|
Peace of Ham Sandwiches be with you, acolytes.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 15:09 |
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:I can't believe the final crux of "this is like XCOM" was that "light mechs aren't tanky enough while moving". This is actually true, to be fair. This game only has 3 defensive movement mod brackets, vs the 4 that you could reasonably see in 3025 era mechs. The major difference is, even a Locust can't reach the max move mod without sprinting. In which case in this game it can't also shoot. The current brackets require moving at least 60, 180, or 300 (magical space units, I guess we're still using meters). A Locust's max walk radius in this game is 210, while it can sprint 368. One other option (currently not used) is to also grant a damage reduction effect to different defensive movement mods, in addition to the harder to hit part.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Fast mechs, not just lights, there are some mediums that have huge rear end engines and that makes em interesting, and heavies that are real slow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Fast mechs, not just lights, there are some mediums that have huge rear end engines and that makes em interesting, and heavies that are real slow. Lol WTF. BT has always differentiated by "role on team." The Catapult, Thunderbolt, and loving Axeman are all 65 ton mechs but their weight is just about the only thing they have in common.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Yeah so if we imagine hard roles and soft roles, in Xcom I'd say the soldiers have hard roles - your rocket guy is the only guy that can rocket, the sniper is the only guy that can shoot out of los, so if you want that functionality you bring that guy. In btech TT it's a bit softer and more functional. You have damage dealer mechs but they are available in various weight and speed configurations. Same for snipers and fast scouts and so on. By reducing the speed and range I think you push into very little functional differentiation (through variants, mech weight, combat style) and through more hard role archetypes (this class of mechs has this equipment which combos with these soldier skills so that's how you'll build your lance) So I feel that Btech VG has defined roles for the mechs instead of the softer roles that I prefer, that's all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
I just strongly disagree. Mechs in tabletop totally have strong roles, if they have a specialized loadout, and the same is true of this game. A trebuchet is very much focused on one thing, while a Centurion can perform well at a variety of range brackets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
I remember this one time playing TT with my college buddies, and getting simply OUTRAGED when my Yeoman got smashed when I took it into the middle of the field to brawl.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Yeah so if we imagine hard roles and soft roles, in Xcom I'd say the soldiers have hard roles - your rocket guy is the only guy that can rocket, the sniper is the only guy that can shoot out of los, so if you want that functionality you bring that guy. I think you're just making things up out of whole cloth at this point. All the mechs in this game are stock designs that do everything they did in the stock tabletop game. The singular (noted and remarked upon many many times ITT) difference so far is the relative tankiness of light mechs, and the LRM induced knockdown spams. Neither of which are a fundamental issue since if you feel like it you can change two numbers in a file and see how the game plays differently. There's no hard and fast roles in this game that did not already exist in tabletop. There's no special equipment that means only certain mechs can do certain things. As it exists now the pilots we're playing with have single skills while the full game will have provisions for 4+. Just like the TT game you can build generalists or specialists, although, just like the TT game again, if you try and build all generalists you're probably going to get smoked by someone that puts together a more specialized force of complimentary brawlers + fire support + scout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:I just strongly disagree. Mechs in tabletop totally have strong roles, if they have a specialized loadout, and the same is true of this game. A trebuchet is very much focused on one thing, while a battlemaster can perform well at a variety of range brackets. Yeah and it's cool if we disagree. So an example from Xcom for me is that Assault class with lightning reflexes. I just don't like that only one soldier has a functionally different mechanic and that is so narrowly defined - if I need someone to run up to a pack that is going to fire at them, I really want to make it the assault. For me that kind of decision making is dull. Sniper goes in the sniper spot, assault runs up to get los, grenadier / heavy stands back. I get that people dig it, but it's not my thing - that style of defining roles. I find the Battletech TT style of "how much armor / how much heat / how much speed / what does it need to do" system of assigning roles to be more interesting. A lot of the balancing constraints in the design just seem to assume 4 mechs each with distinct roles (much like you'd need one of each base Xcom class to cover core functionality) which rubs me the wrong way personally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
You keep talking about all these xcom things that literally don't exist in battletech while claiming that battletech is copying them, as a reason you don't like battletech.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:There's no hard and fast roles in this game that did not already exist in tabletop. There's no special equipment that means only certain mechs can do certain things. As it exists now the pilots we're playing with have single skills while the full game will have provisions for 4+. Just like the TT game you can build generalists or specialists, although, just like the TT game again, if you try and build all generalists you're probably going to get smoked by someone that puts together a more specialized force of complimentary brawlers + fire support + scout. On their own, no, but with the addition of the pilot skills + initiative system banking, sensor system and reduced weapon ranges as well as less movement, I'd say it's heading towards that direction. It's fine if you don't feel that way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Because I had not done enough futile arguing today... Four to six person squad has been around in gaming since, at least, Dungeons and Dragons. In military aviation, the finger-four formation has been around since before WW2. It has been used in...how many role playing games? I'm not sure, but I think the number is "yes". Because, when you want that every one of your units "have a name", sort to speak, it is well established that 4-6 units in a squad is fine - enough people to get tactical, but still keep them unique and manageable. Not broken, don't fix - and not every game need to be revolutionary, y'know? Besides- while I suck at Xcom, and the mere idea of running battletech give my potato nightmares...From what little I have seen, the "tactical crux" of both games are way different (Admittedly, more of a gut-feel then "here's how" - after all, I ain't expert - just average player) And even if they weren't, the strategical one will; Managing a mercenary force living from paycheck to paycheck, maneuvering between both sides of the war, is not X-com's, where there is your side and their side, and your goals are pleasing your funding nations, and keeping up with the arms race.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Weapon ranges in this game are literally the same as they are in TT (A Medium Laser's max range is 270 meters!) . Movement is the same as it is in TT. The two Initiative systems are different, but being able to use it strategically is straight up better than "Welp I lose the die roll I'm gonna get boned this turn"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Weapon ranges in this game are literally the same as they are in TT (A Medium Laser's max range is 270 meters!) . The weapon ranges is referring to the way that weapon brackets have been changed and in general medium range combat seems to involve a lot more hits and a lot more damage than a typical TT match. I haven't played enough with Melee but that feels quite different too. Along with the shorter maps and LOS system it makes sense, but I prefer a more open feel to the combat. Again, just a style preference. So for the deterministic stuff - Not a fan of Brace, not a fan of Evasive Pilot, not a fan of the 50% evasion modifier, etc. Inspire also seems dicey to me but hey I guess I'll see how it feels over the course of a campaign. I don't know how you don't put the guy with Bulwark in your slowest mech, or the one that likes to stand still. I don't know why you don't put Evasive Pilot on your assault, er, mech that needs to scout and draw fire. Sensor lock is a big deal. That kind of stuff just feels like obvious choices that reduce your decision making without adding much to the combat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:The weapon ranges is referring to the way that weapon brackets have been changed and in general medium range combat seems to involve a lot more hits and a lot more damage than a typical TT match. I haven't played enough with Melee but that feels quite different too. Along with the shorter maps and LOS system it makes sense, but I prefer a more open feel to the combat. Again, just a style preference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Nope, just like the 4v4 gameplay is definitely the only format.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Oh hey, 150 new posts in the Battletech thread - I wonder if HBS released an update on the multi-
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Weapon ranges in this game are literally the same as they are in TT (A Medium Laser's max range is 270 meters!) . In TT this initiative loving was mitigated by different initiative rules. You could roll per team or per mech. Obviously per mech made it clunky as gently caress so everyone did it per team
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:You do realize that pilots only having one skill is a factor of the beta, and not representative of either skirmish or the campaign? There's a lot more depth to that system than we can really see at the moment. I hope it ends up being fun to play and I hope the campaign is as flexible as people feel it will be. Legit. I'd like a fun Battletech videogame, it's been a while since Mech Commander.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Oh hey, 150 new posts in the Battletech thread - I wonder if HBS released an update on the multi- Happy to have you. Tell me, do you recognize the myriad ways that Gone with the Wind is actually just a blatant plagiarism of XCOM?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:I hope it ends up being fun to play and I hope the campaign is as flexible as people feel it will be. Legit. I'd like a fun Battletech videogame, it's been a while since Mech Commander. Then go away until that happens. Discussing the beta like it's the end-all of this game is why you keep putting your foot in your mouth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:I don't know how you don't put the guy with Bulwark in your slowest mech, or the one that likes to stand still. I don't know why you don't put Evasive Pilot on your assault, er, mech that needs to scout and draw fire. Sensor lock is a big deal. That kind of stuff just feels like obvious choices that reduce your decision making without adding much to the combat. ...Having your lights "play raven" reduce your decision making, not adding much? Despite "spotter for LRMS" is one of the light 'Mech classic rules, along with "very fast" and "cheap cannon fodder"? I'm not sure I'm getting you. Cyrano4747 posted:In TT this initiative loving was mitigated by different initiative rules. You could roll per team or per mech. Obviously per mech made it clunky as gently caress so everyone did it per team It's still the whims of the dice. The new system gives us a meaningful choice, and I think will serve this game better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
Gun Jam posted:Because I had not done enough futile arguing today... Sir, I think you'll find that the US Army Air Force copied XCOM (2012) in 1936 when it comes to the finger four formation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
So I'm practicing my facing and positioning in order to get better at coming out relatively unscathed and it sorta works, only thanks to the dumb AI I suppose. Was playing stacks with a Light Battle lance vs the enemy's light assault. The enemy urbies just stayed out of line of sight until their mediums were dead. Maybe they were just expecting me to walk into their killzone and couldn't account for me hanging back? Also melee can be utterly brutal sometimes. After wrecking the kintaro and defanging the hunchback, the hunchback just wipes a pristine RA and RT off one of my centurions in melee. By the way, does weight difference matter in melee contests?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Anyone know the conversion rate of C-bills to bitcoins?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
School Nickname posted:Also melee can be utterly brutal sometimes. After wrecking the kintaro and defanging the hunchback, the hunchback just wipes a pristine RA and RT off one of my centurions in melee. By the way, does weight difference matter in melee contests? IIRC, heavier mechs do more melee damage and lighter mechs tend to have less HP in a given location so it works out as if there was a mechanic keying on weight difference, but there isn't anything actually keying directly on weight difference.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:it's been a while since Mech Commander. This actually explains a lot. If your idea of battletech is MechCommander yeah, this isn't going to be mech commander. Mech Commander was profoundly different from the TT in order to translate it to being a RTS. I've had a lot of fun with MechCommander, but it's mostly because I really love the universe and have an embarrassing amount of nostalgia for it. This game hews much, much closer to the TT which is what everyone here really likes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:IIRC, heavier mechs do more melee damage and lighter mechs tend to have less HP in a given location so it works out as if there was a mechanic keying on weight difference, but there isn't anything actually keying directly on weight difference. weight is directly related to the interior structure of a mech. Every mech of a given tonnage has identical internal structure. internal structure also dictates how much armor a location can have, although few mechs in 3025 are rolling full armor. In TT at least tonnage directly correlated to melee damage. Punches were tonnage / 10 and kicks were tonnage /20 . Since they've combined the two into one general "melee" attack I'm not sure quite how that works, and I think they've also monkeyed with the numbers to reflect mechs with arms/hands vs. those that don't have them. Either way, the general trend of heavier hits harder holds up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Mech Commander was profoundly different from the TT in order to translate it to being a RTS. Do you guys know what else was a RTS? 
BadOptics fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This actually explains a lot. If your idea of battletech is MechCommander yeah, this isn't going to be mech commander. Mech Commander was profoundly different from the TT in order to translate it to being a RTS. I've had a lot of fun with MechCommander, but it's mostly because I really love the universe and have an embarrassing amount of nostalgia for it. I was referencing the last sort of working Battletech strategy game release, that's about it. I was not a fan of the liberties they took with Btech rules and it still managed to provide a fun experience. So if I was willing to meet that game halfway, I'm also willing to meet Battletech 2017 with Xcom flavor halfway as well. I think it's quite the stretch to go "aha you don't like REAL battletech, and that's why this far more authentic game doesn't resonate with you." Like I'm being castigated for pointing out the differences this game has from the base TT rules, it seems very odd to conclude that I don't like those same TT rules. I found Mech Commander a fun game despite all the changes like removing heat because too hard etc, hoping Battletech from HBS also ends up a fun game despite my differences of opinion with the combat mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:
Man, you're projecting strong enough to open a theater.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Can we please stop talking about Xcom and talk about how awesome Syndicate was
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Myrmidongs posted:Can we please stop talking about Xcom and talk about how awesome Syndicate was 4 squad members, different equipment loadouts and upgrades on a per soldier basis, seems suspiciously like a ripoff of xcom to me
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Myrmidongs posted:Can we please stop talking about Xcom and talk about how awesome Syndicate was The original or the remake, both of which plagiarized Xcom?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
To divert from the 100 on 1 Ham Sandwiches Gangbang (even if he kinda deserves it).. Some of the folks on another board I hang out at did some data mining, interesting stuff to be found: Lots of interesting tidbits about whats in the game in the \BattleTech - Private Beta\BattleTech_Data\StreamingAssets\data\ Contract Types: Ambush Convoy Arena Skirmish Assassinate Capture Base Capture Escort Defend Base Destroy Base Escort Single Rescue Rescue Double Rescue Single Simple Battle Simple Skirmish MECHS: Atlas AS7-D Atlas AS7-D LazerBoat (????) Awesome ASW-8Q/8T Banshee BNC-3E/3M Battlemaster BLR-1G Blackjack BJ-1 Blackjack BJ-1-STARTER (Oh my) Black Knight BL-6-KNT Cataphract CTF-1X Catapult CPLT-C1 Centurion CN9-A/AL Cicada CDA-2A/3C Commando COM-B1/2D Dragon DRG-1N Enforcer ENF-4R Firestarter FS9-H Grasshopper GHR-5H Griffin GRF-1N/1S Highlander HGN-733/733P Hunchback HBK-4G/4P Jagermech JM6-A/S Jenner JR7-D King Crab KGC-0000 Kintaro KTO-18 Locust 1M/1S/1V Orion ON1-K/V Panther PNT-9R Quickdraw QKD-4G/5A Shadow Hawk SHD-2H/2D Spider SDR-5V Stalker STK-3F Thunderbolt TDR-5S/5SE/5SS Trebuchet TBT-5N Urbanmech UM-R60 Victor VTR-9B/9S Vindicator VND-1R Wolverine WVR-6K/6R Zeus ZEU-6S VEHICLES: APC Wheeled Bulldog Carrier LRM Carrier SRM Demolisher Galleon Manticore Mobile HQ Sabre Schrek Scorpion Striker Swiftwind Thumper Misc Stuff including Special Weapons. Small, Medium, Large Pulse Lasers, Gauss Rifles are in the game, as well as Double Heat Sinks Each weapon will have about 5 different manufacturers each. There will be 170 Star Systems Each House will have their own behavior in how they fight in game
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
SirFozzie posted:To divert from the 100 on 1 Ham Sandwiches Gangbang (even if he kinda deserves it).. THIS is the most interesting and positive thing I"ve seen in a long time. Mission variety is going to be what makes or breaks the campaign. quote:Misc Stuff including Special Weapons. Huh. I smell a lostech cache or plot device.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
loving Gauss rifles? YES!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
SirFozzie posted:MECHS
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 15:09 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Huh. I smell a lostech cache or plot device. Yeah they've always said that some lostech is going to be bouncing around in the game as a very rare loot type thing and setting up a cache to give you your first assault and/or something special is a pretty key checkbox for 'hero protaganist mercenary company' to run across. I would also expect ER LL and maybe even ER PPCs to show up as they are other weapons of the same lostech time loss that don't need to introduce unique mechanics like LBX (ammo switching) or whatever they might decide for Ultra Autocannons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:16
|
|
