That excuse relies on Florence's Law: "Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." To take advantage of that you have to avoid applying magical rules to anything widely understood. Among the audience for primitive construction rules in Battletech that is going to include a level of understanding of real world tanks that would in BT terms be primitive sufficient for their attention to be drawn to the problems.
That you specifically have an unusually low standard for suspension of disbelief does not make this not a problem for others.
no so much retaining suspension of disbelief as much as knowing when a battle's already lost. When Dev is willing to consider a different position in a discussion like this or listen to alternate points of view, the battle is viable (See: Artillery Scatter arguments from almost a decade ago, Force Size Multiplier, or Math issues with BV2).
When the dev digs in and puts their foot down, even suggesting that they put a lot of work into it and falling back on 'exceptions are how we create new equipment'? then, the battle is lost-and was lost before it began.
even when it's the FORMER line developer rather than the current one, because he's former voluntarily rather than being fired and the separation really WAS amicable (as opposed to being forced out), this "this argument's got legs and teh battle can be won" versus "This battle's lost period" comes into play.
Until another developer picks up the portfolio and has a story-rooted reason to change things, or until something happens and they need to do another massive update to the rules like Total Warfare was, this battle's lost in the present-tense, meaning even very well researched arguments will fall on deaf ears, no matter how reasonable or rational they might be.
really, we're talking about a niche corner of a niche corner of the massive library that is Battletech-in-the-present. When I started this game, you could contain all the rules to run a ground campaign in a single book for all then-extant eras, from Star League to Clan Invasion,(actually, being specific, when I started ALL the rules came in a thin, paper-back booklet in the box, and there was only ONE tech level.)
at present, you need a document wagon just to carry all the rules you'd need to run a single combined arms battalion with BASIC artillery support.
Not including the literal hundreds of pages of errata out there.
I've seen the process of evolving infantry from popcorn pseudo-minefields to something that can actually be threatening, seen rules completely change through two-and-a-half versions of Aerospace rules, seen the adoption of every goofy idea in Maxtech, Mechforce UK and Unbound, three or four versions of RPG rules, and seen the entire ruleset for a vehicle class changed to make a
single unit of that class that wasn't viable while others were, into something that at least isn't a serious liability.
yeah, the rules for an entire CLASS of vehicles changed simply to make one specific design viable, because it wasn't prior to the change.
Rules changes happen, but they're governed by what's going on behind the scenes at Catalyst (or whoever comes after Catalyst, or Topps, or whomever), and not because of internet arguments here on the forums.
and sometimes, you have to listen to the statement, nod, say 'whatever' and play the game how YOU want to. Because unlike MMOs or console games or PC games, we can actually DO THAT with just the consent of our gaming group and fellow players-we don't have to acknowledge ANY canon statements if we don't want to. We're not tied down like those console gamers. If you have a better idea, there's no harm in presenting it, and arguments against can float or sink as you like-your game is YOUR game.
If your idea has better legs than the canon, and it spreads? Then you can pat yourself on the back and enjoy influencing the community.
Or not.
But keep in mind, everything the community comes up with in these forums? Catalyst can't use ANY of it. Why? because some jerkoff will claim he came up with it and try to sue them if they do.
it's happened before. There's a reason they don't accept unsolicited submissions.
much the same can be said of accepting unsolicited suggestions. They have to be EXTREMELY careful with those. the margin for being a game company isn't exactly scrooge mcduck levels of wealth, and even a frivolous suit can be crippling.
