Poll

So, a retcon happens: How significant should it be?

[Story] Minor. (Examples: Statistical data or imagery changes that tweak universe factoids but have little impact on story. Changes to population numbers, economic factors, planetary data, force sizes, the look of the Unseen, etc.)
166 (20.1%)
[Story] Modest. (Examples: A single event outcome changes that ripples through the story but doesn't change balance of power that much, such as Ian Davion not dying on Mallory's World or GDL surviving Hesperus II)
95 (11.5%)
[Story] Major. (Examples: A major event or series of events change entirely--or fail to occur--that results in a new balance of power, such as the Fourth War being aimed at Kurita instead of Liao, or Kurita winning the Davion War of Succession)
56 (6.8%)
[Story] Severe. (Examples: A fundamental change is made to the entire balance of the setting, such as the destruction of the SLDF before its Exodus preventing the creation of the Clans, or the deletion of any of the five Great Houses from canon.)
23 (2.8%)
[Story] Extreme. (Examples: The universe is rewritten from scratch; nothing is guaranteed and all previous canon is null and void.)
34 (4.1%)
[Story] NONE! (I DON'T CARE IF IT MAKES NO DAMNED SENSE! CHANGE A THING AND IT'S WAR, HERB! WAAAAAR!)
37 (4.5%)
[Game] Minor. (Examples: Minor rules changes and bug-fixes are made, such as a change to some modifiers, redistribution of units on RATs, change of the hex scale.)
134 (16.2%)
[Game] Modest. (Examples: A swath of rules tweaks are made that shifts game balance to a small degree or changes one aspect of design, such as a rewrite of large spacecraft construction, or a change in dice mechanics from D6 to D12.)
147 (17.8%)
[Game] Major. (Examples: Game play is overhauled on numerous fronts by a series of sweeping tech and rules changes, such as eliminating ProtoMechs/battle armor/WarShips entirely from the setting, eliminating hexes or hit locations from play.)
38 (4.6%)
[Game] Severe. (Examples: An entire core aspect of the game is rewritten or deleted, such as eliminating all non-'Mech units from play, replacing the core game with a Quick-Strike version of itself, eliminating construction/customization rules.)
11 (1.3%)
[Game] Extreme. (Examples: The game is rewritten from scratch; all rules and stats written from before this change are rendered wholly incompatible and anything goes--up to and including BattleMechs themselves.)
30 (3.6%)
[Game] NONE! (KEEP YOUR PAWS OFF THOSE GAME RULES, YOU DAMN, DIRTY APES!)
55 (6.7%)

Total Members Voted: 452

Author Topic: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?  (Read 38547 times)

Sigma

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2399
  • N-scale Fanatic
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #30 on: 21 September 2012, 08:09:17 »
If only I could pick two here.....

You can and are supposed to. Read the OP. O0

Lorcan Nagle

  • 75 tons of heavy metal mayhem
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12121
  • We're back, baby!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #31 on: 21 September 2012, 08:35:53 »
Minor changes to storyline and rules- just to make it easier for the team to deal with inconsistencies and errors made in the past and to get rid of the unseen.

This is pretty much my stance as well.  I'd rather the Unseen stuck around just in case the image rights ever can be regained, but I've no problem with there being Age of War, Star league, and Project Phoenix versions that look different.

Overall, I'd be more open to changes to the rules than to the setting - while it's impressive that the core rules haven't changed much since 1984, we've had radical changes to infantry, Aerospace, the RPG, BattleTroops and BattleForce and the franchise has survived all them.
The moderator formerly known as the user formerly known as nenechan

kroner

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • the artist formerly known as Vorpal
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #32 on: 21 September 2012, 09:56:41 »
Star Maps 3D or at least recognize that there are three dimensions.

Fix populations.  Try to fix economies.

Not as concerned about army sizes.  More emphasis on conventional arms, I guess.  Battlemechs must be supreme on battlefield.  No aliens, of course.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7155
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #33 on: 21 September 2012, 12:24:10 »

[Story] Minor - I kind of like the way things are, but if TPTB need minor room to make this universe go more smoothly then they may have it.

[Game] Extreme - I always wanted to see a truly unified construction and a more consistent rule system. The only limit that I would have is that all previous units must remain optional in the game (like still being able to design and play with warships). I would give a big applause if the required amount of handwavium that we need gets reduced. 
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

captainjohn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 369
  • work is for those who don't know how to plunder
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #34 on: 21 September 2012, 12:26:38 »
I wouldn't mind minor or moderate changes. I can accept most rule changes so long as they can overall improve the flow of the game and story line. After all I don't have to use them if I don't like them. But I don't want changes force me to buy the basic battletech stuff all over again just to stay current or be able to have a reasonable chance to win against another player. I got out of magic the Gathering because I couldn't keep up the cost of buying the latest pack of cards. etc.  The overall cost for me will be an big indicator if I accept changes or not.   
bottom line, pocket book
I hope this is helpfull.
thanks
John
so, we meet again, for the first time

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4068
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #35 on: 21 September 2012, 13:17:01 »
I went with moderate story changes and minor rules changes.

I think the rules we have are pretty good, my gripes are mainly on small issues; like the LAM rules and how infantry units are made up (Guys, seriously? That could have been SO much simpiler) and, yes mech height. I love most of how the game works, what doesn't I can fix myself in my games.

Like my infantry who carry many different types of weapons in differing ratios than allowed under the rules. Simple record keeping for support weapon ammo, grenades, LAWs, ect. or my LAMs which I design in Heavy Metal so I can use advanced materials. Mech height which we just common-sense in our games and I love the quirks system!

But story...I agree with Sigma on the bundling.

Images matter to me and you know which ones I mean. It's much easier and more palatable to say that a certain design built in different areas will look different, it's how I reconcile the varying proportions of the Atlas minis. Much easier to swallow than saying that the marauder has always looked like a gawky cyborg chicken fetus.

I LOVE the attention to the star league era and I hope TPTB continue to explore alternate eras, it's neat and adds to the rich tapestry of the game.

But after thinking my game was gone forever after FASA died, The Dark Age pissed me off with it's demilitarization and bizzare styling. We could have enjoyed all the chaotic, post-apocalyptic, knights in giant stompy robots of the original 3025 era, with expanded technology, warships, the clans, ect...

And instead we got the slap-dash post-peacetech era of malformed art and story we're still labouring to amalgamate. And I am an understanding guy on art, I think the Anime stylings of 3025 fit in just fine with the more of less realistic bents image has taken in the game, but the huge bubble canopies, superflourus rollbars and generic looking arms and legs on the dark age stuff just look too out of place, even for me. But I can live with it.

But the final chapters of the Jihad will forever be my point of departure in the game, up till then, I could enjoy what was going on and carve out my own little niche in my imagination. As soon as you involve Stone and his coalition of allstars, things get increasingly wonky culminating in the post-Jihad silliness and The Dark Age.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

Doug Glendower

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2427
  • I really am bad at letting go.
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #36 on: 21 September 2012, 14:15:05 »
Alternate. Timelines.

*walks away*

Krimsonholt

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #37 on: 21 September 2012, 16:02:08 »
You could justifiably give a great many things in the Battletech universe a retcon. This includes technologies, game mechanics, established history, and established plot lines. But I fear too much of it and it would not be the Battletech that I have enjoyed. If a sweeping rules change needs to be done, set it into that future era that we have been teased about. I think that the handling of the Republic/Dark Age/Age of Destruction eras so far has been great and using a 'light touch' to wrap it up and fast forward to another era would be a good move. As for the eras that are post Dark Age/Age of Destruction? The possibilities are endless and its is something that I would look forward to.
Battletech fan since 1993.
As for who caused the blackout,  I think it was Kitsune Kurita with a an actuator wrench in the library.

Dread Moores

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #38 on: 21 September 2012, 16:34:52 »
The level of change isn't important to me. It could be all-encompassing or minor. It's the quality of the material and rules as a result of the change that matter.

Azriel Sukhanov

  • Guest
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #39 on: 21 September 2012, 17:41:10 »
Major story changes, modest rules changes.

I think there is opportunity to change/eliminate events while keeping long-term fans happy.  I'm not sure if I would eliminate any one of the big houses or the Clans as a whole, as plenty of players are onboard with a certain faction already.

I wouldn't like the deletion of Clan Snow Raven for instance, but personally I would understand if it somehow served a good narrative.  I would find my place somewhere else in the Battletech Universe, like Liao.

I think the core mechanics of the basic game are solid, but if there were some changes I would be on board with it.  I would love an overhaul of the campaign system.  I can read all of the rules I want in ten different books and understand the concepts, but at the end I would still pay money to have a program that did the grunt work for me.

It just depends on what kind of game you want to produce, and who your demographic is.  Sure, I'm on board and have been for 17 years and a lot of people have been with the game for longer.  I honestly think from a business standpoint you have to gear yourself towards making more advanced digital options to play/construct/campaign etc available to your consumer base.  And I think that if you have to change some rules/complexity to adapt to that scenario, then you have to do it.

megatrons2nd

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 422
  • All hail Megatron
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #40 on: 21 September 2012, 20:40:47 »
I like the Fiction, but it can always be altered, so long as it remains recognizable as Battletech.  The size of the Great Houses, their militaries, and populations never made much sense.  I chose major fiction changes, as the balance of power can shift readily anyway as time progresses.

Rules I chose modest, I don't want to lose any available unit type in game.  I personally love LAM's(they are what brought me into the game), but don't care about Protomechs as much(yet realize that there are those that do).

Changing the Hex scale could work like double the size making each battletech map about a Kilometer rather than the roughly half Kilometer that it is now, just make the turn 20 seconds instead of ten, and the fluff speeds wouldn't need to change.  If you further multiply all ranges buy 1.5 you get longer ranged weapons, but don't make them unreasonably long.

Aerospace fighters have always been a bugbear of mine.  They don't flow with the rest of the units movements.  Leave it as is for space missions, but alter it for ground interaction.  Maybe give them 7 MP per current thrust point, and have a turning restriction of one facing change at the end of each 7 MP's used or every 14 MP's used if using the Overthrust movement.
All the world's a joke and the people merely punchlines.


monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #41 on: 21 September 2012, 22:25:16 »
Fiction wise it'd be easy enough to take care of a lot of the problems by chopping about 500 years off the timeline though it would seem that the second part of what I'd do on that front, cutting population figures by a factor of 10, is at least underway.

Rules wise I fully do believe everything that can operate in space needs a serious ground up redo of the construction rules.

On the other fronts I would re-balance the weapons, in particular the ACs, UACs, RACs, LB-X, and Gauss Rifles of all flavors.  The ACs, UACs, RACs, and LB-Xs would have their weights universally lowered, crits reduced(never going below a minimum of 1), minimums removed, and shots per ton of ammo altered.  Gauss Rifles would also get their minimum ranges removed, heat increased, count for power amplifier tonnage with ICE engines, count for Heat Sink usage on combat vehicles, and the Heavy would get its range adjusted, damage normalized, and shots per tons adjusted.  LRMs would be reworked to make bigger launchers a bit more appealing versus smaller launchers in sufficient numbers to make up the difference.  I have particular numbers in mind for all listed items but I am torn on if I should place them in this thread or not.

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6202
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #42 on: 21 September 2012, 23:26:52 »
Hello,

While I do not intend to discourage discussion here, it should be noted that this is not a solicitation for ideas on the nature of the hypothetical retcon, but merely an effort to gauge the degree to which one is acceptable by the fan base.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

FedComGirl

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4447
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #43 on: 22 September 2012, 01:18:10 »
Story: I voted for Minor. Numbers and things can be changed, dated fixed, errors corrected, blanks filled in, and so on. That can go all the way to the beginning but the changes shouldn't be so big and far reaching that it renders old material completely worthless.  If you're going to do that you might as well be starting a new game.

Game: I voted Minor but I'm kind of in between Minor and Modest. I'm fine with bug fixes and rules changes up to one aspect of design (mostly). I'm even hoping for some blanks in tech items and unit construction to be filled in.  But I don't want things to be so changed that its unrecognizable and all the old material is rendered useless. If you do make Major changes, I would hope that you'd include conversion that are backwards and forwards compatible. But like I said above and as many others have said, you might as well start a new game.


HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6202
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #44 on: 22 September 2012, 02:20:11 »
Hello,

Hmm. Fascinating.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

Gaiiten

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1938
  • Can not get enough of BattleTech!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #45 on: 22 September 2012, 05:08:45 »
A question before I vote:

Do I have to consider a sudden change (let us say at the (probable) end of DA (appr. 3150)) while I still used to "the old way", or maybe something like both story and time jump with new conditions?
Crush yah enumhees, see dem drivun befor you, and hear de lamuntatuns of de veemon!

Visit my Deviantart: http://gaiiten.deviantart.com/

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6202
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #46 on: 22 September 2012, 11:07:46 »
Hello,

I do not understand your question. But in the interest of time, a simple "move forward to a new era" is not, in itself, a retcon. For the purposes of this discussion, the retcon means a deliberate and overt change to the history of the canon.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs


Dropkick

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 615
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #47 on: 22 September 2012, 11:16:58 »
Factoids about planets and fasanomics wouldn't bother me so much and I've always felt that the unseen should've been rectonned in the 90's.  They're just images and dated ones at that.  CGL has upped their artwork 500% and can easily make something better than that tired 80's shogun warrior junk.  The rest of the setting is just fine.   CGL has shown that they can make a history that engages their fanbase and can keep them guessing about the future.  CGL should leave the past where it is. 

Changes to rules scare me mainly cause I don't want to see Btech fall into a routine of rules tweaking resulting in me having to buy $75 rule books and $150 worth of mini's just to stay competative every five years.  My pocket book can't take that.

five_corparty

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1380
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #48 on: 22 September 2012, 15:37:51 »
minor tweaks to the story (go away, unseen images!  rest in peace!)

I WOULD have picked minor tweaks to rules- but as it is, weapons are becomoing so powerful, armor is damn near worthless (In my opinion!!!)  So, since fixing that fell under "game balancing," I piked major tweaks.  but, minor/major, either or.

I do like the quick strike rules, but as an additional way to play, not the main game.

ianargent

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 188
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #49 on: 22 September 2012, 19:35:14 »
I voted Minor story, but I think Moderate works for me, too. For rules, quite honestly, one of the things that I love about BT is that, while there are differences in the details, the tables on the back cover of BT 3E are still valid. I skipped about 10 years of BT development and two major rules editions and I can still play the game.

Example from your brothers over in SR - I like the world changes in SR4, I wasn't thrilled by the rules changes. I barely noticed the change from SR2 to SR3; and I find the changes from SR3 to SR4 quite jarring.
Yes, KF drive vessels, assuming they survive the atmospher[ic reentry] (they take 100 points of damage per hex per turn of velocity in the atmosphere), do tend to use an aggressive lithobraking method for landing.

Gaiiten

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1938
  • Can not get enough of BattleTech!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #50 on: 23 September 2012, 03:17:15 »
Hello,
I do not understand your question. But in the interest of time, a simple "move forward to a new era" is not, in itself, a retcon. For the purposes of this discussion, the retcon means a deliberate and overt change to the history of the canon.
Thank you,
- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

I mean is that retcon supposed to get active while the old systems have been using for the ongoing story and gameplay?

For example, due game rules changing the rules for WoB SDS systems that they are for more capable than those in JHS: Terra.
Or due story line let the Blood Spirits reconcile with the Adders after the Viper annihilation (info to us in the Jihad era), but tell us that later (info in DA era).
Crush yah enumhees, see dem drivun befor you, and hear de lamuntatuns of de veemon!

Visit my Deviantart: http://gaiiten.deviantart.com/

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6202
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #51 on: 23 September 2012, 08:51:54 »
Hello,

Um, yes, these would be retcons that immediately change some aspect(s) of the setting and game rules, applying throughout. It could be "well, we decided that the Unseen 'Mechs never existed in the forms shown", or "we decided to rewrite all large spacecraft rules again, and re-stat the entire line of DropShips, JumpShips , and WarShips published to date", or "we decided the Wolf's Dragoons never existed". These would immediately apply to all sourcebooks and rulebooks written after the changes, and could even be added to all active products via errata.

Does that clarify enough for you?

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

martian

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8311
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #52 on: 23 September 2012, 09:52:47 »
I have voted for "Minor" in both categories.

Rules
Some small improvements are in order, some errata or changes of not-so-important modifiers are okay too.  But one part of the charm of BattleTech is that it's backwards-compatible. You can take a decade or two decades old scenariobook or sourcebook and that book will be still useful today (well, 90% of it). I consider it a great feat.

Story
Small changes are permitted, be it the case of those damned Unseens or something similar.
But I don't want to see some well-known facts changed from unclear reason.

Change too many (important/established) things and you will repel old players without attracting new ones. Personally I am pretty comfortable with BattleTech as is, and I am not sure if I would be interested in it after some big changes would occur. Probably not.

TigerShark

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5042
    • MekWars: Dominion
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #53 on: 23 September 2012, 11:23:35 »
I believe any major changes would disenfranchise the current fan base. Requiring that new books be purchased to continue the game in any capacity always leaves a bad, "Magic: The Gathering" taste in peoples' mouths.

Are these changes being made because of some compelling need to fix holes in the story? Is the current BT timeline inadequate? In the first case, minor changes can clarify plot holes and bridge the gap between modern canon and FASA canon. In the second, a new game (like MW:DA) would be in order.
  W W W . M E K W A R S - D O M I N I O N . C O M

  "You will fight to the last soldier, and when you die, I will call upon your damned soul to speak horrible curses at the enemy."
     - Orders of Emperor Stefan Amaris to his troops

Dragon Cat

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7827
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #54 on: 23 September 2012, 11:34:06 »
modest story changes - death/survival of a unit 2 examples that jump at me the GDL survives as noted in the example or the Jihad really was the swan song for the Dragoons.

EDIT - same goes for characters - Stone was a real person who had a history, Stone never existed and the Inner Sphere did what it has done for hundreds of years and worked through the war.

minor game changes - balancing of RATs in some cases but overall I like the game (not a huge aerotech or infantry player here so I won't judge what I don't use) - although from a designer point of view canon dropships with space to carry cargo, Mechbays properly explained for size, ability to overload DropShips to explain ammo, spare parts, food would be nice.

Overall the universe is pretty brilliant and it has the flexibility for players to go it themselves if they want (fan fiction and designs for a start), I'd say if it ain't broke you don't need to fix
« Last Edit: 23 September 2012, 11:44:54 by Dragon Cat »
My three main Alternate Timeline with Thanks fan-fiction threads are in the links below. I'm always open to suggestions or additions to be incorporated so if you feel you wish to add something feel free. There's non-canon units, equipment, people, events, erm... Solar Systems spread throughout so please enjoy

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,20515.0.html - Part 1

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,52013.0.html - Part 2

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,79196.0.html - Part 3

Chris24601

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #55 on: 23 September 2012, 13:17:07 »
I voted "minor" for story. I'm pretty happy with the current state of the BT universe (yes, even the Dark Age stuff which improved greatly towards the end of its run). That said, I wholehearted approve of retconning aspects of the distant past (ex. Delaying the invention of the FTL drive by a century or two) or elements that just don't make sense (ex. FASAnomics) to make the present age (c. 3025 and on) more internally consistant.

I voted major on the rules because I wouldn't mind a ground up reworking of aerospace and ground assets to return BattleMechs to the undisputed Lords of the Battlefield. If that means that warships turn out to have been an 'in-universe' fad that gets completely discredited and scrapped after the jump to 3150 then so be it.

Gaiiten

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1938
  • Can not get enough of BattleTech!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #56 on: 23 September 2012, 13:18:03 »
Yes, it did.

Thank you.

---------------

Due the story, I voted "Modest".

Due he game, I voted "Extreme"   :)


Hello,

Um, yes, these would be retcons that immediately change some aspect(s) of the setting and game rules, applying throughout. It could be "well, we decided that the Unseen 'Mechs never existed in the forms shown", or "we decided to rewrite all large spacecraft rules again, and re-stat the entire line of DropShips, JumpShips , and WarShips published to date", or "we decided the Wolf's Dragoons never existed". These would immediately apply to all sourcebooks and rulebooks written after the changes, and could even be added to all active products via errata.

Does that clarify enough for you?

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs
Crush yah enumhees, see dem drivun befor you, and hear de lamuntatuns of de veemon!

Visit my Deviantart: http://gaiiten.deviantart.com/

Lorcan Nagle

  • 75 tons of heavy metal mayhem
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12121
  • We're back, baby!
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #57 on: 23 September 2012, 15:06:12 »
I believe any major changes would disenfranchise the current fan base. Requiring that new books be purchased to continue the game in any capacity always leaves a bad, "Magic: The Gathering" taste in peoples' mouths.

I dunno, GW get away with it.
The moderator formerly known as the user formerly known as nenechan

Black Omega

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 128
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #58 on: 23 September 2012, 18:58:32 »
For the story I almost said none because the story is the story and while there are some things that I dislike (see Kell Hound nuking) the story survives it.  I put minor because of the one thing that made me much more incensed--Natasha K's death.  On the lame scale of 1-10 this ranked 37.  Okay she knew it was her last stand and we knew it was her last stand.  It would not have hurt anything to have a star or 2 of "red-shirt" JF's put down before Joanna shows up.  And come on, jump jet to the face  :D  That's all I'm going to say about that.

For the game, minor as well.  A few game balance tweaks here and there are can be a good thing.  When I run games, they are non-canon and I do what I want (within reason).  It has been said more that once--"it's your universe, have fun"--and my players and I do.

"Old age and treachery will beat youth and beauty every time."

Siberian-troll

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1718
Re: Retcon Reset (Volume 2): How BIG a change are we talking...?
« Reply #59 on: 24 September 2012, 01:40:28 »
Due he game, I voted "Extreme"   :)

Maybe. Current game have too many rolls and too slow for company's sized battles.