|
Skoll posted:http://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/6944/comments/136406 Considering how a significant portion of bugs in a beta are video card/driver issues, it does not sound like it will be a very useful beta. So far it sounds like I'm probably going to play a single skirmish map then shelve it until release.
|
#
¿
May 26, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Played two matches, one at 15m, one at 25m. Both ended with easy wins against the AI with no mech losses on my side and few with internal damage. The AI seems to be very bad at dealing with skirmishers and flanking. It will gleefully stand in place and take fire on the front and back expecting the armor to weather the storm. Once the enemy has lost a mech its at a severe disadvantage turn-order wise. Once it as lost 2 its doomed. So my observations: This is going to be the best mech game we've had since cyberstorm. PPCs need a buff. LRMs with indirect fire are insanely good. Players need to be able to move the camera while animation is happening. I didn't get to capture the game ending DFA because the camera locked itself behind a rock.  Once we have a mechlab and able to start grooming pilot skills the holes in ruleset is really going to show itself. Its awesome for playing against a computer in a campaign, not so excited about what playing against a human with a tricked out team will be like. But to be fair, playing against humans in table top with tricked out teams sucks too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
isildur posted:'death' won't always result in a lost pilot. it is likely to result in a pilot in the medbay. You need to be careful with this so players actually have an incentive to continue playing after pilot death. In most games where characters have perma death, most players just reload the game and try the battle again. Because the cost of losing the pilot greatly exceeds the cost of redoing the battle. e.g. Grinding a pilot from rookie to elite takes 10+ battles, redoing a battle is just a single battle, and 1 < 10.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:Cowards will reload half the time even if there is no penalty. They're not being forced to ironman, and if they're going to reload either way, why design the casualty system around their particular gameplay choice? Lets not frame the entire discussion around what constitutes a "hardcore" player or not. The game should encourage players to accept pilot death, and setting up a gameplay system around grooming elite pilots is counter to that. Really just having pilots be in "critical condition" in the medbay for X number of missions, and %Y change of dying of their injuries later would allow for pilot death without making the "gently caress it, reload" the easy out.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
You'll never stop save scumming, but you can make the pilot death/injury mechanic more interesting than just shrugging and saying "Why bother?" With that logic, you'll never stop game file editing, so why bother having a mechlab?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:Coming in from both XCOM and Battle Brothers, the level up system ensures that meat is extremely valuable in both games. Losing a single high-level soldier in a "successful" mission can set you back several missions of gains and grinding. Hopefully, this game will either make it easier to lose mechs without losing pilots, or make pilots much more replaceable. Losing single mech should not turn a victory into a pyrrhic win unless that mech has los-tech on it or the pilot is like Natasha Kerensky or something. It all depends on how hard it is to get those pilot abilities, and how OP they are. e.g. If Evasion stays in the game as-is, and it takes many missions to grind a pilot up to getting Evasion, the pilot is worth far more than the mech is. Which is basically the opposite of the original Battletech lore: Where life is cheap and mechs are expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Odd, I didn't even think that was possible to pull of in MW 3 or 4. I certainly couldn't jump over someone and rotate 180 degrees. Never really saw it in MWO either, although there you just usually used jump jets to skate around as a light and help you turn quicker. It was really common and fun in the early days of MWO. Then the grognards complained that their Atlas could be killed by a Spider pilot with a brain and PGI nerfed JJ tactics into the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Seems like we're talking about a lot of different stuff. How much battletech Table Top (or Megamek) have you played? Mechs never really "operated on their own". Experienced players have mechs support each other as a cohesive squad. Its true that HBS made some changes to the TT rules (Most notably initiative and shoot/fire in the same phase) to make it a more streamlined and user friendly video game experience, all of the fundamentals of TT battletech are there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
It would be pretty amazing for a BTech mercenary game to come along where mechs are actually rare. But that would mean most of your merc company is made up of tanks/aircraft/infantry, you don't get to salvage and keep anything you find, and players won't get to experience all the different mech types available. Instead I'm sure we'll all end the campaign with more mechs in our hangars than what we know what to do with.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
If there is an increase in headcappers, and the direct damage weapon of choice, PPC seems underpowered, seems like a buff to head armor should go along with a buff to PPC damage. I'd rather AC20/Gauss remain the exclusive headcapper set.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I agree with the general concept that there doesn't seem to be much long range engagement right now where a mech gets weakened before it's actually in the fight. From just casual observation it seems that terrain and turning isn't nearly as restrictive as it is in Table Top, plus sprinting. Could also be the way the AI is programmed; Its probably pretty dumb and just tries to get the best hit chance it can.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:"Balance" or "Giving Lights a reason to exist" typically. I would be nice if HBS would create a zero ton "software" package trait for mechs like how pilots have traits. So an assault ~could~ have long range sensors, but said mech would be giving up something else instead to do it. Much like what PGI did with MWO's modules.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:Maybe this isn't the place to ask, but this has me itching to replay mechcommander 2. Is there anywhere to get it legit? I lost my copy years ago, and it's bugged copy protection means I'd probably have a helluva time trying to play it anyway http://www.moddb.com/mods/mechcommander-omnitech MC2 went open source. Looks like its still getting updated. Played through the MC2 campaign via this mod a few years ago and it worked fine.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
kingcom posted:I downloaded this but it doesn't really run on windows 7, anything special beyond compatibility mode needed to get this running? I played it on windows 7 so I know it can be done, but I don't remember needing to do anything special.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
All I want is them to model 2-3 melee weapon wielding mechs and give them a custom punch animation (e.g. axe swing) and bonus damage when punching. Is that so much to ask?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
Just make evasive skill be a miss chance based on distance moved, Starting at 10%, and topping out at 50%.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:- We don't know what the campaign game is going to be like, how many and what sorts of maps we'll have, or what sort of objectives we'll need to accomplish. Multiplayer will probably play a lot like skirmish, possibly against a smarter opponent. I have a sneaking suspicion assault `Mechs will be less good against real players who know how to maneuver and can exploit how sluggish Assaults are. The fog of war, interdirect fire, and spotting system reminds me a lot of Cyberstorm. Multiplayer in that game was often a lot of fast missile boats where one guy spots you and missiles from all over the drat place then rain down on your head. Walking around in the heavier HERCs was just suicide.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:Sounds like they need to go out of business to me. To be clear, this is copyright trolls, not patent trolls. And LOL at PGI having no idea that Harmony Gold is incredibly litigious and not being 100% certain about using those reseen designs. Idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2017 14:46
|
|
is poo poo, but patent trolls are worse than lovely developers.
|
If only we could launch a game map directly via a config file (map options, player force, enemy force) and output the battle results to some other file, I could finally have the Battletech:Total War game I've always wanted. Just a random thought.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Few things would make me happier than a new battletech rule set designed around modern game design methods. My existing BTech book collection can join my retired D&D book collection. Course with my luck it does happen and Topps puts PGI in charge of writing the rules. Careful what you wish for and all that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Didn't they already try that with the Dark Age clix stuff? I remember really disliking it when I was in middle school, but at this point I cant remember if it was a visceral rejection of all the DA bullshit or if the game system itself was wonky somehow. The Clix game was basically crap. It was possible to house-rule it into a pretty good battletech game (Basically turn it into alpha-strike), but that didn't excuse the other glaring problems. There was a time ~6-7 years ago when Catalyst lost the license to produce a boxed table top set with plastic miniatures and another one of the various BTech license holders was working on creating a new game with new rules, but it obviously never went anywhere and Catalyst got the license back. Now I really just play Battletech in an RPG format; 1 mech per player and a DM coming up with a creative OpForce. Allows me to utilize all the crazy rules the game has to offer without pissing people off. Eldragon fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Jan 26, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:False, Clix was a great game that occasionally had some problematic expansions. Once it got to its 2.0 status (Age of Destruction) most of the problems were dealt with. It got me and a bunch of buds into the Battletech universe. Fair, age of destruction fixed a lot of problems. And yeah, big battles were where it shined. But I still think Alpha-Strike did a better job, and we switched to playing Alpha strike with Clix units. But it also could be my group are a bunch of grizzled wargaming grognards who aren't happy if the game isn't obtuse.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
HBS at least acknowledged melee mechs and apparently there is an in-house desire. But since they aren't making the mechs themselves so...  But really PGI putting the hatchetman in would get me to start playing MWO again. Chopping mechs with a giant loving ax is pure joy; Guess I better fire up titanfall tonight.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
Artillery (and Mines, Infantry) have always been area denial weapons. Their loss to the game really only matters in how much of an advantage turtling gives you. But since this is primarily a single player game, my guess is : not much. For multiplayer? Well this isn't MWO where turtle tactics are life and death, you can charge down a hill and actually succeed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
Omar_Comin posted:HBS BattleTech: He, She, They I wonder if the furries in the battletech community are pissed HBS didn't include furkin as an option.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Finally getting a chance to play this game, and so far it seems like the best btech implementation yet. Quick Question: In the early game when negotiating contracts, it is better to push for salvage, money, or a balance of the two? I've heard some conflicting things about the value of salvage.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:If you're a turbo-nerd like me then this is the table you need. Well that settles it, I'm modding my game to drop the tonnage of the AC 10 by 1 ton. Right now I'm using AC5 or AC20, ignoring all the others. It's kind of a shame they didn't add a 4 ton Autocannon (Light AC5), table top really benefits from it, Especially if you are playing 3025 era. but I'm sure the grogs would lose their mind about fake timelines being ignored.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
Libluini posted:The prison liberation mission is turning out to be a goddamn nightmare: First that stupid NPC walks in right into the middle of the opposition, ruining the ambush I had set up in the process, and then when we rush in all enemy mechs focus fire Glitch down from pristine to dead in a single turn. Plan your attack better, and don't rush in. The NPC may ruin the Ambush, but the enemy AI will start firing on your quickly and ignore the NPC you need to protect. Use the initiative system to Focus Fire on one of their mechs, while making sure your mechs are only giving LOS to the mech you are focus firing. You should be going into this fight with near pristine armor because you can pop the turret generators and enemy vehicles from range. I made these for MWO back in the day, but most of the same concepts apply: https://imgur.com/a/3Pbzq Basically do this, always:   Eldragon fucked around with this message at 16:26 on May 1, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:I remember this! How is MWO these days, anyway? I have not played in 2 years or so. Back then it was: Clan tech sucks, PGI selling iWin mechs for money then nerfing them when they go free sucks, ghost heat sucks, gauss rifle delay sucks, sniper fights sucks, dropping with pubbies sucks. Libluini posted:Thanks, I know all of this already, but I didn't expect the enemy AI to be too stupid to ignore the NPC. I've restarted and plan to ignore Lady Kamino's death rush now. When I played that Kamino stole most of the mech kills because I would core out their rear armor during my attack, then they turn to fight me and Kamino finishes them off. Just don't wait so long they have time to kill her; the missions is scripted so do as the image above implies: get all your guys near the prison gate then charge in as a group. Eldragon fucked around with this message at 16:34 on May 1, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:For anyone starting fresh campaigns I'd definitely suggest the following: So far I have not found LL vs PPC to be totally out of whack, similar with the SRM6. I still use them. With the AC10 I just can't find a use for them, ever. 1 Ton lighter and 1 ton ammo? Totally. Although I think I will just make a Light AC5 / Light AC2 with reduced ranges so I can crap some ballistic badassery into lighter mechs.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The amount of nerd rage you get on Reddit or the Paradox forums if you suggest they should reduce tonnage on some of the weapons is absolutely amazing I am not at all surprised, TT grognards are pretty bad. Thank god this game is mod-able. I used to think that the battletech community was the worst gaming community out there. Then I started playing Elite Dangerous. TT is fun, but the game mechanics did not age well at all, and HBS pretty much fixed them; so I'm sure there are grogs who are pissed and refuse to play this game.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:That's true, but it's also a task that realistically takes almost no time at all since the answer is 99% of the time "Use the new space on armor or heatsinks." If someone is going to go through and reassign weights to lot of weapons, you could at least argue that updating stock designs is a chore. How many stock mechs use the AC10? 4? 5? I don't have the mech list in front of me but its not a huge number.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
And never put ammo in a section with no other components if you can avoid it. e.g. If you only got ammo in the side torso, and that side torso takes a crit, 100% chance the ammo is going to cook off. If that side torso has 5 slots of LRMs, its a 1 in 6 chance.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I do hate how the game makes it really hard to Collect Them All. I have yet to see a stalker at all. I actually really like how I can't just go down to Space-Mart and buy any mech I want like in all previous games. Makes the Salvage vs. Money slider really matter. Just getting getting a third of a mech I'm trying to collect is pretty cool. Completing the mech feels like an accomplishment more-so than just saving up the C-Bills.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:People want to see the Clan Invasion as an expansion, but that means 3050 and a bunch of not well balanced tech becomes available. But that would involve giving insufferable clanners a game where the clans are the protagonists and they can live out their eugenic furry fantasies. I don't think we want that.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
Eej posted:They also really buy into the idea of elite soldiers in superior hardware being beaten by inferiors who rely on numbers, deceit and treachery It would be at least interesting if the clans were beaten like a professional boxer going down to an unexpected kick in the balls; but instead it was Deus ex Comstar.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
So I did a 1.5 Skull assassination mission, game threw 4 vehicles, 2 wolverines, a vindicator and an Orion at me. I'm still early game, and all I had was a Centurion, Shadow Hawk, Blackjack, and Spider. Through what is probably some of the best Kiting and LOS shenanigans I won the match. I won't have a functioning lance again for 40 days. But the game rewarded me with an AC20++ for the trouble. I literally have no idea what to do with it, it's not actually that great on a Centurion and I prefer rocking 3xSRM6.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
Ultimately, I'd rather play a game where I fight lots of mechs/vehicles in a mission and if Bulwark needs to be a little OP to make that happen, so be it (But Disabling turn in place and still getting Bulkwark is a good first step). Certainly more fun than a fair fight against a good AI in campaign mode. Just giving the AI artillery/airstrikes so you can't kill zone turtle every mission, and it would balance out just fine. Extra fun if you can destroy the artillery/aircraft. Of courses that's more
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe? Don't forget the Jagermech
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:I think the fundamental problem is that Battletech sees light>medium>heavy>assault as just being a linear gear progression like going from a +1 to a +2 sword in some RPG rather than having actual different roles. So yeah, I don't see that changing without some major overhauls to how stuff works or just a lame fun tax. Really just missions that require you to move quickly solve this issue. The storyline mission where you have to destroy the comm tower in 15 rounds or less is tricky with a slow lance, trivially easy with a single jump equipped light. is a decent example of "don't roll nothing but slow mechs". Similar solutions can be done with randomly generated missions. And let us not forget the fun of infantry. Trivially easy to kill, only dangerous at short range, but chew through mechs dumb enough to let them get close. Back when I was doing weekend TT games, dropping with an swarm of infantry against the dudes with their anti-mech optimized murder boats is probably the most fun I had playing the game. Course this game will probably never have them, which is too bad. But yeah, the core base game of mechs slugging it out, tonnage wins. Eldragon fucked around with this message at 21:29 on May 7, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 7, 2018 21:26
|
|