|
Psion posted:The only failure state is bankruptcy, so presumably replacements are, at heart, just a matter of c-bills. But that leaves a disturbing comparison with Battle Brothers. In Battle Brothers, mercenary contracts scale with the size and average level of your band. But contracts don't spawn that fast, and you cannot find multiple high-level (or even medium-level) replacements without scouring the entire map. So losing half your front line would often leave your mercenary company completely surrounded by contracts balanced for your old strength, and no way to get close enough to your old strength to beat those contracts. Losing half your party in a battle is effectively a game over, even if you had the cash to "replace" your losses. Of course, there's an easy fix to this problem. Either make high-level replacements easily available for the right price, or leave a steady supply of scrub contracts at every world.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:27 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 21:53 |
|
We're fine with you not liking the design they went with. We're not fine with you making blatantly false statements and declaring them fact. Now if you'll
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:28 |
|
Zaodai posted:We're fine with you not liking the design they went with. This is exactly how it went down the last time they tried it a couple e: people, including me for a change, actually tried to engage reasonably first, too, so it's some real revisionist history Psion fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Jun 5, 2017 |
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:33 |
|
Psion posted:This is exactly how it went down the last time they tried it a couple months back in the previous thread. Make outrageous claims and when called out, ignore the actual reasons people posted and try to deflect with "you're all mad because I disagree, lol" and pretend that they were the one being reasonable all along. I think this time is the first upgrade to outright lying (see, e.g., paperdoll quote) though. A shameful shitposter, to be sure. Er the last time I was posting was a year ago when we bought into the beta, and the response was that the beta wasn't out. So I took off for a year, and here I am, having played the beta. Are you confused about the paperdoll? The paperdoll that I'm referring to is in combat, when it shows your mechs in the bottom left and an enemy mech that you are targeting with fire, armor is a bar and not as a value on each section of the mech.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:38 |
|
Eldragon posted:
A pilot is cheap and easy to find. A skilled pilot not so much. If your only goal is filling a seat, sure, but a quality shooter with a full set of skills? Not so much.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:42 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Well as an additional point, let me list all the ways I feel Battletech - the video game imitates Xcom - the game.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:43 |
|
Great Beer posted:A pilot is cheap and easy to find. A skilled pilot not so much. If your only goal is filling a seat, sure, but a quality shooter with a full set of skills? Not so much. One of the things the setting never really handled well was the number of academies and privately trained nobles making the IS have a zillion pilots of at least Some Skill playing musical chairs with approximately 4 mechs, but in this case I could see it working out as a justification for a fairly wide pilot pool. I would be okay with being able to recruit a generally midtier to good pilot at more or less any point, and combat experience training them up into something really good. Assuming they live. Like I'd prefer not to have to recruit raw rookie "literally cannot hit a barn" pilots en masse and train them painstakingly up through 15 missions, I don't think that fits the setting or the gameplay.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:47 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Lol you guys pulled this same stuff like a year ago when I posted, at some point it's gonna be hard to keep being outraged that 1 dude on the internet doesn't like the design they went with. And maybe it can be a civil thing without huge meltdowns or brown sea posts or source your quotes or allllll the usual stuff You are also willfully ignoring facts (such as a 4 mech lance being a standard thing in the game since its tabletop inception in the 80s). Instead, to you, its "XCOM DID IT THIS WAY SO OBVIOUSLY THEY TOOK THE IDEA FROM XCOM!!". People are calling you out because you have bad, wrong opinions and are sticking to them and continuing to post about them, all whilst ignoring facts and good points people are making about how Battletech is not, in fact, a clone of XCOM with robits. edit: You are entitled to your opinion and you are welcome to post about it as much as you want, but other people are going to have opinions about your (bad) opinions and are going to call you out. No one is forcing you to post.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:55 |
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:It wasnt a year ago and the problem everyone has with your posts is that you are full of poo poo and are going "THIS GAME IS XCOM 2 WITH MECHS!!!!1" and will not have any part in a discussion about it - you are not willing to justify your opinions beyond "Xcom did it that way so obviously Harebrained did it EXACTLY THE SAME!". More directly, we accept that you have Bad, Wrong Opinions. But you need to accept that your Bad, Wrong Opinions are not the same as factual information.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:56 |
|
hasn't there already been some kind of java client for emulating 1:1 tabletop rules around for decades it seems like that might be more the guy's speed
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:58 |
|
I'd like to point out that Psion just said that I was outright lying for my comment that this: Friendly armor loadout in combat: And this - enemy armor loadout when targeting: Does not show me the actual amount of the remaining armor in combat, which means I can't eyeball whether the weapon I'm firing has a chance to breach that location if it hits. Ham Sandwiches fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jun 5, 2017 |
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:59 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Lol you guys pulled this same stuff like a year ago when I posted, at some point it's gonna be hard to keep being outraged that 1 dude on the internet doesn't like the design they went with. And maybe it can be a civil thing without huge meltdowns or brown sea posts or source your quotes or allllll the usual stuff TBH, I think you accidentally bought XCOM 2.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 17:59 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:I'd like to point out that Psion just said that I was outright lying for my comment that this: You wouldn't logically have that perfect, real-time information in combat anyway to let you know if your weapons will definitely penetrate or not. But you know what game gives you real-time up to date information about the health and armor of enemy targets? XCOM2.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:01 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Er the last time I was posting was a year ago when we bought into the beta, and the response was that the beta wasn't out. If you hover over a specific part of the paperdoll it will show you that specific section's armor.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:02 |
|
Zaodai posted:You wouldn't logically have that perfect, real-time information in combat anyway to let you know if your weapons will definitely penetrate or not. Er he said my claim was an outright lie? I was describing the way it works in the game. You can disagree with what I posted, but my observation was absolutely true, and you guys called me a liar for making a true observation.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:03 |
|
BadOptics posted:If you hover over a specific part of the paperdoll it will show you that specific section's armor. I want to see it on the paperdoll at a glance, without having to select a specific section's armor. if I want to see "where can a PPC actually breach" I don't want to have to select each section to find a vulnerable one, I want to be able to tell which mechs will have a hole opened by having me shoot chunkier weapons.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:04 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Er he said my claim was an outright lie? I was describing the way it works in the game. You can disagree with what I posted, but my observation was absolutely true, and you guys called me a liar for making a true observation. Ham Sandwiches posted:I want to see it on the paperdoll at a glance, without having to select a specific section's armor. if I want to see "where can a PPC actually breach" I don't want to have to select each section to find a vulnerable one, I want to be able to tell which mechs will have a hole opened by having me shoot chunkier weapons. If the game was a finished product I could see you being this mad about it but its a beta, dude. They have developers posting in this thread as well as taking feedback directly. They also have their own forums, have you posted there?
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:05 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Er he said my claim was an outright lie? I was describing the way it works in the game. You can disagree with what I posted, but my observation was absolutely true, and you guys called me a liar for making a true observation. We call you a liar for claiming that mechanics are wholesale lifted from XCOM2, down to aiming being the same when it's not aside from you clicking a target with your mouse. Also, isn't the burden of proof on you? You're the one spewing bullshit at us. Alternatively, go play a game you like, or if you actually want to change things you perceive as being wrong, submit those surveys that come up after EVERY GAME of the beta, allowing you to send your feedback directly to the devs. There are many more productive options if you genuinely aren't a troll and are just somehow that misguided.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:06 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Er he said my claim was an outright lie? I was describing the way it works in the game. You can disagree with what I posted, but my observation was absolutely true, and you guys called me a liar for making a true observation. Because your stated that Battletech does not have locational damage, which it does? The bar at the top is just a rough estimate of the mechs remaining total armor and internals. You can kill it in a headshot or by removing both legs.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:08 |
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Perhaps we misunderstood you you or didnt look that close because of all of the other "observations" you posted about how the game is XCOM2 with robots? Thats one thing - what about the rest? Perhaps this sort of "DEFEND YOUR CLAIMS IN COURT WITH A TRIAL OF GOONS" is loving dumb dude. I'm one dude with an opinion on the latest computer game based on an old rear end board game. This game feels far too much like xcom2 with robots, from the scale, to the pilot skills, to the way that it seems to be chasing a yer gonna lose pilots approach, to the particiular implementations of the spotting / los systems. And the reason I brought this up a while back was that Shadowrun was Xcom with runners, and that was underwhelming too. It just seems like the same crew of guys given the same constraints are gonna make similarish products. Yelling at me isn't going to make the AI stop being dumb or get rid of the jank or magically make the game better. You guys successfully chased out the last guy that didn't like the game (there was one dude, lmao, then there was none) and I get it, it's not ok to post negative stuff in the Battletech thread (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:08 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Perhaps this sort of "DEFEND YOUR CLAIMS IN COURT WITH A TRIAL OF GOONS" is loving dumb dude. I'm one dude with an opinion on the latest computer game based on an old rear end board game. This game feels far too much like xcom2 with robots, from the scale, to the pilot skills, to the way that it seems to be chasing a yer gonna lose pilots approach, to the particiular implementations of the spotting / los systems. Please see: AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:The game is in beta and the devs are asking for feedback via the beta client of the game - have you provided the devs this feedback? and Zaodai posted:We call you a liar for claiming that mechanics are wholesale lifted from XCOM2, down to aiming being the same when it's not aside from you clicking a target with your mouse.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:10 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:And the reason I brought this up a while back was that Shadowrun was Xcom with runners, and that was underwhelming too. It just seems like the same crew of guys given the same constraints are gonna make similarish products. Ohhh, the stupid opinions go way back then. It makes much more sense, now, thank you.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:11 |
|
Or maybe once a year I can fire off 3-4 posts on the SA forums that capture my opinions and then go back to posting about other stuff until the next major thing. Like that's it guys, I've played the beta and you've weathered the storm, the naysayers are done, and all that's left is to enjoy the eventual game in a few months.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:12 |
|
I like how the prediction of 'he'll come back and talk about how he's actually the reasonable one' came true. Your opinions range from outrageously oversimplified to just dead wrong. That's why people are dismissing you.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:13 |
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:I like how the prediction of 'he'll come back and talk about how he's actually the reasonable one' came true. Yeah the guy that just wanted to say his piece about a game along with everyone else, and then did so. Shocking stuff dude, had to have been Nostradamus to predict imo.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:14 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Or maybe once a year I can fire off 3-4 posts on the SA forums that capture my opinions and then go back to posting about other stuff until the next major thing. Your talents are wasted here, GO, AND HELP THE CITY!
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:15 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Yeah the guy that just wanted to say his piece about a game along with everyone else, and then did so. Shocking stuff dude, had to have been Nostradamus to predict imo.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:17 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Or maybe once a year I can fire off 3-4 posts on the SA forums that capture my opinions and then go back to posting about other stuff until the next major thing. AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:You are entitled to your opinion and you are welcome to post about it as much as you want, but other people are going to have opinions about your (bad) opinions and are going to call you out. No one is forcing you to post. Zaodai posted:More directly, we accept that you have Bad, Wrong Opinions. I dont even need to type new posts because someone already has a good reply
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:17 |
|
i, too, think Jordan Weisman is doing Battletech Wrong
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:20 |
|
I mean, he's not WRONG that the game has a lot in common with xcom, they ARE the same basic game type, turn based strategy, after all. I wouldn't go as far as to say that this game is just xcom with mechs though, xcom already has mechs and it plays differently... and I honestly think xcomc has more depth to it in the battle phase right now with how their cover system works.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:25 |
|
JacksLibido posted:I mean, he's not WRONG that the game has a lot in common with xcom, they ARE the same basic game type, turn based strategy, after all.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:29 |
|
JacksLibido posted:I mean, he's not WRONG that the game has a lot in common with xcom, they ARE the same basic game type, turn based strategy, after all. Yeah my take is removing the cover system was a net negative, the initative system seems to slow down the rounds instead of improve them, and all sorts of information you'd need to make the decisions gets lost every step of the way. The to hit rolls don't really capture the odds to hit in a solid way, the movement is very different from btech and seems to remove some considerations. The weapon range and melee changes also seem odd. Anyway I'm still looking forward to the mod potential and just the fact that there's an updated Battletech game is pretty cool. The maps seem super small which one of the last concerns I had but hopefully there's some decent sized ones for Multiplayer and we can get a few fun goon skirmishes at some point.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:29 |
|
The challenge of making a Mechwarrior game comes in part from dealing with everyone who played Battletech in the 70ies or whatever, and has their own view of how the game should be. They will also buy into the top tier pre-order and defend the game dogmatically until it is finally released and turns out to be poo poo (see: MWO). For what it's worth, this game looks a lot like XCOM and that's not a bad thing. Initiative system looks good but the battles seem too easy and there is too much melee. Hopefully the developers will find a way to make single player challenging.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 18:31 |
|
golden bubble posted:Of course, there's an easy fix to this problem. Either make high-level replacements easily available for the right price, or leave a steady supply of scrub contracts at every world. Sure, it'll require tuning the system to make sure you have the opportunity to recover, but having never played Battle Brothers I can't really say anything about the specific analogy you're drawing. I've seen a few dev posts which seem pretty aware of this possibility so they're planning for it. Stuff like wanting the players to take losses, but not so badly that they can't bounce back from a mission failure or mech loss or whatever. I get the sense that they want a couple mistakes to be recoverable, a short string of mistakes in a row to be tough but recoverable, but if you keep making mistakes, The idea of "you lost your Atlas on turn 2 of this mission, RIP this entire campaign" is something they actively said they didn't want, so if that's roughly like losing half your company in Battle Brothers, there you go? Psion fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jun 5, 2017 |
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:32 |
|
All turn-based tactics and tactical RPG games are XCOM. They always have been XCOM. The whole universe is XCOM. XCOM. EDIT: Most Sedans seat four people because that's how many soldiers you start with in XCOM. Makes u think
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:36 |
|
And maybe you put your more expendable guys in the roles more likely to die. If you don't want to have to replace your god tier pilot, put him in the assault, not the metal babby. You can always hose out the cockpit and hire a new pilot from out in front of Space Home Depot if you need to.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:37 |
|
the nintendo 64 was the first home console to have 4 controller ports, because of xcom
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:43 |
|
4^3=64, XCOM 3 is going to be an N64 exclusive, you heard it first here folks
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:45 |
|
Cowcaster posted:the nintendo 64 was the first home console to have 4 controller ports, because of xcom Conflict itself did not exist until the earliest life on Earth saw combat in XCOM.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:46 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 21:53 |
|
Four gospels, four rookies. Coincidence?
|
# ? Jun 5, 2017 19:52 |