27 replies to this topic

[Ryokens leap]

Sitting in a cockpit, looking out a canopy, using instrumentation and HUD says sim to me. Microsoft Combat Simulator feels pretty much the same. The key word there is simulator. A 130 kph light might feel like a FPS but, I don't feel it is.

[De La Fresniere]

I have absolutely no attachment to BT rules or its fairly ridiculous 80s sci-fi pseudo-techbabble.

But even if I did... some things just don't work out when translated into a real-time action shooter game. Ultimately I'd rather play a good game than one that's nowhere as good because it stuck with mechanics that aren't appropriate for it.

[Huntsman]

I have an attachment to BT fiction, but not to the rules. In fact, some aspect of how weapons work in TT are simply broken for this game, though I can't help but feel that the devs will often try to fit a square peg into a round hole in this regard. Specifically I feel this way about machine guns and pulse lasers.

[Mercules]

Pihb, on 12 February 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

I figure if you like TT rules, stick to TT.

I figure if you like Battletech/Mechwarrior, stick to Battletech/Mechwarrior, not Genric FPS mecha online.

[Mercules]

The problem isn't that we have to go with Balance OR Battletech/Mechwarrior flavor. That is a False Dichotomy too many on the board feel the need to try to push that just isn't realistic. You do not need a fascist attachment to the rules but if you don't use them as a guideline than you really don't have Mechwarrior anymore because all that Lore is based off those original rules.

This wasn't Macros which was Manga/Anime and then turned into an RPG/TT game then translated into a Video Game. This was a TT/RPG that was then give lore beyond the rules based off those rules and that turned into a video game. The difference is subtle but important.

Macros exists as lore and a game was designed with rules to try and fit that lore. BT/MW was a game and the lore was written to reflect a set of rules. So if you follow the lore, you are following the rules.

Either way it is NOT imbalanced to follow the rules of BT. What doesn't work well is to half way do it. For example, to hang onto Medium Lasers do 5 damage and 3 Heat, but then not remember that figure is determined for 10 seconds of play and have them fire 3+ times per 10 seconds. They could have had lasers do 1.666666 damage each shot and 1 heat OR had them be continuous beams that simply spread out 5 damage and three heat over 10 seconds. So .5 damage and .3 heat every second. SIMPLE.

ECM is certainly not implemented according to TT rules, nor are LRMs or Streak SRMs. Hey, guess what have been touted as some of the most broken items in the game at various times? The things least like their TT counterparts.

You don't have to have one or the other, you can have both but you have to be smart about it.

[Kobold]

If you don't remain faithful to the basic precepts of the universe, then it stops being a Battletech/MechWarrior game.

[Lycan]

FupDup, on 12 February 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

From the way I've seen most people use it, they mean simulator as in simulating the TT experience (which is pretty flawed in and of itself because a real TT simulation would be a turn-based strategy game played from birds-eye view, not an FPS).

Actually, most of the people want this to be a simulator of actually piloting a mech in combat. In its current incarnation, the player is just possessing a robot avatar and then standard FPS rules kick in.

[Herodes]

The thread title and presentation do make it a loaded question and thus a fallacy.

This is bad style and trollish behaviour and everything except an open discussion while disguising as such.

One should not participate in discussing content but instead comment on the style of discussion.