|
With the vote this tight for two factions who will oppose each other, we should totally skip having OpFor and play as both sides against each other. Goons on the list who voted for the Commandos can play as them, and vice versa. Would be a drat interesting battle.
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
Longinus00 posted:They're not really underdogs. They get the poo poo kicked out of them in every book they're in (ignoring the Cassie Suthorn junk). They're the only group I can think of where you're introduced to a large variety of characters (instead of, say, the GDL where there's Grayson, Lori and maybe 2 other 'important' figures) from all ranks in the unit, and they get killed off during the fighting. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:With the vote this tight for two factions who will oppose each other, we should totally skip having OpFor and play as both sides against each other. Goons on the list who voted for the Commandos can play as them, and vice versa. Would be a drat interesting battle. I'm down with this, though coordinating it round-by-round might be a pain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:30
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:With the vote this tight for two factions who will oppose each other, we should totally skip having OpFor and play as both sides against each other. Goons on the list who voted for the Commandos can play as them, and vice versa. Would be a drat interesting battle. Thirding this, it's a dead heat and that would be a hell of match-up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:30
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:With the vote this tight for two factions who will oppose each other, we should totally skip having OpFor and play as both sides against each other. Goons on the list who voted for the Commandos can play as them, and vice versa. Would be a drat interesting battle. There's a lot of things to take care of in this case, though. Twice the number of players, for one. Then the thread needs to be careful about posting battle advice for people on opposite sides. It's a lot more running around than PTN might want to do, especially on just the second battle while people are still getting used to the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:They get the poo poo kicked out of them in every book they're in (ignoring the Cassie Suthorn junk). They're the only group I can think of where you're introduced to a large variety of characters (instead of, say, the GDL where there's Grayson, Lori and maybe 2 other 'important' figures) from all ranks in the unit, and they get killed off during the fighting. I meant only in the upcoming confrontation, the commandos should be seriously understaffed thanks to the 4th succession war. What happens to the commandos in the books out there? I'd imagine they always lose or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:34
|
|
|
Preliminary, Unofficial Vote Totals as of Aesirstorm: Camacho's Caballeros: 14 Comguards: 3 Marauders: 6 Death Commandos: 14 2nd Donegals: 1 Come on! Think of an Atlas in a sombrero!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:34
|
|
|
Agent Interrobang posted:Thirding this, it's a dead heat and that would be a hell of match-up. Yeah, if it's something PTN wants to deal with/handle I think it would be pretty awesome. At the same time, i'd imagine it would be kind of a hassle for him so I'd understand if he didn't want to try it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:Preliminary, Unofficial Vote Totals as of Aesirstorm: fixed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:With the vote this tight for two factions who will oppose each other, we should totally skip having OpFor and play as both sides against each other. Goons on the list who voted for the Commandos can play as them, and vice versa. Would be a drat interesting battle. Eh, I don't know. It would become clear pretty quick which side had more people that actually played Battletech, as they'd kick the poo poo out of the one with more people that never did the game until this thread. Also it'd be a bit hard to coordinate strategy without also telling the other side what you were planning. Plus, I think the way initiative works would bog things down if there wasn't PTN taking the hit and saying 'this side all lose initiative every time.'
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
Voting Death Commandos
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:
Grasshopper mariachi 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:38
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:fixed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
Piell posted:Voting Death Commandos  another 30 million FWLers just had their water poisioned 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Gothsheep posted:Eh, I don't know. It would become clear pretty quick which side had more people that actually played Battletech, as they'd kick the poo poo out of the one with more people that never did the game until this thread. Also it'd be a bit hard to coordinate strategy without also telling the other side what you were planning. Eh, I doubt it would be that hard to get some kind of coordination going for members of one side. As for initiative, it would have to be changed a bit compared to last game, obviously. Maybe doing half-turn updates where one side moves/shoots and having the other side move/shoot on their update, or something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Gothsheep posted:Eh, I don't know. It would become clear pretty quick which side had more people that actually played Battletech, as they'd kick the poo poo out of the one with more people that never did the game until this thread. I FIRE MY PPC AT THE DARKNESS Nah, I think it's better to have one side functioning as NPCs. It lets PTN keep the whole thread in the dark about the proper state of the one side of the force, instead of having to pretend that players with their mechwarriors don't really know the other players are there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:42
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:Eh, I doubt it would be that hard to get some kind of coordination going for members of one side. As for initiative, it would have to be changed a bit compared to last game, obviously. Maybe doing half-turn updates where one side moves/shoots and having the other side move/shoot on their update, or something? Both sides move before shooting commences, so it would end up taking 3x the updates to work (movement for side A, movement for side B, combat) and that's not even considering that movement is supposed to be staggered (saide A moves one unit, side B moves one, A moves another, etc). The more I think about it the more of a hassle it would be for PTN.  Iridium posted:Nah, I think it's better to have one side functioning as NPCs. It lets PTN keep the whole thread in the dark about the proper state of the one side of the force, instead of having to pretend that players with their mechwarriors don't really know the other players are there. Also results in great pilot dialogue. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
Voting G)Death Commandos because the CC get kicked around so much in canon it will be fun for them to be the protagonists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:44
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:Eh, I doubt it would be that hard to get some kind of coordination going for members of one side. As for initiative, it would have to be changed a bit compared to last game, obviously. Maybe doing half-turn updates where one side moves/shoots and having the other side move/shoot on their update, or something? PTN could attempt to implement simultaneous movement/firing as described in TacOps, everyone sends him their move and he just makes sure if any stacking violations occur to do a roll and decide who keeps the hex. Since he already acts as the GM it's close to what he'll end up doing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:45
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:PTN could attempt to implement simultaneous movement/firing as described in TacOps, everyone sends him their move and he just makes sure if any stacking violations occur to do a roll and decide who keeps the hex. Since he already acts as the GM it's close to what he'll end up doing anyway. Is that how it works? I considered simultaneous move/fire, but didn't know how the stacking violations was resolved. That would be really neat, since you can't just constantly move into perfect firing positions against a target just standing there. Chaos is fun. Also, I first read TacOps as Tacos. Thinking about the Camacho's Caballeros all morning has left my mind all screwy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:49
|
|
|
Death Commandos! I wanna be the faceless henchman this time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes. I do believe that is the main draw of them 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:54
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes. You just answered your own question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes. We were just kinda-sorta-if-you-squint good guys. Let's be bad guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:56
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:Honestly, I think it'd be much more fun to let people have a bunch of different mechs and let them try to do different things so we can see a range of failures, rather than everyone in the exact same mech for our first fight against a confusing new enemy. This is fair. While I'd rather play the Marauders, it'd be more interesting to watch something else for most of the audience. Since I retain an irrational dislike of the Caballeros and my reason for disdaining the Death Commandos (faceless evil dudes) evaporates if we play as them and not against them, I'll switch over to G, Death Commandos. Should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:59
|
|
|
That makes it 19-14 for the Death Commandos by my count, the landslide seems to have begun. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:00
|
|
|
Okay, I know I promised a lap around the Inner Sphere, but let me explain: last night I had a little bit of a flu bug or something. In the throes of my fever, this came to me in a vision. So without further ado... [A handsome blond man in a finely tailored suit enters the screen from stage right. He removes his suit jacket and puts on a cardigan.] I'm glad to see you're back. It's me again, Daniel Namni-Brewer, Vice President of Public Relations for Defiance Industries, and I'd like to have another chat, if you've got a minute. BattleMechs Are Awesome, brought to you by Defiance Industries. Defiance Industries: The Biggest. The Baddest.  Today's Episode: BNC-** Banshee. The Banshee is a 95-ton machine built during the early days of BattleMech warfare. The original model, the BNC-3E was built by Star League Weapons Research, a lineage we at Defiance Industries are proud to honor. Armed with a Magna Hellstar PPC and Imperator AC/5 as its primary weapons, with a Magna Small Laser as a head-mounted emergency backup, the machine's true centerpiece is the massive GM 380-rated fusion engine, at the time the largest engine ever built. Its top speed of 64.8 km/h allows it to close easily on most comparable-weight machines. With it's 15 tons of armor, the Banshee can advance on a target while blowing holes in it with its AC/5 and PPC, until it reaches melee range, where it can use its most effective weapons: punches and kicks. Punches and kicks, you say? Well, we at Defiance Industries thought that a 95-ton machine relying on them as its best weapons just didn't sound right, and based on pilot response, a lot of you out there agreed. So we started research on a new variant that completely overhauled the entire design... [Vice President Namni-Brewer withdraws large sunglasses from inside his cardigan, puts them on] TO THE EXTREME!!!! Step one, that gigantic engine? Pulled it out, replaced it with a 285, freed up a ton of weight. Reduced your top speed to 54 km/h, but we're building an ASSAULT MECH here, not some 95-ton scout; the Banshee-3S is in the business of kicking rear end, and much like the company who built it, business is good. Step two? Cover this baby with guns. Were you tired of having only two guns to shoot? Well, so were we. So we pulled off those second-rate hackjob Magna PPCs and replaced them with PDVR "Piledriver" Model 11s fresh from Tharkad, and on top of that, added a Defiance Killer Type T Autocannon/10. With that you're gonna be punching three bigass holes in anyone who dares cross your path. Now with guns like that, surely Defiance Industries is satisfied with their rebuild, right? PSYCH!!!!! No, to seek out those holes we made, we added not one, not two, not even three, but FOUR new Defiance B3M medium lasers, a pair of Defiance B3S small lasers, and topped it off with a SureShot Mark VI SRM-6 pack. With a secondary armament like this, you can march downfield opening up giant holes in your enemy's armor, and then filling them with laser fire and missiles, cracking their machines open from the inside out. [Vice President Namni-Brewer places the sunglasses back in his cardigan] We at Defiance Industries are proud that we've taken this much-maligned design and given it a new lease on life, something our competitors in Marik space failed to do twice, once with their BNC-3M design that made the fatal mistake of retaining the overlarge engine and thus, could only replace the AC/5 with a second PPC, and then again with the BNC-3Q, which replaced the machine's entire armament with a single weapon, an Imperator Zeta-A AC/20, and left it vulnerable to long-range fire. As always, it's a pleasure to see all of you, and I'm glad I got this chance to talk to you about one of our proudest achievements in BattleMech design. Why, did you know there's manufacturing firms that don't even know how to turn their automated lines off, let alone modify their designs? Lucky thing that's not us, or our customers would miss out on a lot of great designs! This program brought to you by Defiance Industries. The views expressed here do not reflect the views of our broadcast network or their affiliates. Defiance Industries: So Hard, People are Scared of Us. And as a bonus, turns out the BNC-3S is one of the few variants that got its own artwork. So here it is.  Click here for the full 1586x1521 image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:00
|
|
|
I'll also switch from Miller's to the Death Commandos. Can we get some Death Commando recruitment material to help set the mood?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
The stock Banshee art looks like it has gun barrels for nipples. Now I can't unsee that. Also, yeah, the rout is on. For the glory of the Liaos! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes. I've never liked them. They just try way too hard; it's like a 13-year-old's first custom merc unit. -Their name. "Death Commandos." One step up from the Blood Killguys. -Their paint scheme? All black. -Their custom rules? "No special abilities work on us. Also we can field any machine we want no matter what." -And of course, not only are they all elite MechWarriors who can do WHATEVER THEY WANT TO ANYBODY but they're also all elite anti-Mech infantrymen and special ops commando guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
Polaron posted:Ugh. Why does everyone want to play Death Commandos, they're giant assholes. I don't know. I want to play 17th Recon because they sound like the kind of guys that would ride motorcycles though explosions while firing a machine gun in one hand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
Changing my vote to the Caballeros, just on the off-chance it'll help. Because Liao sucks and needs to get conquered by everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:I've never liked them. They just try way too hard; it's like a 13-year-old's first custom merc unit. I always thought that was just the propaganda and that really they were just like every other dastardly political unit... Not quite military aces but extremely loyal and amoral. I just want to play Space North Korea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:We were just kinda-sorta-if-you-squint good guys. Let's be bad guys. I don't think it's a stretch to call the Kell Hounds good guys. The Merry Marauder posted:This is fair. While I'd rather play the Marauders, it'd be more interesting to watch something else for most of the audience. Since I retain an irrational dislike of the Caballeros and my reason for disdaining the Death Commandos (faceless evil dudes) evaporates if we play as them and not against them, I'll switch over to G, Death Commandos. Should be interesting. Not evil, just machiavellian. TildeATH posted:I always thought that was just the propaganda and that really they were just like every other dastardly political unit... Not quite military aces but extremely loyal and amoral. I kind of think of them as "space mossad". Longinus00 fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Feb 2, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
Voting F for the sake of Goons pulling DFAs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:08
|
|
|
Voting Camacho's Caballeros. for the hilarity that will occur when a unit known for being terrible shots lucks constantly into critical hits due to PTN's rolling. Also, it's time we play for Team NO YOU SHUT UP! Viva!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:14
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:I always thought that was just the propaganda and that really they were just like every other dastardly political unit... Not quite military aces but extremely loyal and amoral. Nope, they get all the elite unit bonuses on the random skill table and poo poo. They're super-elite not just as mech pilots, but as infantry too. And as RPG characters they usually have cyborg implants and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
In other words, they were designed by a thirteen year old. WHY DO YOU PEOPLE WANT TO WATCH US PLAY AS THEM?!  (Yes, I dislike Liao, why do you ask?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:Nope, they get all the elite unit bonuses on the random skill table and poo poo. They're super-elite not just as mech pilots, but as infantry too. And as RPG characters they usually have cyborg implants and poo poo. They are the only Capellan unit worth a drat. Considering how terrible the rest of their military is, let them have this one boon. Also, if/when the Eridani Light Horse becomes available, I fully expect a unanimous vote for them. I will accept no debate on this matter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:20
|
|