|
Ugleb posted:
Yeah, I never understood the 'disappointment' with MWO. Battletech is a game about taking 3 basic weapon types (4 if you're a huge nerd about the subtle differences between SRMs and LRMs), trundling around in a world-of-tanks style battlefield, and shooting at the same sub-system of another robot for 30-90 seconds, until somebody splodes. They accomplished that. All this additional poo poo about how the speed of heavy vs assault mechs, or the supremacy of putting 2 AC20s in a Jenner over any other mech in that class (this is not meant to be a real thing, just an example of poo poo I don't care about), or how to make heat sinks something anybody gives a poo poo about, wait, no, now they're too important, is beside the point. The mechanics of Battletech have always been incredibly samey-same and boring. To the point where any mech is essentially like any other, as long as its tonnage and loadout are the same. Even if the madcat or marauder *had* personality, they immediatley lose it, when there's a variant for every viable alternative what you could cram in them, so that an Atlas and a Daimyo could be identical--just swap some poo poo out! If the madcat was *always* packing 2 giant LRMs and whatever is in the arms, I forget, then that would give it a personality. But people swap in PPCs or artillery, or 12 machine guns, and it's like... whatever. Who gives a poo poo. At that point, you find the best loadout at a size class (maybe there's 2 or 3!) and that's the game you play--the game of 'which is the best'. If you don't like that game, you need to switch to something that's balanced which means not allegedly infinitely reconfigurable until no chassis really means anything and is just an empty vessel for weapons to sit in. MWO is cool. It is free to play. Battletech Or just play MWO and if they put out a 100 dollar solid gold Centurion that gets an arbitrarily slightly larger reactor, then just stick your fingers in your ears and hum real loud. It honestly is not going to matter in most of the matches you play. You will be running in circles trying to shoot at the same exact spot on an enemy mech while they do the same to you. Because that's what happens when you translate battletech into a real time piloting game. IMO. Maybe I'm missing the subtle outrages that the MWO devs have perpetrated on their fanbase because I only ever jumped in to shoot some mechs and explode at random for a little bit at a time.
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
MWO is really bad actually but that has very little to do with bad miniatures
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Rephrase 'actually' into something that makes any sense. The game does exactly what it's supposed to. What game did you think you were going to play?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:Rephrase 'actually' into something that makes any sense. The game does exactly what it's supposed to. What game did you think you were going to play? Something that is good and not a terrible hunk of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Every time I tried MWO it was significantly worse. They kept patching in more and more cash shop poo poo while making the game itself worse. Some of it was funny, like the hilarious broken stupidity of when they introduced ECM, which resulted in a friend and I essentially being invulnerable god beings in our Ravens for a week. But mostly it was horrible poo poo like broken netcode, and balance ideas like nerfing SRM to the point that being in a missile-rigged Atlas made you feel weaker than a Hunchback.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Yeah. But it's Battletech, where nothing matters and you can swap all the poo poo out of the raven-shaped bucket for free whenever you want. So take off the whatever and put in the whatever, and go out and shoot at robots in your robot. I seriously don't know what the deal is. Do you have a crisis of immersion if your favorite weapon system becomes ineffective? You can't bring yourself to change the loadout to the new thing that's effective? If it weren't for changing meta making you switch what weapon you use, I have no idea why you'd keep playing the game. I also never used the cash shop, and never noticed it mattering if someone had used it. There's an empty robot for sale with 10% extra space for ammo or better cooling! Game ruined!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:Yeah. But it's Battletech, where nothing matters and you can swap all the poo poo out of the raven-shaped bucket for free whenever you want. So take off the whatever and put in the whatever, and go out and shoot at robots in your robot. Generally it is a good thing if stuff like the netcode and weapon balance is good, rather than being broken
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Unless they went with all omni spots, the whole thing about chasis not mattering can't be right...right? Maybe I just didn't notice that in Mechawarrior titles because little me figured out that he wants ER PPCs (they combine range, punch and infinite ammo) and jumpjets. That why I spend a lare part of the game in an Uziel that only had PPCs, the rest was armor and sinks. Only played MWO once because laptop
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Did they actually make a playable game out of it? When I played (during beta, is it out of beta?), it always felt like they were spending 90% of the dev budget on art. Pretty pictures and new mechs on the regular, weeks of unplayable garbage because they refused to use their beta to actually playtest in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
I never really played MWO but being able to freely swap weapons into and out of any battlemech is very specifically not default battletech, for exactly the reasons cited. A lot of the real-time battletech-based games let you do poo poo like that, but they were operating under different rules. In the actual tabletop boardgame, the conditions under which you can swap out equipment in the same chassis are restricted. There is also a system for balancing forces, and while it's imperfect, it does a decent job. It also does something cool that few if any other non-historicals games do: you can pick any specific year, in a setting that spans hundreds of years, and fight in that specific moment using only the units available to the factions at that moment. There is an ebb and flow to technology and design philosophy across the factions and years, so if you decide you want to recreate a specific conflict between two factions in a specific year, you pick forces from an appropriate list and the restrictions on what's available provide interesting strategic depth. Every translation of Battletech into a realtime game has had problems. It is inherently a turn-based tactical boardgame - it's not even strictly a miniatures game, because it doesn't use a consistent scale, there's no true-line-of-sight horsecrap, and you can absolutely play the game without making any rules changes at all with just tokens or cutouts or paper. (This is probably part of the reason why the miniatures have mostly sucked for 30 years.) Realtime multiplayer combat games don't appeal to me in general, so I've only brushed against MWO very briefly a long time ago when it was in early beta. The impression that I have is that the game actually does have some teamplayer depth, which is not at all obvious until you've mastered the controls, but that the developers have continuously hosed with game balance usually in ways that made things worse instead of better, while charging for all kinds of DLC and add-on crap, for a game that runs and plays like it's still in beta. But I don't have a horse in that race and don't care if that's a good assessment or not, because to me, it simply isn't Battletech. This will be Battletech. Hopefully. From the guys that made the very well-received Shadowrun games. Turn-based tactical combat. Letting the computer handle all the recordkeeping that makes tabletop battletech unappealing to most people. A willingness to modernize the rules, by a company with a proven track record of understanding how to retain the core flavor and feel of a property while doing so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:Yeah, I never understood the 'disappointment' with MWO. The problem wasn't the core mechanics of Shoot Robots With Other Robots. They worked well. Neither was the problem all the cash shop poo poo they added later on to desperately try to get their investors even a pathetic ROI. The core mechanics were alright, and people will stomach a cash shop if the game is actually solid (see: World of Tanks, War Thunder, League of Legends, every single good free to play game). It's that they failed in the entire framework around the core mechanics that are required to keep peope playing. There were no mechanics to facilitate competitive team vs team play, no support for teams, like five mechs, three poo poo garbage maps, hell, there was no progression of any kind, which is what can keep people playing when the rest of your game sucks. There was just a matchmaker that dumped ten people completely at random into a poo poo map. What they released was like if Valve would have released CS:GO with just De_Dust, the AK-47, AWP, and Deagle. A decent enough core which worked well on it's own, but not enough to keep anyone playing for more than a couple of days. Geisladisk fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
Thank you! That makes sense and explains why I, as a filthy casual, never noticed some of the worst elements.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:it doesn't use a consistent scale, there's no true-line-of-sight horsecrap I don't understand why people hate line of sight rules. A unit can't see a target and therefore cannot shoot at it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
If you played with 6mm scale mechs, then maybe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Star Man posted:I don't understand why people hate line of sight rules. A unit can't see a target and therefore cannot shoot at it. TLoS isn't just line of sight. It's line of sight based on my static model which is supposed to represent a living person or a moving robot or whatever, and says that if I can draw a clear line from my model's eyes to your model's body or any part of him or something like that, then he can see him, and if not, then he can't. It actively penalizes or benefits players depending on the specifics of their models and gaming terrain. If I put my captain standing on a rock and waving a flag, maybe he's easier for you to snipe from across the table! If my goblins are in front of my orcs, can the orcs shoot over them? Yes, because they're taller, but you modeled your halflings riding on little sheep just because it looks cool so your arrow dudes can't shoot over them because they can't see past them. Except maybe if you shift their movement tray just so now you can pull a piece of string in between that rank and that other rank and now they can! Battletech says "terrain uses up the whole hex", measures from the center of the shooter to the center of the target hex, and if the line touches a hex containing blocking terrain, it's 50/50 which the target can choose to decline (but then he can't shoot back at you) or accept. If it passes through the hex with blocking terrain, it's blocked. All terrain is on levels; mechs stand two levels high, and can see over one-level-high terrain. Light forests provide cover bonus but can be seen through, two light forest hexes block LOS. Etc. Etc. You can thus determine LOS in battletech without regard to the size of your miniature, the exact architecture of a building, or how tall the trees are that you used for your forest. There are no arguments about LOS. You can plan your moves ahead without worrying about whether a particular position might or might not give you LOS, because you can just grab your ruler or tape measure or any straight edge and check. Once you get the hang of it, you can just stare at the hex map and easily see the lines of sight anywhere. It's good to have no ambiguity and not punish people or give people incentives for tweaking their little metal and plastic dollies in a particular rules-abusing way. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Star Man posted:I don't understand why people hate line of sight rules. A unit can't see a target and therefore cannot shoot at it. True Line of Sight is a poo poo mechanic that never works well. It's arbitrary, fiddly and inelegant and it has no upside to an abstracted line of sight system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Star Man posted:I don't understand why people hate line of sight rules. A unit can't see a target and therefore cannot shoot at it.  I can totally see the tip of his sword. That isn't part of his body, it doesn't count. True line of sight. If I can see ANY part of the MODEL, I can target it. That is stupid. You are stupid.Next week. Why are all your models almost prone on their bases? True LOS motherfucker.That is why TLOS is poo poo. The Infinity silhouettes are much better for resolving this type of thing.  And here is why they use silhouettes. All 4 guys are the same unit type, but with TLOS you might imagine one of them has a minor advantage. Indolent Bastard fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
TLOS also reinforces the concept that the models specifically represent what each character is doing at that moment on the battlefield, as if every warrior stands behind a wall brandishing his axe high above his head or every soldier advances down the field crawling on his stomach at the speed of a runner. I actually find it less immersive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:Yeah. But it's Battletech, where nothing matters and you can swap all the poo poo out of the raven-shaped bucket for free whenever you want. So take off the whatever and put in the whatever, and go out and shoot at robots in your robot. That's not how they work though. Omni-mechs yeah, but if you're in an Atlas variant with a preponderance of missile slots then you're utterly hosed if SRMs get nerfed. Because a missile Atlas is by far and away most effective as a close-in brawling nightmare. You could load LRMs and ineffectually try to fight at range, or some SSRMs and maybe leg a light mech, but the fundamental role of the 100 ton assault mech is then compromised. So you have to then buy a different variant of the Atlas to not be hamstrung. The MWO devs just didn't seem to understand what they were doing when it came to adapting their core rules to a real time setting. Also the matchmaker was one of the harshest I've ever seen for skill-based rigging. Do well and you would be viciously hammered into the ground for it until your rating went down again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:And here is why they use silhouettes. All 4 guys are the same unit type, but with TLOS you might imagine one of them has a minor advantage. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:You mean the S3 foxhole dude while all the others are S2? Shows how much I actually play. The point stands tlos is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
gently caress, I hate all those "fancy" scenic based dudes in infinity. I want all my dudes/ladies advancing or gesticulating. Scenery like walls and such has place in dioramas and on the table, not on the base. rant rant rant
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:The problem wasn't the core mechanics of Shoot Robots With Other Robots. They worked well. Neither was the problem all the cash shop poo poo they added later on to desperately try to get their investors even a pathetic ROI. The core mechanics were alright, and people will stomach a cash shop if the game is actually solid (see: World of Tanks, War Thunder, League of Legends, every single good free to play game). This here is why there is a  emote.MWO in beta was meant to just be a starting point to nail the core gameplay and that was fine. 2 years on it was the same but with crap loads more mechs. Few to none extra maps or game modes though as they were free content. Pgi abused their communities goodwill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
Back to the uninspiration! Let me warm up to the main event a little as I take you down the rabbit hole of Batman miniatures. First off we have this comic book version of Talia Al Ghul, which in and of itself is nothing remarkable. This mini could just as easily have been Black Widow and we have all seen plenty of Scarlet Johansson leaping about in similiar attire in Avengers movies. So far nothing unusual.  Moving on then we have from the Wonderland Gang, The White Rabbit. This crew is very much based on comic book sources and frankly I know nothing of this character or why she is a very scantily clad playboy bunny. Best guess is that the Mad Hatter has her hypnotised or something as that is his thing. This is in my opinion the most chessecake and eye-rolling model in the range so far but there you go. I actually like the other three models she comes packaged with so may end up buying and having to paint this one. I might greenstuff trousers onto her or something to reduce the g-string effect. When my nephew comes to visit he likes to look at what I've painted in the cabinet, I think I'd probably get in trouble with his mum/my mother in law if I left this one out!  Now then. What happens when some guy decides that the standard White Rabbit model just isn't, in his words, 'more like a classic pinup' so decides to commission one person to convert these two ladies together (while removing clothes) and a second to paint it for him? Well, you get this.  I think this dude needs to work on his definition of 'classic pinup'. Ugleb fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
The pole is a nice touch. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
jfc, trust nerds to take already skeevy, pandering poo poo and take it above and beyond. Every, goddamn time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Man, I love me some g-string stripper classic pin ups. Also, Wonderland Gang? That poo poo must be Golden Age stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Comic nerd checking in: White Rabbit is a modern Batman villainess. She has the power to create a duplicate of herself that inexplicably wears skimpy clothing, has lighter skin, and white hair. She sends the duplicate out to do all the crime stuff. So the miniature, while cheesecake as hell, is accurate to her comic appearances.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Mutant Headcrab posted:Comic nerd checking in: White Rabbit is a modern Batman villainess. She has the power to create a duplicate of herself that inexplicably wears skimpy clothing, has lighter skin, and white hair. She sends the duplicate out to do all the crime stuff. Cool, I have been wondering! I kinda assumed she would be an older character actually. Can you answer me a rules/fluff question then? In the game she can only be used by two crews, Wonderland and Bane for some reason. What is the link between our self cloning classic pinup and Bane?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 08:21
|
|
|
Mutant Headcrab posted:Comic nerd checking in: White Rabbit is a modern Batman villainess. She has the power to create a duplicate of herself that inexplicably wears skimpy clothing, has lighter skin, and white hair. She sends the duplicate out to do all the crime stuff. That's a really cool power, but why does it have to be a silly playboy version of herself? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Because comic books.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
Ugleb posted:Because comic books. Next stop: making Robin an impoverished girl from Liberia because progress in comics is Rule 36'ing existing heroes. Making new inclusive heroes? That's madness! Next you'll ask for Jean Grey to die and stay dead. Preposterous!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Next stop: making Robin an impoverished girl from Liberia because progress in comics is Rule 36'ing existing heroes. I'd read Batman & Raiden
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
I look forward to the next xmen reboot where they kill her off and nothing happens but marvel refuse to confirm or deny her return. Purely to wind up nerds. Edit - or they could just end times it all with the appearance of THE GALACTIC DEATH FIELD OF DOOM under which everyone who dies stays dead making it all into a Highlander scenario. Ugleb fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Dec 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
Ugleb posted:Cool, I have been wondering! I kinda assumed she would be an older character actually. Can you answer me a rules/fluff question then? In the game she can only be used by two crews, Wonderland and Bane for some reason. There was a story arc called Forever Evil, where the Crime Syndicate (evil Justice League from another Earth) wrecked the heroes poo poo. Bane took the chaos as a chance to take Gotham for himself. He recruited several villains including White Rabbit. Funny thing is, while there is a Wonderland Gang in DC, White Rabbit was never a member. Their rabbit themed villain was a gun toting woman named March Harriet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Next stop: making Robin an impoverished girl from Liberia because progress in comics is Rule 36'ing existing heroes. Oh no, what will I do if old characters are women? The horror, the horror
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Mutant Headcrab posted:There was a story arc called Forever Evil, where the Crime Syndicate (evil Justice League from another Earth) wrecked the heroes poo poo. Bane took the chaos as a chance to take Gotham for himself. He recruited several villains including White Rabbit. Huh. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:Oh no, what will I do if old characters are women? The horror, the horror Oh no, what will I do if old characters are men? ...I don't even read comic, ffs
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Mutant Headcrab posted:There was a story arc called Forever Evil, where the Crime Syndicate (evil Justice League from another Earth) wrecked the heroes poo poo. Bane took the chaos as a chance to take Gotham for himself. He recruited several villains including White Rabbit. March Harriet sounds preposterous enough to be quite cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
ineptmule posted:March Harriet sounds preposterous enough to be quite cool. That's how comic books get you. Don't worry. It's not worth your time. Comics are the safety net in society for people who can draw* but have no other value as a person. *and not write
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2015 19:32
|
|