|
May I suggest a link to the Discord server in the OP? If the Discord Server admin is alright with that, I guess?
|
# ¿ May 24, 2017 17:33 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 07:20 |
|
Zaodai posted:In theory, since it's on steam they can just revoke it that way, though nothing really stops you from just leaving your steam in offline mode for the duration I guess.
|
# ¿ May 26, 2017 13:38 |
|
Skoll posted:http://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/6944/comments/136406
|
# ¿ May 26, 2017 19:31 |
|
Q_res posted:Right now it's tentatively set for "late summer/early fall"
|
# ¿ May 28, 2017 16:30 |
|
BenRGamer posted:...did they ever say the beta would be anything different? Other than having multiplayer, that is. Q_res posted:Skirmish only was always the plan for the Backer Beta, all the way back to 2015 during the initial Kickstarter campaign. So treating it like some sort of bad sign is really weird. I mean, I doubt they'll actually hit "late summer/early fall" but I think it's pretty pessimistic to think they can't get this game out within the next 6 months. The final product is going to have a multiplayer skirmish, single player skirmish, single player linear campaign, single player non-linear contract taking campaign. The beta for the skirmish is out on June 1, which is a delayed date. This delayed beta release for a small portion of what the final product will include...had features stripped at the last minute Therefore I would not get my hopes up for a release in the next 6 months. Disclaimer before the pitchforks come out: I'm not an authority on the subject and could be VERY wrong. I may just have bad opinions. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 21:44 on May 28, 2017 |
# ¿ May 28, 2017 21:42 |
|
DatonKallandor posted:The features it had stripped are exclusive the part of the game that isn't the focus though. The primary part of Battletech - the campaign and combat are both still in the beta. What got cut was multiplayer - that doesn't impact the campaign.
|
# ¿ May 28, 2017 22:00 |
|
I'm the one who was posting about it on this page and I'm not panicking, just posting my opinion on a gay dying comedy forum and people seem to be reacting really strongly and/or misinterpreting what I am saying Me calmly stating my opinion that I don't expect the game this year /= "Oh gently caress oh gently caress oh gently caress everything is ruined and the sky is falling".
|
# ¿ May 28, 2017 23:05 |
|
Q_res posted:Literally nobody freaked out at you, all I said was that it seemed (overly) pessimistic. I think you're being a touch sensitive about a reasonable, calmly stated disagreement. Alchenar posted:This is a lot of panicking over 'they aren't confident they can get the networking good to go right now'. You're not wrong, Q_res, I may be over-reacting but I know these forums well enough that I felt a disclaimer was necessary. I feel like my response to your post explained my stance and wasnt overly reactionary. I'm going to drop it because it doesnt add anything to conversation at this point.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2017 02:19 |
|
blackmongoose posted:If I recall correctly, Battletech armor is basically a magical material with multiple properties that are well outside the realm of physics, but most people accept it as a setting conceit because it's the only thing that makes giant robots workable. The magic armor is a significant contributor to the low density of Mechs, especially if you assume the internal structure is made of similarly low density magic stuff.
|
# ¿ May 30, 2017 18:02 |
|
Psion posted:See, in the IS, they use the new Kerensky Ton, which doesn't mean 2000lb/1000kg (depending on if you mean short ton/metric ton) so therefore...
|
# ¿ May 30, 2017 19:15 |
|
JacksLibido posted:It's actually stupid easy to throw a track on a tank.
|
# ¿ May 31, 2017 05:05 |
|
Drone posted:Looks like they gave out some copies a bit early to streamers so they can put up videos immediately: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hpz-oX3gKys
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2017 18:35 |
|
Psion posted:I intend on posting 15 second gifs so whenever I get my hands on it, rest assured I won't waste your time with two hours of crap and no need to like, comment, and subscribe!
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2017 18:37 |
|
Phrosphor posted:I think something to bare in mind is someone has already tried to do a faithful tabletop rules battletech game and it was received really badly. It took a very long time to play even a small skirmish and it just wasn't fun. Mechwarrior: Tactics had a Lot of other problems but at it's core the tabletop rules just weren't enjoyable on a pc.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2017 03:33 |
|
I imagine the Multishot skill will be great on something like an Awesome when you have to kill a bunch of vehicles in the campaign.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2017 13:57 |
|
Perestroika posted:You could combine that with a soft anti-savescum mechanic as well. Throwing out a random idea: Say a pilot gets injured/"killed" in the field, you'll get shown the general severity of their condition (e.g. light, medium, severe, critical), but without a final mechanical effect yet. Then you get to decide what kind of treatment to give them, with a trade-off between effectiveness and time taken. So you could throw them right back into the field, but that would have high odds of resulting in a fairly gnarly (semi-)permanent injury or even outright death. Or you could stick them into the medbay for an extended period (perhaps with a money cost for whatever super high-end care is available in the BTech universe), which would give you much better odds at a relatively less severe penalty or even a full recovery, but would keep the pilot out of action for several missions. The key here would be that the roll for whatever happens is fixed at the time you decide on your treatment option, but you only get to actually see the result once the treatment finishes. Most people wouldn't go back like 4+ missions just because their guy did bite it in the end.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2017 20:19 |
|
Zaodai posted:And some of it may not even be monetary value vs current value. How much are your friends worth? Are you going to face down that assault lance to buy time for the guys who employed you for the last 4 missions to escape, or are you going to leave them to die, or even switch sides because it's an easy pay day? Of course then your rep will be poo poo because you bailed, but hey, you're not dead.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 16:37 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Lol you guys pulled this same stuff like a year ago when I posted, at some point it's gonna be hard to keep being outraged that 1 dude on the internet doesn't like the design they went with. And maybe it can be a civil thing without huge meltdowns or brown sea posts or source your quotes or allllll the usual stuff You are also willfully ignoring facts (such as a 4 mech lance being a standard thing in the game since its tabletop inception in the 80s). Instead, to you, its "XCOM DID IT THIS WAY SO OBVIOUSLY THEY TOOK THE IDEA FROM XCOM!!". People are calling you out because you have bad, wrong opinions and are sticking to them and continuing to post about them, all whilst ignoring facts and good points people are making about how Battletech is not, in fact, a clone of XCOM with robits. edit: You are entitled to your opinion and you are welcome to post about it as much as you want, but other people are going to have opinions about your (bad) opinions and are going to call you out. No one is forcing you to post.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 17:55 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Er he said my claim was an outright lie? I was describing the way it works in the game. You can disagree with what I posted, but my observation was absolutely true, and you guys called me a liar for making a true observation. Ham Sandwiches posted:I want to see it on the paperdoll at a glance, without having to select a specific section's armor. if I want to see "where can a PPC actually breach" I don't want to have to select each section to find a vulnerable one, I want to be able to tell which mechs will have a hole opened by having me shoot chunkier weapons. If the game was a finished product I could see you being this mad about it but its a beta, dude. They have developers posting in this thread as well as taking feedback directly. They also have their own forums, have you posted there?
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 18:05 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Perhaps this sort of "DEFEND YOUR CLAIMS IN COURT WITH A TRIAL OF GOONS" is loving dumb dude. I'm one dude with an opinion on the latest computer game based on an old rear end board game. This game feels far too much like xcom2 with robots, from the scale, to the pilot skills, to the way that it seems to be chasing a yer gonna lose pilots approach, to the particiular implementations of the spotting / los systems. Please see: AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:The game is in beta and the devs are asking for feedback via the beta client of the game - have you provided the devs this feedback? and Zaodai posted:We call you a liar for claiming that mechanics are wholesale lifted from XCOM2, down to aiming being the same when it's not aside from you clicking a target with your mouse.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 18:10 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Or maybe once a year I can fire off 3-4 posts on the SA forums that capture my opinions and then go back to posting about other stuff until the next major thing. AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:You are entitled to your opinion and you are welcome to post about it as much as you want, but other people are going to have opinions about your (bad) opinions and are going to call you out. No one is forcing you to post. Zaodai posted:More directly, we accept that you have Bad, Wrong Opinions. I dont even need to type new posts because someone already has a good reply
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 18:17 |
|
JacksLibido posted:I mean, he's not WRONG that the game has a lot in common with xcom, they ARE the same basic game type, turn based strategy, after all.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 18:29 |
|
Internet Explorer posted:They need to make it so you can't do a 180 when jump jetting. Jumping behind someone and shooting their back armor is fine, but it shouldn't be as easy as it is now.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 20:00 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Hmm so aside from having quite similar mechanics which was apparent early on, just like HBS redid their previous franchise combat system in the style of Xcom, even pointing out that "they implemented many elements from this rather successful strategy game, which plenty of others have chosen to copy as well" is just ridiculous
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 21:25 |
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Battletech HBS 2017 edition has many elements from Xcom 2 that I'm not quite sure will translate well to btech. The 4 person squad size is an example - how much time do you guys want me to explain what I mean? I suspect not much, but then if you want to give me crap for not explaining... So yeah, in btech board rules I think mechs are more autonomous and effective independently. By combining the pilot / skill / initative system, I think you end up in a more Xcom like "defined roles" system where the mechs end up having some similarity to the way that Xcom 2 attempted to differentiate soldiers. Ham Sandwiches posted:The 4 person squad size is an example Ham Sandwiches posted:in btech board rules I think mechs are more autonomous and effective independently Ham Sandwiches posted:By combining the pilot / skill / initative system, I think you end up in a more Xcom like "defined roles" system where the mechs end up having some similarity to the way that Xcom 2 attempted to differentiate soldiers Ham Sandwiches posted:Like check out the beta skirmish gameplay - it's about keeping your guys together and positioning, which is a lot more like Xcom than necessarily Btech. Ham Sandwiches posted:I'm really not sure how my personal opinion on the flavors of the combat franchises that went into it and how they map to my preferences is so contentious, but it really appears to be.
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2017 21:45 |
|
Q_res posted:The biggest problem with bumping the PPC to 60 damage (something I've suggested, too) is that it becomes a headcapper (one shot kill on a headshot against a fully armored Mech). Combine that with its very high hit %s and long range...
|
# ¿ Jun 6, 2017 15:29 |
|
I dont understand why Assaults have so much worse sensor range. Or spotting range - arent most of them taller and more stable platforms?
AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Jun 6, 2017 |
# ¿ Jun 6, 2017 19:32 |
|
Psion posted:https://gfycat.com/AbandonedFilthyAtlanticbluetang Also, Alchenar posted:An actual DFA combat animation would be nice. Also, mechashiva is not a crime!
|
# ¿ Jun 6, 2017 22:36 |
|
Paingod556 posted:If you ever figure out how to edit 'Mech portraits as well, got just the thing
|
# ¿ Jun 7, 2017 15:14 |
|
Gwaihir posted:
I cant find the screencap I had of 10 Kerensky Alts all on top of one another We did it the weekend that they had the trial Cataphract that has JJs and had 8v8 Kerensky alts. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Jun 7, 2017 |
# ¿ Jun 7, 2017 16:44 |
|
Pattonesque posted:That makes sense. I also wonder if AI behavior will change in an actual campaign mission.
|
# ¿ Jun 7, 2017 20:06 |
|
Nalin posted:This is all I have: Willfrey posted:Aaah the memories. After the cataphract tower fell I was trapped in the sky somehow
|
# ¿ Jun 7, 2017 21:49 |
|
Skoll posted:https://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/8141?page=1 I read most of the first post and at least it wasn't filled with typos and rage - it was mostly well worded. It just wasn't thought out - he is criticizing a game that: 1) Is in beta 2) Has a survey after each match 2) Has a forum for feedback Some of the criticism is sorta valid, other bits might actually be a bug? So... get hosed, dudebro. Post your feedback in a constructive manner rather than being super critical about it.
|
# ¿ Jun 9, 2017 04:28 |
|
DatonKallandor posted:Can't do it cause Smalls use different hardpoints from Mediums. Gotta wait for the Firestarter for real melee shenanigans.
|
# ¿ Jun 12, 2017 14:39 |
|
Q_res posted:Why would that possibly work like that? Kind of defeats the purpose of having hardpoints?
|
# ¿ Jun 12, 2017 14:50 |
|
Zaodai posted:Oh lord they left the Argo parked in the Detroit system. I guess that confirms we find it as salvage. Sitting on blocks, in space. Rygar201 posted:Hmm? A spaceship for your Command Center? Sounds like some other successful tactics game...
|
# ¿ Jun 12, 2017 18:52 |
|
Sky Shadowing posted:TW:W2
|
# ¿ Jun 12, 2017 21:09 |
|
ZenVulgarity posted:So this game seems cool and good Battletech is made by HBS (Harebrained Schemes), who are wholly awesome and good. HBS is run by the man who invented the tabletop game Battletech in the 80s. They have in-house programmers. They acquired the mech assets (the only good part of MWO; the cool mech art and models) from PGI and are otherwise not affiliated.
|
# ¿ Jun 14, 2017 15:00 |
|
Alchenar posted:Not even going to attempt to claim that MWO has done anything positive for the franchise.
|
# ¿ Jun 24, 2017 15:40 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 07:20 |
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Meanwhile I"ve played two MC2 campaigns to completion because it put me in the mood\.
|
# ¿ Jul 3, 2017 20:39 |