novels or the rulebooks, I just want the game to be balanced and fun. but right now we have neither......

[Bishop Steiner]

Solis Obscuri, on 05 January 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

roll for accidental fires

Uhhh... you know why our TS is always set on PTT?

Could be titled "every fandom ever"...

Let's not start the ad hominem train again...

but.......
it's so
much
FUN!

[Mel Mad Dog Winters]

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 think few players expect the game to be exactly the same as the board game.

However:
(1) The developers reference it at least in selling it to a particular fanbase (the old-school Battletech people among others). What would otherwise fall into a 'niche' market category for compute games and perhaps have less potential customers has a large group of people who have loved the Battletech IP since it came out many years ago. From what little I've heard and read about the devs, they supposedly share this enthusiasm and recognize where a large percentage of their players will potentially come from.
(2) The board game is the source of the entire IP. Every Mechwarrior computer game that claims a 'Battletech source' at once immediately acknowledges the source by doing so and attempts to at least resemble it.


In short, while the game need not be exactly the same as the board game, it does at the very least have to attempt to be like it when both possible and reasonable. If not, it's just another mech game and it is not really a true attempt at a 'Battletech' computer game. So, I'm afraid to say that referencing the board game in discussions related to MWO is very appropriate and reasonable.

This should be obvious.

So, not knowing everything that might have motivated the original post, I'm left assuming that someone annoyed the Hell out of you while talking about this? If so, well, that sucks. I don't know what to say there.

Edited by Mel Mad Dog Winters, 06 January 2013 - 12:39 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Void Angel, on 05 January 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Also, fun fact! Every person I have ever talked with on these forums who brings up differing rates of fire as being "non-canon" is discounting the Solaris VII rules - which are designed to simulate moment-to-moment decisions instead of generalizing them in 10-second slices.

I am discounting them for a simple reason - the results of using Solaris VII diverge considerably from using the table top rules. AS such, they are just as flawed as MW:O.

Simple examples:
PPC in the table top deals 10 damage and 10 heat in 10 seconds. 2 Medium Lasers deal 10 damage and 6 heat in 10 seconds.*
PPC in Solaris deals 10 damage and 10 heat in 10 seconds. 2 Medium Lasers deal 20 damage and 12 heat in 10 seconds.
MG in the table top deals 2 damage in 10 seconds. MG in Solaris deals 8 damage in 10 seconds.
The reason for the difference is that a Medium Laser in Solaris (with 2.5 second long turns) can fire every 2 turns, the PPC can fire every 4 turns, and the MG can fire every turn.

If it isn't evident to you that this is a flawed approach to translating between 10 second to 2.5 second turn, then I am not sure what else I can say. But maybe this as a helper how I would have done it, assuming the fire rates stay the same, and armour values stay the same.
PPC deals 10 damage and 10 heat every 4 turns, Medium Lasers deal 2.5 damage and 1.5 every 2 turns, and an MG would deal 0.5 damage every turn.

*) Actually, all heat values in Solaris are quadrupled. But the heat table also uses quadrupled values, and heat sinks sink 1 heat every 2.5 seconds, not 1 heat every 10 seconds.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 06 January 2013 - 02:27 AM.

[BigDuke6ixx]

8RoundsRapid, on 04 January 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

I think your original thread title is much better.

I mean, look how much action you got in this ridiculous POS thread, that none of us should've ever posted in because of its utter mind numbing ignorance. I'll even kick you down a few likes, amigo.

That's you, that is.

[Grand Ayatollah Kerensky]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 January 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

Because the series of FPS has more in common with BattleTech than the RPG it is named after. I have listed the reasons on several occasions. So when someone wants to say someone says there is nothing in common with TT they are more wrong than they think.

Bottom line is a 1:1 conversion of tabletop rules won't work for MWO. More intelligent people than you have looked at the problem and come to this conclusion.