|
I'm voting C, since although all of the scenarios sound amazing I want to put my money where my mouth is. Also I'm going to laugh if it turns out that we're playing the Clanners if B wins.  And on the topic of reminiscing, I was the Guillotine in Rise of the Phoenix (?) that hopped around vaguely menacing Capellan Skynet. And then I ended up knocking out my own mech right at the end because of my hubris regarding jump jet pilot skill rolls, which is probably when it reached peak :battletech: for me.  I'm still really grateful that the guys in IRC and elsewhere patiently explained stuff to me since it was my first time playing. Unfortunately when my turn next comes around you'll probably have to do it again. But I'll try to be bolder and make my own decisions more.Also one or two people voted for me as MVP for some inexplicable reason!
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
It would be interesting to see what Inner Sphere DHS looked like in a world where they didn't just shrug their shoulders and let you sink 20 heat without spending any resources on cooling just by checking the box to say you had them. 3 crits is really bulky and hard to work around, especially if you also follow the unwritten style guide of mech design and don't jam ammo in the legs and such.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
In a world with no internal heatsinks, they'd be pretty bad. In a world with half of what we have now, They're probably much closer to balance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Also, anything that has "unwritten rules" is inherently retarded and poorly balanced. In the case of game design, it's just a cop out in admitting you didn't actually balance your game. "Well sure, if you put any optimization in your mech at all things become horribly broken, but if you'd just built intentionally lovely mechs it would be fine!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:Also, anything that has "unwritten rules" is inherently retarded and poorly balanced. In the case of game design, it's just a cop out in admitting you didn't actually balance your game. "Well sure, if you put any optimization in your mech at all things become horribly broken, but if you'd just built intentionally lovely mechs it would be fine!" It's an unwritten style guide in the sense that there aren't any rules for ammo feeding and thus you can freely do inane poo poo like feed ammo across the torso for no reason or somehow have ammo feeds running through the legs and have them work just fine with no drawbacks or concessions, but the mechs are mostly pretending to be real-world designs and thus try to avoid doing that. It's something PTN has mentioned building around when creating his own in-universe loadouts. It's more a flavor issue than a balance one, but I don't think anyone's going to contest the presence of some significant gaps in BT's design.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Strobe posted:In a world with no internal heatsinks, they'd be pretty bad. In a world with half of what we have now, They're probably much closer to balance. I think Weisman (or someone at HBS who's pretty drat into Battletech) has said if they could change anything they'd make engine heatsinks fixed at singles. If you want doubles you actually have to put them somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
dis astranagant posted:If you absolutely must fight aircraft with mechs they're not awful with flak ammo. Total crap otherwise since they're way too heavy for what they do barring some contrived scenario where you get to plink away at max range (longer than any other weapon) while the other guy stands around feeling bad. This is not true, AC/2s are garbage tier anti-air weapons. You can't even threshhold a Seydlitz with one, much less force a control roll. AC/2s are only "good" anti-air weapons if you've got enough of them to do significant damage to force control rolls via. damage accrual which, since AC/2s are notoriously bad at doing "significant damage," means you need at least 10 of them with Flak Ammo or 20 without (2-4 Partisan tanks worth, or a single Kraken). The real use of AC/2s isn't apparent until you start playing Aerotech. A 6-plane squadron of fighters with just a single AC/2 does a single point of Capital Damage out to extreme range, which is surprisingly good for anti-DropShip work* (most DropShip Anti-Air is of the long- and medium-range variety). Everything's better in AeroTech, it's sort-of a mix between tabletop and Alpha Strike and I've been sorely tempted to steal the AeroTech range rules and run with them as a house rule for one match. * At Introductory levels. Once you hit Tournament Legal ER Large Lasers are always better. Voyager I posted:It's something PTN has mentioned building around when creating his own in-universe loadouts. The only time I'll ever put ammo in the head is if it's inert, and even then if I have slots anywhere else I'll use those first. It may be the safest place for explosive ammo but an average non-pirate pilot is going to "Nope!" right the gently caress out of sitting on top of a ton of machinegun ammo. Edit: Oh, and since the vote's basically over, now's a good time to reveal my Master Plan. 3 of the 4 scenarios are going to feature semi-hefty weapon and `Mech rebalancing. It's something I've been working on for a bit, but which I did not want to influence the vote as it happened. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
"Take that, Weisman" -- PTN, upon playing the BT beta I actually really want to see your take on revising TT weapon rules so, I'm psyched just don't ruin the Devastator (and then give me one in a year, please)
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
Hey, I want to try my hand at being a Mech-Jock. I may be garbage but whatever. Put me in the line up please. Also I've never played bt so if there's a thread newbie primer let me know!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:This is not true, AC/2s are garbage tier anti-air weapons. You can't even threshhold a Seydlitz with one, much less force a control roll. AC/2s are only "good" anti-air weapons if you've got enough of them to do significant damage to force control rolls via. damage accrual which, since AC/2s are notoriously bad at doing "significant damage," means you need at least 10 of them with Flak Ammo or 20 without (2-4 Partisan tanks worth, or a single Kraken). You don't have to do significant damage. If a fighter takes damage - period - it has to take a control roll. If it fails, it drops 1d6 altitudes immediately. Since fighters have to be at altitude 3 or lower to even attempt ground attacks, it usually means that the fighter has a good chance, usually between 42% and 58%, of plowing into the ground and ceasing to exist. The AC/2 also has the added advantage of being able to do that from literally two map-sheets over, and when firing Flak ammo has a drat good chance of forcing the roll. It's actually a fantastic AA gun, it's just that AA guns aren't really an in-demand niche in 95% of BattleTech games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
*pshtt* mayday mayday my aileron got knicked im going down *pshtt*
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Strobe posted:You don't have to do significant damage. If a fighter takes damage - period - it has to take a control roll. Have a TW rulebook page number? My reading (which may be incorrect) suggests they only take a control roll if they take a threshhold crit. I admit I've never owned AeroTech (2?) and while I owned BattleSpace I never played it either. I do know a lot of the weird instant death conditions went away in Total Warfare. Helicopters can survive rotor hits, Tanks don't explode instantly on taking common hit roles, and fighters don't fall out of the sky quite so often. Edit: Ah, yep, you're right. That's what I get for reading page 92 "Some situations or types of damage can cause an aerospace unit to crash" and not page 249. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Total Warfare, pg. 249. I'll quote the relevant text, since it's only a tiny little bit of a book that has been out for 10 years:quote:DAMAGE TO AEROSPACE UNITS IN ATMOSPHERE The referenced pg. 93 is the modifiers table, for reference, and pg. 81 describes the damage for crashing, which is basically 2D6 * 10 * velocity. It's a really easy rule to miss, because it's not with the main body of aerospace movement rules (which is usually the hard parts), and is instead hidden away in the aerospace units rules.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
Psion posted:"Take that, Weisman" -- PTN, upon playing the BT beta Nah, it's more like the other way around. Besides, who doesn't love a shake-up? I'm not afraid of reverting things if it goes bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Nah, it's more like the other way around. Besides, who doesn't love a shake-up? I'm not afraid of reverting things if it goes bad. I really can't wait to see what you've got in store!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Nah, it's more like the other way around. Besides, who doesn't love a shake-up? I'm not afraid of reverting things if it goes bad. "Take that, PTN" -- Weisman, upon reading this thread?  But, seriously, I think it'll be interesting! Unlike the game you have to consider post-3025 tech and I bet that'll be fun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Total Warfare, pg. 249. I'll quote the relevant text, since it's only a tiny little bit of a book that has been out for 10 years Just as an aside: quoting a reasonable segment of the text of any copyrighted work in this context is completely legal under fair use laws: but, the length of copyright is irrelevant unless it's expired, which happens automatically 70 years after the death of the original copyright holder. So it being 10 years means nothing. (As an aside from this aside: game rules have been ruled in several court cases to be uncopyrightable, which means you can re-use the actual rules of any published game freely, including republishing them in your own works. Not doing that is a matter of professional courtesy, not law.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:It would be interesting to see what Inner Sphere DHS looked like in a world where they didn't just shrug their shoulders and let you sink 20 heat without spending any resources on cooling just by checking the box to say you had them. 3 crits is really bulky and hard to work around, especially if you also follow the unwritten style guide of mech design and don't jam ammo in the legs and such. Have you ever played the War of 3039? Because that's what that world looks like and it's probably the best era of BattleTech play full stop. Zaodai posted:Also, anything that has "unwritten rules" is inherently retarded and poorly balanced. In the case of game design, it's just a cop out in admitting you didn't actually balance your game. "Well sure, if you put any optimization in your mech at all things become horribly broken, but if you'd just built intentionally lovely mechs it would be fine!" Even without any unwritten rules like "don't put ammo in the legs" the game still isn't balanced, though. The Hellstar is a thing that exists in published material, after all Defiance Industries fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Just as an aside: quoting a reasonable segment of the text of any copyrighted work in this context is completely legal under fair use laws: but, the length of copyright is irrelevant unless it's expired, which happens automatically 70 years after the death of the original copyright holder. So it being 10 years means nothing. While I don't think you're wrong about the law, I don't think that was entirely his point. He was probably (and appropriately) more worried about less about legality and more about practicality...like enforcement of forum rules about reproduction of copyrighted material and the likelihood of the intellectual property holder actually showing up and giving a poo poo about it being posted publicly (both less likely for older poo poo).
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:(As an aside from this aside: game rules have been ruled in several court cases to be uncopyrightable, which means you can re-use the actual rules of any published game freely, including republishing them in your own works. Not doing that is a matter of professional courtesy, not law.) That's interesting, cause Wizards of the Coast have been sueing people for turning cards 90 degrees as little as about a year ago. (They own "tapping" a card by turning it 90 degrees)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Pretty sure that was a patent, and I'm pretty sure that it's expired. edit - Yeah, this one https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=5662332A&KC=A&FT=D
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Which is like Sega owning the rights to using an arrow in a video game to point you towards your objectives. You can use stuff that isn't an arrow to point you towards objectives, as the concept of "you need to go here" isn't patentable, but an arrow at the top of screen pointing you in the direction Crazy Taxi style is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Viva Miriya posted:*pshtt* mayday mayday my aileron got knicked im going down *pshtt*  "Breach in the Starboard Fusion Chamber" Warship captain after getting strafed by AC2s and receiving a golden BB
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:That's interesting, cause Wizards of the Coast have been sueing people for turning cards 90 degrees as little as about a year ago. (They own "tapping" a card by turning it 90 degrees) goatface posted:Pretty sure that was a patent, and I'm pretty sure that it's expired. This is it, exactly. As far as I know, Richard Garfield is the only person who has bothered to get a patent for his game system: he succeeded, and Wizards was then obliged to enforce that patent. This is a derail, of course, I just like to correct people's misapprehensions about intellectual property law. Arcturas posted:While I don't think you're wrong about the law, I don't think that was entirely his point. He was probably (and appropriately) more worried about less about legality and more about practicality...like enforcement of forum rules about reproduction of copyrighted material and the likelihood of the intellectual property holder actually showing up and giving a poo poo about it being posted publicly (both less likely for older poo poo). Forums rules should of course be followed regardless of whether they make sense or are stupid. For the latter, if someone has a problem with you making fair use of their works for the sake of discussion on a forum, they can and should be ridiculed with maximum force. Fair use isn't just the law: it's a good idea. In this particular case, fair use doesn't even apply: the rules quoted are unprotected by copyright.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
Voting is now officially closed. Luthien won! I've been spending the past couple of days converting IJN battleship lineart into "Yamato Style" buildings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Voting is now officially closed. Luthien won! I've been spending the past couple of days converting IJN battleship lineart into "Yamato Style" buildings. 6:49:01 PM <Viva_Miriya> FractionJackson: Luthien won 6:49:37 PM <sebmojo> was that the setting for counting coup? 6:50:54 PM <@FractionJackson> I have only one response to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDT3aewUld4
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
Some of what I've gotten is pretty interesting.   
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Yamashiro superstructure tower blocks?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
goatface posted:Yamashiro superstructure tower blocks? High society building style on Luthien is World War 2 battleship bridges because what else are a bunch of space weebs gonna latch on to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
Buildings shaped like an aircraft carrier stuck bow first into the floor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
If all those AA emplacements are functional then I am in favor of this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
Pagoda masts! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Nah, it's more like the other way around. Besides, who doesn't love a shake-up? I'm not afraid of reverting things if it goes bad. I'm sort of super hyped about this because I've been actually hoping for this kind of thing for a while. You've had a few fancier toys perform differently since our tech here is "new ground" in terms of canon, but seeing what more you could do would be really interesting. Not that we haven't seen oddball weapons or mechs shine because certainly they have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Some of what I've gotten is pretty interesting. Oh my.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
Luthien was my last preference, but that's mainly because the other options were extraordinarily good. Hyped to see what the Horses have done with the place given their ethos of uplift. Will the locals be thrilled to see the old order reimposed by the Davions? Either way, superstructure architecture! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
I'm fine with Luthien. It was my third choice behind the two NRWR scenarios (because I really like the NRWR storyline and I want to see how it turns out) but it was a fairly close third. I hope we had enough votes for B and D for them having a good chance at succeeding. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:I'm fine with Luthien. It was my third choice behind the two NRWR scenarios (because I really like the NRWR storyline and I want to see how it turns out) but it was a fairly close third. I hope we had enough votes for B and D for them having a good chance at succeeding. I think there's no reason to worry. B and D are probably safe as houses, voting-wise; if any of them are likely to turn out poorly due to lack of votes it's going to be C. At least unless way less people voted for B and D than I remember.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
Late to the party on reminiscing, but PTN the whole thing has been great from beginning to end. I had a blast playing as a Demonhawk in the Nergal reactor mission as Bethany in the Mad dog and after sacrificing myself to save our pristine Bobcat who had shut down due to heat under the guns of the Warhawk, playing as Jason in the Screamer and I cannot wait to try again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:. . . feature semi-hefty weapon and `Mech rebalancing. It's something I've been working on for a bit, but which I did not want to influence the vote as it happened. Care to give us a preview? Just curious as to what this means, functionally and mechanics-wise? Are we going to have 1/3 points damage and 'mechs going out to 200 tons? Heat reducing weapons range, etc?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
My fingers are crossed for a direct port of dwarf fortress's wrestling system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 20:12
|
|
