Personal computing discussed
kamikaziechameleon wrote:You're absolutely right that it's a strong word. Though I didn't mention it in my first post, I too grew up with Battletech, among other games. My older brother was my idol growing up, and he and his friends spent hours playing Battletech on sprawling paper hex-maps. I didn't really understand the game, as young as I was, but I remember thoroughly enjoying thumbing through the Technical Readouts and admiring the mech designs. (´・ω・`)Hate seems like a strong word, only in that its such an active thing. Like you spend time each day meditating on the games faults or something. I get that its not a good battle tech game, its a decent though strangely not balanced hawken clone.
I wish it was more but don't want to spend my energy getting all bent out of shape about what it isn't.
kamikaziechameleon wrote:SoM wrote:i'm a MW fan, tried MWO and had my ass handed to me, just like in World of Tanks, where everyone had better stuff that i couldn't compete with.
uninstalled
i'm waiting on Homeworld Shipbreakers, signed for beta but not picked yet
I'm fine with loosing in a high skill game. I played starcraft 2 online and lost for days straight, didn't stop me from playing, didn't make it a bad game. I don't play competitive games hoping I'll win, expecting I'll win, being angry if I'm not as good as someone who's played a year. Took me 2 years in counter strike to have a positive kill/death ratio. Such is the nature of competitive format. I don't know how you do anything if not being awesome stops you from doing it.
I was ok with the idea of fremium for this game. I had set aside mentally about 100 dollars to start in MWO to get the mechs I wanted setup ASAP. Get some friends in and get a lance rolling. Selling coolant flushes is a F'Ing Crime IMHO. That was a larger red flag for me that PGI had no idea what they were doing than anything. Its akin to selling double damage boosts in any other game.
I believe at any point things for MWO could turn around but the issue is that PGI seems to have no idea what they are really doing up there. They are creating a game that doesn't really appeal to existing core fans, who is going to promote their game if not the fans?
I'm really sorry Kurkotain, looks like I asked a loaded question yesterday.
Forge wrote:I've been an old clanner since MW2, and I don't see anything of redeeming value in MWO. I'm sorry, but it's true. It's a generic mech-like shooter, the hitboxes in particular are way off, and they keep doing non-MW things to work around problems with their game.
shaq_mobile wrote:I remember vividly when I was playing Ghost Bear Legacy that I settled on making customized builds that worked for my playing style. There wasn't any point in having extra-long range weapons, since I usually couldn't get a hit on anything over medium range. There also wasn't much point in having a lot of rear or side armor, since I was mostly charging straight at my opponents. I ended up with a lot of designs with max frontal armor and a whole load of medium pulse lasers.I always felt that was part of the beauty. Coming up with silly builds.
Forge wrote:MW3 had similar problems, due to the simplicity of the game any slot could take any weapon, and it led to bizarre designs. I personally used to roll in a TimberWolf (MadCat) that had something absurd like 5 Gausses or 10 ultraACs, and used to one shot legs off of other mechs. Nobody ever played MW3 multiplayer with me twice.
Microsoft, being smarter than the MW:O owner/operators, gave up, rebuilt the engine with proper slot restrictions and limits, added on a decent SP campaign, and released it as MW4. I personally felt MW4 was pretty close to perfect, as video game translations of tabletop games go.
Forge wrote:MW3 had similar problems, due to the simplicity of the game any slot could take any weapon, and it led to bizarre designs. I personally used to roll in a TimberWolf (MadCat) that had something absurd like 5 Gausses or 10 ultraACs, and used to one shot legs off of other mechs. Nobody ever played MW3 multiplayer with me twice.
NovusBogus wrote:A first-person Mechwarrior game is stuck in a nasty catch 22: as long as weapons shoot straight the game will be a horribly unbalanced core war but players will get frustrated if their shots don't hit. If it was up to me I'd bite the AC20 round and have any hit on an opponent then get run through a probability-based function to determine where the shot landed but I've always enjoyed making and managing loadouts and loot more than actually using them.
If nothing else, MWO will hopefully demonstrate that there really is demand for MW games. PGI has often said that they wanted to do a real successor to MW4 but nobody would fund anything but a freemium multiplayer arena. Then they got one of the largest stacks of crowdfund cash to date.
shaq_mobile wrote:I'd like to see more depth in the damage of weapons (multiple damage types) and armor layouts. It'd also be cool to have a little more random accuracy on some of the weapons. Ballistic weapons should be a little more random. Something like the way WoT does it, but with less random distribution. That's soooo random it's enraging sometimes. I'd like to see all f2p games have models like LoL where you only pay for boosts and cosmetics. Buying items that make you inherently superior pretty much instantly makes me want to never give a dev money.
All that being said, MWO is free so it's at least worth picking up to play a few times.
I still feel like Living Legends played better.
druidcent wrote:Forge wrote:MW3 had similar problems, due to the simplicity of the game any slot could take any weapon, and it led to bizarre designs. I personally used to roll in a TimberWolf (MadCat) that had something absurd like 5 Gausses or 10 ultraACs, and used to one shot legs off of other mechs. Nobody ever played MW3 multiplayer with me twice.
It's been a while since I've designed a mech under the table top rules, but, from what I recall, you could at most put 4 Gauss Rifles on a mech, but you wouldn't have enough ammo for more than 4 turns.. Also 4 gauss rifles may end up too heavy.. The Stone Rhino is the only canon mech that I know which carried 3 Gauss rifles, and it was a 100t very slow Clan mech. I'm not 100% sure why this can't be translated well. I think the other issue would be assigning a Battle Value of some sort. Both sides should of the match should have an equivalent mech battle value, then it will be up to the players/pilots. It'll still be a little less strategy and a little more twitch, but that should be reasonable. It would be better than matching up certain number of assaults/heavy/med/lights...
Scrotos wrote:druidcent wrote:Forge wrote:MW3 had similar problems, due to the simplicity of the game any slot could take any weapon, and it led to bizarre designs. I personally used to roll in a TimberWolf (MadCat) that had something absurd like 5 Gausses or 10 ultraACs, and used to one shot legs off of other mechs. Nobody ever played MW3 multiplayer with me twice.
It's been a while since I've designed a mech under the table top rules, but, from what I recall, you could at most put 4 Gauss Rifles on a mech, but you wouldn't have enough ammo for more than 4 turns.. Also 4 gauss rifles may end up too heavy.. The Stone Rhino is the only canon mech that I know which carried 3 Gauss rifles, and it was a 100t very slow Clan mech. I'm not 100% sure why this can't be translated well. I think the other issue would be assigning a Battle Value of some sort. Both sides should of the match should have an equivalent mech battle value, then it will be up to the players/pilots. It'll still be a little less strategy and a little more twitch, but that should be reasonable. It would be better than matching up certain number of assaults/heavy/med/lights...
Before any of the star league or clan stuff, I made a 100 tonner with 4 x AC/20. If you followed the example in the technical readout 3025 of the Victor which substituted 2 of the 4 arm myomers/actuators to have an AC/20 on the arm, you could do the same. My memory is hazy because I've had my books in storage for literally 15 years, but you'd have one AC/20 per arm (hands and forearms replaced) and one AC/20 per side of torso. Stuff any extra ammo in the legs and anywhere. It wasn't designed for anything but a quick takedown at close range, kinda like an UrbanMech.
My memory isn't exact on that as I'd have to dig up the sheets, but I might have made it or updated it with a star league tech XL fusion engine which would have made it very tight on ammo. And given that tech base, most likely UltraAC/20's for even more punch and even less staying power, ammo-wise. I dunno what the Battle Value stuff is. I kinda lost interest after I found out that Liao somehow became in charge of the star league. That reminds me, I need to try to beat BattleTech 2: Crescent Hawk's Revenge someday. Got hurt bad when fighting the clanners.
druidcent wrote:I can't remember when Liao took over the Inner Sphere, but I think that was just at the end of the story-arc before it went off the rails and became Clicky-tech... Also, I don't think it was the insane grandfather (Maximillian?) I think his grandson actually took over and was reasonably sane.. He ended up the equivalent of the Secretary General of the UN from what I remember. Victor still ended up controlling the armies.
Hawkwing74 wrote:One question relevant to the game...is it all pvp? I don't think I would enjoy getting stomped by people who have been playing a long time while I get my feet wet.
kamikaziechameleon wrote:I read about 10 books as a kid scattered across the time lines. Whatever they had on the shelf at the local barns and noble and bought them all.
The simplest way to explain the literary stylings of those books is tom clancy sci-fi. The multiple perspectives and immersive level of detail was so thrilling. You could imagine each and every scene to the detail as you would read it.
druidcent wrote:It may have been 3063.. I think it was introduced when they released the BattleTech Master Rules, which updated the core-rule book. The reissued TROs and Mechsheets had Battle Value. (There was also something called Combat Value, and I can't remember which of the two was messed up, and they had to retweak the formula).
Sun-Tzu became a very interesting character.. I had a similar reaction.
The BattleTech books are definitely popcorn sci-fi... It's fun, and decent, but I wouldn't call it a masterpiece. I like Stackpole, but I can't say Iiked Thurston at all.. I found his writing too one-dimensional.