605 replies to this topic

[Koshirou]

DanNashe, on 26 February 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

TL; DR: Dislike of the clans is really veiled dislike of where the whole universe went after 3050.

Nothing veiled about it in my case.

@ Damion Wolf
You might want to try using words to communicate. In the best case scenario, these words would even form recognizable arguments. That would probably achieve something. But I fear you may be a little late to the party anyway, because I just assume you fall under the purview of my rhetorical question a few pages back:

My humble self said:

Oh, and as for "liking" the Clans as in actually admiring their culture etc.:

Are you freakin' kidding me?

Edited by Koshirou, 27 February 2013 - 03:15 PM.

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

As one of the "Old timers" that played the TT version, I can say that Clans were an attempt to breath new life into a TT that was really fighting to stay alive. Why? The advent of the Atari, Oddesey and other gaming systems including the long lost and now forgotten Arcade. A place where people went and dropped quarters into machines to play video games starting with Pong and moving into Pac-Man, then onto stuff like Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter. Things most of you youngens might have read about or heard your parents talking about.

The game before the Clans had grown from it's infancy into a challenging elaborate chess game, it took lots of time to complete a really good battle. BT was fighting for market share with Dungeons and Dragons and some other less popular TT's and the fight was getting pretty one sided as BT was waning badly and D&D was more attractive to those that wanted to dress the part. Hell, D&D even spawned Renaissance Festivals in the State of Ohio, in a former Corn Field where people dress the part and say M'lady, and Have at thee! Those of us that stuck with BT from the old guard were really dismayed and many quit over the introduction of the Clans as a way to save BT. It lopsided the game completely, broke rules, and destroyed most of the work that had been done to make BT a really enjoyable balanced game. Clans became the Win button! Those who are my age may remember the Happy Days episode with the Fonz jumping the shark, well that's what the clans were! Now if the Clans had come in with a Star consisting on 3 instead of 5 mechs it would have been a little better, but the damage is done.

This would be why most of us "Old Timers" dislike the clans, anytime they come in the game goes to ****! It becomes a massive nerf to the clans and then it feels stupid to even spend the cbills on a clan mech. That or the Clans just brake the game and people either quit or join the clans, leaving only the Old Timers like me to pilot our inferior IS antiques. Warhammer vs. Thor, I only win if I can range the hell out of the Thor.

[Grizley]

Don't try to speak for us old timers. We don't all share you opinion, in fact, quite the opposite.

I have serious questions about the validity of your claims to have played TT at all. The bit about winning in a Warhammer against a Summoner if you can "range the hell out of it"? How exactly do you "range the hell out of it" when it's packing more close range weapons than the 'Hammer and it's primary weapons have a better maximum range? Clan and IS mechs of the same weight are not equal, no more than you taking a Stinger up against a Battlemaster would be.

I remember the pre-Clan times, and they were fun. There were far fewer potential combinations though, and battles could drag out a very very long time even with a relatively small number of mechs on both sides.

So, Clan tech arrives, exponentially increasing variety and increasing damage across the board while armor stays flat. That made it much more reasonable to attempt a two stars vs a company fight in an evening. Essentially the opposite of the padded sumo effect.

[Koshirou]

Grizley, on 27 February 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Don't try to speak for us old timers. We don't all share you opinion, in fact, quite the opposite.

I have serious questions about the validity of your claims to have played TT at all. The bit about winning in a Warhammer against a Summoner if you can "range the hell out of it"? How exactly do you "range the hell out of it" when it's packing more close range weapons than the 'Hammer and it's primary weapons have a better maximum range? Clan and IS mechs of the same weight are not equal, no more than you taking a Stinger up against a Battlemaster would be.

I remember the pre-Clan times, and they were fun. There were far fewer potential combinations though, and battles could drag out a very very long time even with a relatively small number of mechs on both sides.

So, Clan tech arrives, exponentially increasing variety and increasing damage across the board while armor stays flat. That made it much more reasonable to attempt a two stars vs a company fight in an evening. Essentially the opposite of the padded sumo effect.

Actually, at the very maximum engagement range of 23 hexes, a 3050 era Whammy has a slight edge (2 IS ER PPCs) above the Thor (1 Clan ER PPC), but this is probably not going to last, and at say 18 hexes the Thor does 34 points of damage as opposed to the Whammy's 20.

[Grizley]

Koshirou, on 27 February 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:

Actually, at the very maximum engagement range of 23 hexes, a 3050 era Whammy has a slight edge (2 IS ER PPCs) above the Thor (1 Clan ER PPC), but this is probably not going to last, and at say 18 hexes the Thor does 34 points of damage as opposed to the Whammy's 20.

Technically the Hammer has a slight advantage at 23-22 range, at 21 the Summoner can engage with his LRM15 which brings his expected damage up to 24 average. At 18 or less things swing more to the Summoner as it can start using it's AC too.

I wouldn't expect to spend much time in that 60m window considering the Summoner is faster and jump capable...

Got to admit, I'm not a huge fan of the Summoner, it's just not the mech that the other Clan heavies are. Still, in a long range duel between a Hammer and a Summoner the Summoner still has an advantage in the 22-23 range. 1/32 chance to kill per shot vs 1/1024.

[Zolaz]

IrrelevantFish, on 03 February 2013 - 12:44 AM, said:

As a fan of the BT universe, I hate the Clans because I find it impossible to suspend my disbelief when it comes to Clan social structure. I only have a cursory knowledge of psychology and my Battletech lore is extremely rusty, but from what I remember, the Clan ruling class consists almost entirely of brave, honor-bound psychopaths (good luck finding even one of those IRL) reared in a manner almost guaranteed to give a child complex PTSD, who are also chest-pounding warmongers with a deep love of science.

Think Ancient Greeks, Romans, Spartans, Nazis, Zulu warriors, Samurai, Medieval Knights, Vikings ... your right a warrior culture based on their own code of right and wrong just seems silly. When you are a Clanner you dont get PTSD, you get a Hunchie IIC. Let me guess you never young and in the military?

[Pihb]

I hate the clans because...
1. They talk stupid
2. It sounds like a six year old with downs syndrome came up with the clan names
3. I find the concept of honor on the battlefield dumb
4. Their mech names are stupid
5. Their mechs are ugly
6. RP'ers flock to the clans (almost forgot this one)

Edited by Pihb, 28 February 2013 - 05:01 PM.

[CG Oglethorpe Kerensky]

Zolaz, on 28 February 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

Think Ancient Greeks, Romans, Spartans, Nazis, Zulu warriors, Samurai, Medieval Knights, Vikings ... your right a warrior culture based on their own code of right and wrong just seems silly. When you are a Clanner you dont get PTSD, you get a Hunchie IIC. Let me guess you never young and in the military?

The closest of those cultures that comes closet to the clans are the Spartans...and it didn't go well for them.

When your ruling caste consists of people who can and will kill at the drop of a hat and without any remorse, then you are pretty much doomed.

[Marduk Moreau]

Seeing as I was a Inner sphere player for a long time, shunning the Clans, I think it is they/we have all the good toys, Our regulars are as good as their seasoned Elites, and the favorite Mercenary faction turned out to be nothing but a Clan Scouting expedition.

[guardian wolf]

Pihb, on 28 February 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

6. RP'ers flock to the clans (almost forgot this one)

Hey pal, I only like RPing them against other Clan players cause then it's interesting. If it's all IS, then I love playing oddball mercs. Hell just once, I'd like to get into a Clan RP, and be the only guy from the IS.

[Smk]

Brenticus, on 26 February 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

For me, it’s not so much that I hate the clans. I actually like them. It’s more that I can’t fully back any group that fights so far removed from a Total War mindset. Now, I realize that the BT setting is one where true Total War does not exist, but the IS is much closer to it than the Clans are, so between the two, that is what they represent to me.

IMO, war is something far too dangerous, and its stakes are far too high (especially when it comes to things like the Clan invasion- something that can change everyone’s entire way of life) to pull any punches at all. My thought is that, in the end, when lives are on the line, you owe it to your people to do literally everything in your power to protect them and destroy the enemy.

That’s why I don’t like the Clans (or rather why I like them but can’t back them). The IS is bad enough with their attitude towards war, but the Clans are even further removed from a Total War mindset. This limited kind of warfare has an appeal to be sure, and it has genuine advantages. It makes the Clans sort of romantic in a way, but I feel that they are too impractical for me to fully endorse or root for.

Basically, the IS is just closer to my own mindset.

But you can't perform total war with limited resources. That's why it was stopped. That's why it's no longer used by anyone today. What's the point of ruling over a barren rock? The entire concept is flawed. It's a "even if you win you lose" situation.

[Skylarr]

Koshirou, on 27 February 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:

Actually, at the very maximum engagement range of 23 hexes, a 3050 era Whammy has a slight edge (2 IS ER PPCs) above the Thor (1 Clan ER PPC), but this is probably not going to last, and at say 18 hexes the Thor does 34 points of damage as opposed to the Whammy's 20.

Grizley, on 27 February 2013 - 05:49 PM, said:

Technically the Hammer has a slight advantage at 23-22 range, at 21 the Summoner can engage with his LRM15 which brings his expected damage up to 24 average. At 18 or less things swing more to the Summoner as it can start using it's AC too.

I wouldn't expect to spend much time in that 60m window considering the Summoner is faster and jump capable...

Got to admit, I'm not a huge fan of the Summoner, it's just not the mech that the other Clan heavies are. Still, in a long range duel between a Hammer and a Summoner the Summoner still has an advantage in the 22-23 range. 1/32 chance to kill per shot vs 1/1024.

In 3050 the majority of Warhammers had 3025 Tech. Only the Elite Units received the limited amount of new Tech that was out. So the Warhammer was equipped with a standard PPC.

Warhammer [http://www.solaris7....Info.asp?ID=574]
(18 Heat SInks, 160 Points of Armor, BV (2.0) 1299)
Speed 64.8 km/h
Jump: None ( there is a variant that has JJ, but, it replaces the PPCs for Large Lasers, max range 15.)

• 2xPPCs (Damage: 10, Heat:10, Range: Short 1-6, Medium 7-12, Long 13-18)
  
• 1xSRM-6
  
• 2xMedium Lasers
  
• 2xSmall Lasers
  
• 2xMachine Guns

Summoner(Thor) Prime. [http://www.solaris7....Info.asp?ID=670]
( 14 Double Heat Sink, 182 Points of Armor, BV (2.0) 2298)
Speed 86.4 km/h
Jump: 75 meters

• 1xLB 10-X Autocannon (Damage: 10 Slug or 1/pellet, Heat: 2, Range: Short 1-6, Medium 7-12, Long 13-18)

The Summoner only carries 1-ton of LBX ammo. So he can onle have one type at a time.

• 1xLRM-15 (Damage: 1/misile, Heat: 5: Range: (No Mins) Short 1-7, Medium 8-14, Long 15-21)
  
• 1xER PPC (Damage: 15, Heat: 15, Range: Short 1-7, Medium 8-14, Long 15-23)

(In TT Is Reg Pilot has a base target number of 4/5 while an Clan Reg Pilot has a base target number 3/4)

Edited by Skylarr, 05 March 2013 - 08:03 AM.

[guardian wolf]

Guys the man has a point, I love the Whammy with all my heart, but this ^^ certainly does it in against a Summoner.

[Skylarr]

Warhammer IIC

[http://www.solaris7....Info.asp?ID=914]

The original Warhammer was designed as an assault BattleMech. However, it had been overrun by heavier 'Mechs, though it remained a powerful weapons platform. The Clans wisely maintained and built on this solid frame a real assault 'Mech, the Warhammer IIC. Thanks to their technological expertise, they were able to add ten tons with the same speed and firepower. The Warhammer IIC is built on an Endo Steel frame and is protected by twelve tons of Ferro-Fibrous armor. The result is a dangerous 'Mech, able to hold its own in any battle against the Inner Sphere.

• 2xER PPCs
  
• 5xMedium Pulse Lasers
  
• 1xSRM-6
  
• Heat Sinks 20 Doubles
  
• Armor 230 points
  
• The Smoke Jaguar Warhammer variant replaces all the medium pulse lasers with two LRM-15 packs and an extra ton of ammunition.

[Woska]

The pre-clan game was well balanced and enjoyable. The introduction of the Clans changed the game a lot. You had an entirely new group of factions with superior technology and superior pilots. On a ton for ton basis, the Clans could be very tough to beat.

I think a lot of the issues comes from people playing the game without much imagination. They didn't adapt their matches to reflect the story and the differences. They just used Clan tech because it was better.

And because of the superiority of Clan technology, many seemed to feel that if you didn't play Clan, you couldn't win.

Personally I liked playing Clan in the table top game, I felt it was better suited to my play style. But in the case of MWO, I'm not sure there's an easy way to balance the game play.

The Clans had a very strict set of rules of engagement. And that is tricky to implement and enforce with gamers. If they can find a way, I think it will be a nice addition, but I wouldn't be upset if they chose to leave them out either.

[Damocles69]

eugenics have been tried before.... by hittler

[Stormwolf]

Damocles69, on 05 March 2013 - 11:05 PM, said:

eugenics have been tried before.... by hittler

**** eugenics have more to do with their political agenda instead of taking a close look at genetics.

Anyway, the Spartans practiced eugenics long before them based on killing the sick and weak.
And then there's certain tribes of old that would weed out the weak because they were a liability to the survival of others.

[Skylarr]

Quote

Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources. Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenicists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States. Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in a variety of other countries, including Belgium Brazil, Canada, and Sweden, among others. The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s, a time when Ernst Rüdin used eugenics as a justification for the racial policies of **** Germany, and when proponents of eugenics among scientists and thinkers prompted a backlash in the public. Nevertheless, in Sweden the eugenics program continued until 1975.

Eugenics has been used by many in the past. It is still being used even today.

[guardian wolf]

*facepalm at eugenics comment* how many times do we need to cover this people?

[Skylarr]

guardian wolf, on 06 March 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

*facepalm at eugenics comment* how many times do we need to cover this people?

I have to admit it is getting old.