Author Topic: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?  (Read 24079 times)

jackpot4

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 666
I tried, i honestly tried to play HBStech again and the gentleman's warfare is just too much....

I know my opinion on this matter isn't the majority and for those who are beyond excited just to have a Battletech universe game, they may not just disagree but, may hate my opinion. 

I remember my excitement that HBS was actually going to make a Battletech game where you control your lance from overhead.  Finally something new, current generation!  I was on the hype train with everyone else.  Then, my heart sunk.  When i found they were going to do 1700's gentleman's warfare for combat rather than Battletech's 30 year old, and modern, simultaneous combat.  I could not grasp how the guy who made Battletech would regress to such an archaic type of combat. 

Immediately they were under fire for going that route, they had to make entire videos justifying their decision, essentially saying that people weren't mentally capable of keeping up with what was going on if they chose simultaneous combat.  They came up with all these reasons why it was "better" like the idea that light mechs were now more viable.  It was unbelievable to hear this after playing Battletech.  After playing HBStech I have never seen light mechs so useless. 

One major reason I remember them justifying the need for gentleman's warfare because people couldn't mentally keep up was because of multiplayer.  Already I was hesitant because of gentleman's warfare but, when I saw the KS tier that included multiplayer, I refused to donate if it got anywhere near that level.  Time and again in many games, even AAA titles when there is multiplayer, there are shortcomings in the single player mode that wasn't there when the focus was solely on single player.  One epic example is the catastrophe around the end of Mass Effect 3.  They had plenty of multiplayer but, had the resources been committed to the story - what would live on for years and decades longer than multiplayer - they could have given us the truly epic, visual conclusion we were all expecting on release.  Minutes more of space combat as thousands of vessels fought for dear life, larger scopes of ground combat as thousands, possibly millions of allied warriors made groundfall, and more.  So much wasted potential.  What we got in Mass Effect 1 for when it was made was more than what we got in Mass Effect 3 for when it was made.  Similar parallels can be drawn such as the Gears of War Trilogy vs 4 and 5, or Halo CE/trilogy vs 4 and 5, etc.

As far as what we get for the time we are in, a great comparison is (IMO) the pinnacle of Battletech on PC, MW4: Mercs.  Set during the FedCom Civil War, voice acting throughout the game, picking and choosing missions all over, control of two full lances of mechs at a time, and even on the Overlord Assault, COMPANIES of mechs fighting with VTOL and armor support.  How was a game, made 20 years ago, more capable of that kind of onscreen content than one made in the current generation?  A homeowner can have more powerful equipment that Microsoft had when they made MW4 Mercs.  How can the AI control 15 mechs or more at a time but we cannot control more than 4?  Yes, they are two different types of games, I totally see that, but, how are there more restrictions now than then?

Simultaneous combat could easily be implemented and made in such a way that is easy to view and understand plus, the BALANCE.  Simultaneous combat balance on tabletop wargaming is the most balanced form of gameplay I have ever witnessed.  Massive war machines moving around aren't taking cover like a foot soldier, they are up and moving near constantly, the expectation is to be under barrages of fire and returning that fire constantly.  Moving at the same time and firing at the same time are very basic expectations for the battlefields of Battletech.  Had multiplayer never even been a (failure) goal, the amount of effort that could have gone into single player would have made it infinitely re-playable (my opinion).  I remember checking the MP list on a Sunday afternoon a month after release and there was 1 game being hosted.  I was very vocal about how multiplayer should not have been included with this game.  Without it we could have easily had simultaneous combat, we could have had dozens of alternate sequences for the space flights, we could have had dozens of more motion slides for the cutscenes, we could have actually taken part in the assaults against the main enemy armies in the campaign sequences. 

I find it baffling how games playing with 1700s style gentleman's warfare are successful.  The wife and I are a bit into Star Wars and wanted to give the game a try so we got the box sets and a mat and played.  We gave the games a few tries and it nearly always ends with one side getting steam rolled because while your fighter is sitting still, it gets shot out of the sky and then you gang up on the rest.  After just a few games, we agreed, it was not fun.  So, I fixed the rules, I made it simultaneous combat.  All the fighters constantly moving, constantly firing, chaos and FUN.  I simply told her "This is why I play Battletech".  Another game I wish would fix the rules and advance past the 1700s is 40K, somehow after 40,000 years, they fight like the British before losing the Revolution.  I really enjoy watching miniwargaming, striking scorpion and other youtubers playing the game because I can just enjoy seeing the models and hearing about battles happening.  If I get too into it, as an outsider with little knowledge of the rules, I can even identify stuff that is nonsense balance wise.  I get that game has a great many issues but lining up and getting shot, before shooting back will never make sense to me. 

After giving HBStech a real, solid try, yes, 20+ hours, it pushed me over the edge tonight.  ctrl+alt+delete, end task, steam, uninstall.  They had such an opportunity and (IMO) squandered it.  I hear roguetech has helped make the game dramatically better and I sincerely hope people keep building on it.  Perhaps in a few months when I can stomach gentleman's warfare enough to try to play this game for just being in the Battletech universe, that mod may help salvage my opinion of the game.  Hopefully we have a slew of non-MWO mech designs we can play with (just a personal desire). 

I am glad that some people really cherish this game and find satisfaction in it but, after experiencing Battletech, HBStech is lacking in so many areas and those areas cause me great frustration when I just want to enjoy it, use some strategy and have fun playing Battletech.  I cannot wait until we can start getting back together at the LGS for some games, I miss them greatly.  [Written during the C19......situation  ::)  ]

My one request, of anything, if HBS makes another Battletech game, they make it simultaneous combat.

If you read this through, thanks for the time, I hope I have provided an insight to an idea/opinion that some may not have considered. 
« Last Edit: 10 June 2020, 00:06:25 by jackpot4 »
Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

Be the Light in the darkness.

Elmoth

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3414
  • Periphery fanboy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #1 on: 10 June 2020, 02:29:38 »
I agree that lights are replaced ASAP if you can. Only exception maybe is a Panther as a backup for when your PPC mech is in repairs. IN general, in the game, bigger is better since all missions end up being slugfests. that is my main criticism. All missions are pitched battles in the end.

Simultaneous play?= I dont' know if this would solve it, though. I don't think so. More mission variety would be better for me, so to each one his own. As opposed to you, I did enjoy the game, and still am. Right now I am starting a career mode with all the settings in stingy mode, no massive upgrades in the Argo, and I will sell all assault mech components I get in order to get a more realistic lance. Besides that (autorestrictions to keep witgh the light-medium and 1 heavy maybe) limit to have what I believe to be a more sensible unit evolution, I am ok with the game as it is :)

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #2 on: 10 June 2020, 08:14:34 »
I agree that lights are replaced ASAP if you can. Only exception maybe is a Panther as a backup for when your PPC mech is in repairs. IN general, in the game, bigger is better since all missions end up being slugfests. that is my main criticism. All missions are pitched battles in the end.

Simultaneous play?= I dont' know if this would solve it, though. I don't think so. More mission variety would be better for me, so to each one his own. As opposed to you, I did enjoy the game, and still am. Right now I am starting a career mode with all the settings in stingy mode, no massive upgrades in the Argo, and I will sell all assault mech components I get in order to get a more realistic lance. Besides that (autorestrictions to keep witgh the light-medium and 1 heavy maybe) limit to have what I believe to be a more sensible unit evolution, I am ok with the game as it is :)

More mission types may help, but they aren't going to fix it. One change that could fix this would be sensors like in MC1/2, where your mechs could detect something well beyond visual range, and if the mechwarrior was specced right, could tell you what it was. I could see this being very useful, having at least one light mech out for scouting.

Realistically, the issue is the pilot skills and equipment, where a heavy mech can get good evasion, and a light mech can have their evasion attrited by numerous enemies, there's a serious law of diminishing returns to speed. Since the PC always outnumbers the players unit by a significant number, they get better reduction of evasion. In the environment where speed is no longer armour, there's no substitute for armour.

Can't fix that one now, players are used to it. For every player you made happy because lights are worthwhile again, you have ten who would be pissed at the exchange. Most of the players I know look forward to replacing their lights and mediums with heavies, change that and you might be getting somewhere.

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19825
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #3 on: 10 June 2020, 09:31:21 »
cpu pilots with higher skills also make life very hard for lights.

besides the one lance limit, the other problem is mission structure - you usually get dropped a few turns from the objective. there is not really room for a ton of sophisticated tactics. the other thing is you don't need a scout mech. i just got to the lostech cache mission and my "recon" is a thunderbolt with a 10 tactics decker. run in, sensor lock, bombard with LRMs.

another annoyance is that the enemy often doesn't show up until you fulfill an objective. you can't scout ahead because there's nothing to scout.

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

MarauderD

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3926
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #4 on: 10 June 2020, 11:30:55 »
It sounds like a MechCommander 3 is what you would prefer?

I think the issue here is no AAA studio can (or would) touch BattleTech.  Microsoft doesn't seem to think it is a profitable license, as they've sat on their hands since MW4 back in 2000.  That is 20 years.

I totally understand HBS' BattleTech isn't for everyone.  Having played all the BattleTech games in the last 10 years, and some of them with 1000+ hours poured into them, I would love to see a MechCommander 3 with simlutaneous combat come out.  I just don't think we'll see it in our lifetimes.

As a side note, having played MWO for years and the newer MW5, at least HBS BattleTech had some love and care crafted into it.  PGI took the bones of fun 1st person shooter, and continued to make it worse for 5 years.  Then, they took the worst AI I've ever seen in gaming (been playing PC games since the early 90's) and made MW5.  I'd give the game one out of 5 stars, and I love all things BattleTech.

Pray PGI doesn't keep the license in 2025, and someone makes another worthy BattleTech game.  Because it won't be them.
« Last Edit: 10 June 2020, 11:58:13 by MarauderD »

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7154
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #5 on: 10 June 2020, 11:31:23 »
I supported the KS, and when I played the game I quickly found out that I don't like turn-based PC games.
I rather have a Real-Time Tactical game such as MechCommander.
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

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #6 on: 10 June 2020, 14:24:52 »
cpu pilots with higher skills also make life very hard for lights.

besides the one lance limit, the other problem is mission structure - you usually get dropped a few turns from the objective. there is not really room for a ton of sophisticated tactics. the other thing is you don't need a scout mech. i just got to the lostech cache mission and my "recon" is a thunderbolt with a 10 tactics decker. run in, sensor lock, bombard with LRMs.

another annoyance is that the enemy often doesn't show up until you fulfill an objective. you can't scout ahead because there's nothing to scout.

All of these generally describe BattleTech tabletop.  Ok, maybe not the last. :)
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19825
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #7 on: 10 June 2020, 15:39:02 »
in tabletop at least you can blame it on time. i've had to get super creative trying to create some variety in mission objectives.

i don't hate the game (except when urban missions with a bunch of enemies absolutely cook my laptop). in fact it's grown on me a lot since i first played it in 2018. i just wish there was some greater variance than what's there where you can solve almost every problem with a bigger, better crafted hammer or intentionally handicapping yourself

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

MarauderD

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3926
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #8 on: 10 June 2020, 16:54:28 »
My biggest bone to pick with HBS game is the immersion factor:  they have all the tools to do it right, but their tools don't quite do it.

Wolverine K in Marik forces?  Shouldn't happen.  Does happen.

Everyone fielding a metric ton of Javelins?  Shouldn't happen.  Does Happen.

Taurian lances should have tons of Warhammers and Marauders:  they only manufacture 3 heavies in their realm, but all I see is Quickdraws.

Etc, etc.  You get the idea.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #9 on: 11 June 2020, 17:19:19 »
I backed early, expecting a sexier MegaMek (with which I would have been quite happy).  That's not what we got.  I played it through the campaign, and even tried to install the first patch, but that exceeded my computer's limits (upon which I based the decision to back the KS).  I don't even remember the last time I played at this point...  :-\

jackpot4

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 666
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #10 on: 12 June 2020, 12:54:11 »
I am glad this became a good discussion guys, thanks for that. 

Would I prefer Mech Commander 3 or Battletech on PC?  Most certainly, I would take either over HBStech.  The comparison I draw is that home PC owners now can have more powerful machines with better tools than Microsoft had when they made Mech Commander or MW4.  We can see that the mod communities are using this aspect to accomplish great things.  If they made the one change from Gentleman's Warfare to Simultaneous Combat, I would venture to say the game would be amazing and I'd have had thousands of hours logged.  But, in my opinion, the most important aspect that affects every game played, ruins the entire experience.  No matter how much effort went into character development, graphical design, what little voice acting there is, etc.; all of it falls by the wayside where the gameplay at its core is gentleman's warfare.

While typing this and thinking about everyone else on the team, it really is a shame.  I bet the world designers really put in the effort, the artists, all of them put in a great amount of effort and because someone made this decision to change the base, fundamental element that puts Battletech above other game systems in balance and fairness, it stole from everyone's work and took from my experience as well.  I am sure there are worlds, environments, and missions I have never experienced because I can't stomach such a consistently bad gameplay experience (IMO). 

All of these generally describe BattleTech tabletop.  Ok, maybe not the last. :)

I did spot this comment and would have to disagree.  A true 4 to 6 movement mod is far more effective than 7 evasions in HBStech.  Even at short range a 2/3 pilot still has to roll 6 to 8 (assuming no woods hexes are nearby) to even hit the light mech and I've seen a great number of easier shots miss. 

Even in games with all 3/4 pilots, the light mechs can be the most devastating.  A Spider can harass and nearly kill an Atlas that is on its own, a Gunsmith can shred armor off larger mechs, etc.  Having the capability to control when your mechs move is what gives lights such power.  HBStech's gentleman's warfare made lights nearly worthless or constantly having to be move in such a way to abuse the turn based system or having to flee the majority of the time.  Forcing lights to move first or have them sit and be shot at by all the other lights and mediums makes them incredibly easy targets.  The only thing protecting them is if programming was put in place to force the in game AI to look toward bigger targets a specific % of the time.

Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

Be the Light in the darkness.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28957
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #11 on: 13 June 2020, 09:33:51 »
Would I prefer Mech Commander 3 or Battletech on PC?  Most certainly, I would take either over HBStech.  The comparison I draw is that home PC owners now can have more powerful machines with better tools than Microsoft had when they made Mech Commander or MW4.  We can see that the mod communities are using this aspect to accomplish great things.  If they made the one change from Gentleman's Warfare to Simultaneous Combat, I would venture to say the game would be amazing and I'd have had thousands of hours logged.  But, in my opinion, the most important aspect that affects every game played, ruins the entire experience.  No matter how much effort went into character development, graphical design, what little voice acting there is, etc.; all of it falls by the wayside where the gameplay at its core is gentleman's warfare.

While typing this and thinking about everyone else on the team, it really is a shame.  I bet the world designers really put in the effort, the artists, all of them put in a great amount of effort and because someone made this decision to change the base, fundamental element that puts Battletech above other game systems in balance and fairness, it stole from everyone's work and took from my experience as well.  I am sure there are worlds, environments, and missions I have never experienced because I can't stomach such a consistently bad gameplay experience (IMO). 

I am sorry, you are looking at MechCommander, etc with rosy glasses.  MC2 had the worst AI I have ever encountered and when I have gone back to replay it I constantly have to remind myself NOT to go with my usual cavalry tactics b/c it uses a exploit in the AI.  Changing the difficulty setting did not make the AI smarter, it just increased the probability of headshots- that is it.

Your first paragraph explains why you are never really going to get what you want- why what we got with MWO was long on promises that did not deliver.  I thought their original concept, replaying the invasion in real time with each side controlled by real people was a interesting work around to one of the biggest problems in game design- a competent AI for single player games.  Look at the state of the industry- most things are FPS or online play with very few offering any sort of decent single player narrative, partly because fighting a thinking human is still harder than most of the AIs.  Games are also expected to be open to allowing folks to tweak, make their own versions/mods, and all sorts of aftermarket options which reduce what the revenue could be . . . so why spend money developing a awesome new MC3 when you can pour that money into Call of Duty Retread #58?

Its why I have not bought a great many games in recent years . . . I think the last 3 games I have bought were . . . HBS, Solaris, and before those?  Sins of a Solar Empire . . . I do not exactly count the Total War title (Rome II?) I got as a gift b/c its in the same vein . . . and yes, it was a 'retread' with the latest tech.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

IntoTheRain

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Be Joe Cool.
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #12 on: 16 July 2020, 00:05:57 »
Bought it during the steam sale.  As someone who only has a handful of games playing the tabletop, its about what I expected.  I finished off the campaign last night, and started Career mode today.

The Good:
* Company management.  This has been by far my favorite thing about the game.  The early game can be super tricky, and you really have to pick and choose your battles both in and out of missions.  A lucky crit can be a big deal if you aren't save scumming, and even a few random events can have major ramifications early.  Of course, as you get C-Bills this starts to fall off and you have a lot more freedom, especially once you start upgrading the ship for shorter turnaround between missions.

* The re-balanced weapons seem to be a step in the right direction, finally making the limited, exploding stuff better than energy boats.  Its not perfect, but I think I like it better than the TT values.  I heard a lot of mods move it closer to the TT, which I'm actually not looking forward to.

* The initiative system is a lot cleaner than the tabletop version.  Turn based or no, this gives lighter chassis some clear advantages over their heavier brethren.  On the other hand it *screws* the low end of the weight spectrum for each class, and there is basically no reason to take something like a Dragon if you have access to 55 tonners.



The Bad:
* The actual missions are a letdown.  When I bought the game, I was expecting a combat sim with a tiny bit of management as an afterthought.  As it turns out, the game plays like a management sim with the combat as an afterthought.  There are only a few maps, they all load in the same spot, and the mission variety is sorely lacking.  This has been by far my biggest complaint with the game. 

* Missions take a long time.  I've played very few turn based PC games in my time, but btech hasn't made much of a case for me to dig deeper.  In the spirit of the tabletop, pilots are crosseyed and have a seizure any time they pull the trigger.  Weapons go flying everywhere and draw battles out for incredible periods of time.  This makes you incredibly reliant on Called Shots to quickly finish enemies, as even highly skilled pilots can't seem to put their shots on target.  Of course, once you get a high morale score and called shot masteries on your pilots, it becomes shooting fish in a barrel.

* Difficulty scaling is wonky.  The game throws you to the wolves at the start of the game, with little information regarding things like mech facing, movement modifiers, called shots, etc.  I spent hours learning when things were good and why.  Even spent a fair amount of time online learning some of the mechanics.  But once you make it through the early game, the game becomes increasingly easy, and eventually you are rolling in money, mechs, and pilots.  The game needs something to make both the management and in missions harder when you reach the late game.

* The mechlab is too restrictive.  Yeah, yeah its 3025.  There is still a brutal lack of options for mechs besides weapons.  No engine modding means a lot of chassis just cannot be salvaged as useful units.  The fixed modules on certain chassis are even worse, making them vastly superior to other mechs on similar weights. 

I'm curious to see what the mods add to the game.  If they can fix some of the problems then I'll think I got my money's worth.

I would definitely prefer a real time version of the game.  Been playing Company of Heroes 2 lately and thought it might be a decent place to adapt Btech onto.

MarauderD

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3926
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #13 on: 16 July 2020, 11:08:44 »
Bought it during the steam sale.  As someone who only has a handful of games playing the tabletop, its about what I expected.  I finished off the campaign last night, and started Career mode today.

The Good:
* Company management.  This has been by far my favorite thing about the game.  The early game can be super tricky, and you really have to pick and choose your battles both in and out of missions.  A lucky crit can be a big deal if you aren't save scumming, and even a few random events can have major ramifications early.  Of course, as you get C-Bills this starts to fall off and you have a lot more freedom, especially once you start upgrading the ship for shorter turnaround between missions.

* The re-balanced weapons seem to be a step in the right direction, finally making the limited, exploding stuff better than energy boats.  Its not perfect, but I think I like it better than the TT values.  I heard a lot of mods move it closer to the TT, which I'm actually not looking forward to.

* The initiative system is a lot cleaner than the tabletop version.  Turn based or no, this gives lighter chassis some clear advantages over their heavier brethren.  On the other hand it *screws* the low end of the weight spectrum for each class, and there is basically no reason to take something like a Dragon if you have access to 55 tonners.



The Bad:
* The actual missions are a letdown.  When I bought the game, I was expecting a combat sim with a tiny bit of management as an afterthought.  As it turns out, the game plays like a management sim with the combat as an afterthought.  There are only a few maps, they all load in the same spot, and the mission variety is sorely lacking.  This has been by far my biggest complaint with the game. 

* Missions take a long time.  I've played very few turn based PC games in my time, but btech hasn't made much of a case for me to dig deeper.  In the spirit of the tabletop, pilots are crosseyed and have a seizure any time they pull the trigger.  Weapons go flying everywhere and draw battles out for incredible periods of time.  This makes you incredibly reliant on Called Shots to quickly finish enemies, as even highly skilled pilots can't seem to put their shots on target.  Of course, once you get a high morale score and called shot masteries on your pilots, it becomes shooting fish in a barrel.

* Difficulty scaling is wonky.  The game throws you to the wolves at the start of the game, with little information regarding things like mech facing, movement modifiers, called shots, etc.  I spent hours learning when things were good and why.  Even spent a fair amount of time online learning some of the mechanics.  But once you make it through the early game, the game becomes increasingly easy, and eventually you are rolling in money, mechs, and pilots.  The game needs something to make both the management and in missions harder when you reach the late game.

* The mechlab is too restrictive.  Yeah, yeah its 3025.  There is still a brutal lack of options for mechs besides weapons.  No engine modding means a lot of chassis just cannot be salvaged as useful units.  The fixed modules on certain chassis are even worse, making them vastly superior to other mechs on similar weights. 

I'm curious to see what the mods add to the game.  If they can fix some of the problems then I'll think I got my money's worth.

I would definitely prefer a real time version of the game.  Been playing Company of Heroes 2 lately and thought it might be a decent place to adapt Btech onto.

Question for you:  when you bought it on steam, did you get any of the DLC with it?  It wouldn't fix your valid complaints, but I'd say the game was about twice as enjoyable for me with all 3 of the DLC than without them.  The flashpoints and Mechs from the 3rd update are pretty fun and add a lot of depth and replayability in the career mode.

I believe the three DLC are Flashpoint, Urban Warfare, and Heavy Metal.  Just FYI.

Cheers,

mad

Seer

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • One must imagine Sisyphus happy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #14 on: 22 August 2020, 08:03:56 »
Whatever ends up happening, what I want to see is combined arms warfare. Infantry, aerospace, armor, etc. A campaign where you command at least a Company's worth of units over the long term, ideally a Battalion's worth. That way the player could feasibly take the field in their own 'Mech: at higher levels this doesn't happen. A Regiment or more could also turn it into Battletech: Hearts of Iron (no thanks). For something of this scale, a RTS system would make it too 'gamey'. A "WEGO" turn based system over the 'gentleman's warfare' "IGO-UGO" would be better from what I've seen of other wargames. That said, I understand there would be issues in implementing it, especially concerning melee and DFAs. But that hardly seems insurmountable. HBS actually investigated 'simultaneous' systems during the kickstarter back in 2016:
Quote
We have built and played the hell out of seven (7!) different approaches to turn order, from a completely linear XCOM-like system to a completely simultaneous action system with many variations in between...

Because so much happened so quickly, you often found yourself needing to dive into each 'Mech’s data after the action just to understand what happened in the previous round. As you can imagine, that wasn’t very fun. The other goal these prototypes failed at was actually the most important - they felt like you were commanding fighter planes, not BattleMechs. They didn’t feel like BattleTech.
I think the devs wanted the player to feel in control and give them every opportunity to completely understand what was happening, which is the opposite of what a commander experiences. Much is actually out of your control and down to the forces on the ground implementing your orders. I think HBS made the right choice for the scale of combat in their game, where you essentially micro-manage a lance of 'mechs, but for anything larger a 'simultaneous' system will be necessary, and that's what I want to see: a proper Battletech wargame on the computer.
« Last Edit: 25 August 2020, 13:24:08 by Seer »
"The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."


BattleTech Non-Fiction Publications list | Argo Running Costs | MGS REX | The "Sea Monster"

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #15 on: 28 August 2020, 06:06:00 »
I think the devs wanted the player to feel in control and give them every opportunity to completely understand what was happening, which is the opposite of what a commander experiences. Much is actually out of your control and down to the forces on the ground implementing your orders. I think HBS made the right choice for the scale of combat in their game, where you essentially micro-manage a lance of 'mechs, but for anything larger a 'simultaneous' system will be necessary, and that's what I want to see: a proper Battletech wargame on the computer.

What, exactly, do you mean by simultaneous? Are you talking like the Battletech board game? Or are you talking real time? They are very different things, and while I think a real time game is the best proven contender, it would not feel at all like board game Battletech. As much as I enjoyed MechCommander and MechCommander 2, it felt more like Company of Heroes than Battletech on PC.

Seer

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • One must imagine Sisyphus happy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #16 on: 30 August 2020, 02:52:56 »
Simultaneous gameplay differs from real time or sequential gameplay in that you have no foreknowledge of your opponents moves. Both you and your opponent plan your moves and then the moves play out simultaneously. In real time you can obviously change moves on the fly, while in sequential (e.g. TT) play your opponent moves and you can then plan a counter-move. Simultaneous means once your orders have been given you're rendered an observer until the turn has ended, and the same for your opponent. Orders take as long as they take under the battlefield conditions, so orders can persist from turn to turn unless you intervene during another orders phase. Best example I can give you of it in action is a game called Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm (pick it up on sale; it's great).

I think this would work well for BT because unlike in TT play where there's a degree of confusion and chaos from the very small increments of time involved (10 seconds iirc) here the opposite is the case: the confusion and chaos comes from large stretches of time where commanders cannot issue new orders. It takes time for orders to be effectively relayed between different command levels -- from your command staff down to your junior officers. This can be impacted by electronic warfare and other conditions, like whether the chain of command has been disrupted by battlefield deaths. It makes for a less predicable experience.
"The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."


BattleTech Non-Fiction Publications list | Argo Running Costs | MGS REX | The "Sea Monster"

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #17 on: 30 August 2020, 05:14:53 »
Simultaneous gameplay differs from real time or sequential gameplay in that you have no foreknowledge of your opponents moves. Both you and your opponent plan your moves and then the moves play out simultaneously. In real time you can obviously change moves on the fly, while in sequential (e.g. TT) play your opponent moves and you can then plan a counter-move. Simultaneous means once your orders have been given you're rendered an observer until the turn has ended, and the same for your opponent. Orders take as long as they take under the battlefield conditions, so orders can persist from turn to turn unless you intervene during another orders phase. Best example I can give you of it in action is a game called Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm (pick it up on sale; it's great).

I think this would work well for BT because unlike in TT play where there's a degree of confusion and chaos from the very small increments of time involved (10 seconds iirc) here the opposite is the case: the confusion and chaos comes from large stretches of time where commanders cannot issue new orders. It takes time for orders to be effectively relayed between different command levels -- from your command staff down to your junior officers. This can be impacted by electronic warfare and other conditions, like whether the chain of command has been disrupted by battlefield deaths. It makes for a less predicable experience.

Ahh now I see, so in essence an RTS is inherently a simultaneous experience, turn based need to work for it. I'm not the biggest fan of turn based games anymore, prefer real time now.

My personal favourite turn based game was Lords of the Realm 2, where each turn was simultaneous for players, you could march armies throughout the turn, including running away from much larger armies if you got them to move first. TBH it was the best bits of RTS and turn based put together, shame they faffed the third one.

Sir Chaos

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3086
  • Artillery Fanboy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #18 on: 30 August 2020, 08:30:22 »
Ahh now I see, so in essence an RTS is inherently a simultaneous experience, turn based need to work for it. I'm not the biggest fan of turn based games anymore, prefer real time now.

My personal favourite turn based game was Lords of the Realm 2, where each turn was simultaneous for players, you could march armies throughout the turn, including running away from much larger armies if you got them to move first. TBH it was the best bits of RTS and turn based put together, shame they faffed the third one.

Kind of. Imagine a real-time game where you cannot issue orders while the real-time part is running - but every 10 or 20 or whatever second, the game pauses and you can issue orders for the next 10-20 segment.

"Battlestar Galactica: Deadlock" works like this, for example.
"Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl."
-Frederick the Great

"Ultima Ratio Regis" ("The Last Resort of the King")
- Inscription on cannon barrel, 18th century

Elmoth

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3414
  • Periphery fanboy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #19 on: 30 August 2020, 09:17:10 »
A great example of this kind of thing was the old space hulk game, where you had ,(iirc) a minute where you could pause the game to issue orders. It was an actual minute, so each time you paused the game to issue orders the clock was ticking. It put A LOT of pressure on you

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4065
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #20 on: 30 August 2020, 09:27:49 »
I backed early, expecting a sexier MegaMek (with which I would have been quite happy).  That's not what we got.  I played it through the campaign, and even tried to install the first patch, but that exceeded my computer's limits (upon which I based the decision to back the KS).  I don't even remember the last time I played at this point...  :-\

I really feel you.

I backed early as well and was sorely disappointed.

Honestly; I felt like they sold out unnecessarily. I think less energy on graphics on more on story and raw capability; like having more than a lance or so would have made for a better game. as it was; meh; not worth my time to just race to the heavies and assaults in order to weather *waves* of enemies.
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

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #21 on: 31 August 2020, 05:40:12 »
I really feel you.

I backed early as well and was sorely disappointed.

Honestly; I felt like they sold out unnecessarily. I think less energy on graphics on more on story and raw capability; like having more than a lance or so would have made for a better game. as it was; meh; not worth my time to just race to the heavies and assaults in order to weather *waves* of enemies.

I can't agree, HBSBT is wildly popular compared to CGLBT, and it's been better received than most of the other BT games in the last couple of decades. MegaMek is for players who want CGLBT on their PC, and were a beautified version released it would have limited success noting the availability of MegaMek itself and the limited appeal of CGLBT.

While HBSBT had a storyline that could best be described as 3015 meets Hollywood, it remains a 3015 storyline that neatly suits an idealised version of the Battletech Universe, it's actually better than MC2's storyline, which was frankly terrible, MCG had the best storyline out of the tactical BT games, hands down.

So I don't agree that HBSBT sold out unnecessarily, I think they just weren't aiming for the audience you think they were.
« Last Edit: 31 August 2020, 06:12:50 by Nightlord01 »

MarauderD

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3926
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #22 on: 31 August 2020, 13:54:35 »
I can't agree, HBSBT is wildly popular compared to CGLBT, and it's been better received than most of the other BT games in the last couple of decades. MegaMek is for players who want CGLBT on their PC, and were a beautified version released it would have limited success noting the availability of MegaMek itself and the limited appeal of CGLBT.

While HBSBT had a storyline that could best be described as 3015 meets Hollywood, it remains a 3015 storyline that neatly suits an idealised version of the Battletech Universe, it's actually better than MC2's storyline, which was frankly terrible, MCG had the best storyline out of the tactical BT games, hands down.

So I don't agree that HBSBT sold out unnecessarily, I think they just weren't aiming for the audience you think they were.

Agree completely.  If you didn't enjoy HBS' BattleTech, I understand.  But it is an amazing game, which I thought was quite excellent.  The DLC rounded out the content, flashpoints, and Unseen mechs nicely.  Wiseman himself said he wanted to take the best part of BattleTech TT game and iterate on it, improving what could be improved in a turn based format.  I know the initiative system rubbed some folks wrong, but it was stated that HBS wasn't porting the boardgame over to be a beautiful MegaMek. 

It might not be for everyone, but as a backer for MWO, MW5, and HBS' BattleTech, the only one worth the money I spent is BattleTech.  Just my subjective opinion, I know.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28957
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #23 on: 02 September 2020, 11:41:38 »
MC2's storyline was good I thought, it just had some of the usual format problems (if the FS & LA had that much gear, why were they not roflstomping the Cappie guerillas?)

IMO, MC & MW3 gave a plausible answer to some of that- and MW3 started you off with a upper end medium rather than the 'normal' weak unit.  Funny enough, MC2 did as well- you had 2 Bushie and that new Razorback.

You CAN play through with limited heavies & assaults . . . and even limiting your pilot improvements.  It is one way to increase the difficulty level, lol.


Btw, I had been working on a MC MegaMek campaign . . . lots of custom maps and trying to figure out how to work the AI . . . and assigning better mech selections (MC scenario has a Jagermech as oppo?  Get a Rifleman IIC 2).
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19825
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #24 on: 02 September 2020, 12:06:19 »
the drop limits on tonnage in MC pretty much guaranteed you weren't coming in ultra heavy. pretty sure i was still running mistique's raven and falcon's hunch iic well into the last operation. i think the warhawk you hijack in that late mission was one of the few assaults i used. too many missions where speed and timing matters to rely on the big slow assaults or too much to defend like that protect the barns mission early on when you can drop ten units.

if it weren't for development limitations, i totally agree there should be far more second line clan stuff. my favorite piece of weirdness though was how many vehicles the jags used. though it's probably good you were facing rommels instead of athenas  ;D




You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28957
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #25 on: 02 September 2020, 12:13:37 »
Yeah, I will have to post my MC to MM/TT conversion list when I get home.  LOL, those Cs on the list will get a bit of a upgrade with the RecGuide retcon.

But yeah, I shifted the list to Drac salvage & Star League left overs while making the vehicles Clan police types- which makes them easier to kill.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

jasonf

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 410
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #26 on: 02 September 2020, 18:03:31 »
I've actually enjoyed HBS BT quite a bit, too. Heck, it's probably the main driver of getting me back into the sourcebooks and lore.

On the issues about missions and Mech size as you progress, I started playing around with some of the mods out there and found they did a decent job addressing them.

There's one called RougeTech that tries to bring as much CGLBT aspects into the game as possible. Lots of people seem to like it, though I found it a bit overkill for the PC version, especially when it came to the UI. There is another one called Commander's Edition that stays true to the HBS BT format but adds all the Mechs and planets.

I think both have added missions with max tonnages (at least in Career mode), which forces players to keep lighter Mech sizes in their stable. This helps quite a bit in making the missions more varied, especially later in the game.

 

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #27 on: 03 September 2020, 03:32:21 »
MC2's storyline was good I thought, it just had some of the usual format problems (if the FS & LA had that much gear, why were they not roflstomping the Cappie guerillas?)

IMO, MC & MW3 gave a plausible answer to some of that- and MW3 started you off with a upper end medium rather than the 'normal' weak unit.  Funny enough, MC2 did as well- you had 2 Bushie and that new Razorback.

You CAN play through with limited heavies & assaults . . . and even limiting your pilot improvements.  It is one way to increase the difficulty level, lol.


Btw, I had been working on a MC MegaMek campaign . . . lots of custom maps and trying to figure out how to work the AI . . . and assigning better mech selections (MC scenario has a Jagermech as oppo?  Get a Rifleman IIC 2).

MechCommander 2 storyline was your straight up Three Kings/Rambo storyline, in other words, straight out of Hollywood. So while HBSBT had a Hollywoodised Battletech story, MC2 had a Hollywood story with a veneer of Battletech. While it is a competent telling of the tale, it's not a Battletech story, which is why I consider it somewhat terrible.

Contrast that against MC and MW3, where the story was part of a greater Battletech storyline that was playing out at the time it was released. Both of those games were published by Microprose (IIRC) and it was clear they were made with the same vision. Net result we got a Battletech storyline, told in the Battletech fashion, putting us in the seat of the action as it happened in universe. Pretty awesome, with a creative game engine that effectively forced you to take lighter mechs and victory conditions that supported this. The restrictions don't make much sense from an out of character perspective, something the literature for the game makes fun of.

I'd love a remastered edition, but that's never going to happen. :-(

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28957
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #28 on: 03 September 2020, 09:17:26 »
MechCommander 2 storyline was your straight up Three Kings/Rambo storyline, in other words, straight out of Hollywood. So while HBSBT had a Hollywoodised Battletech story, MC2 had a Hollywood story with a veneer of Battletech. While it is a competent telling of the tale, it's not a Battletech story, which is why I consider it somewhat terrible.

 . . . MC2 story was Operation Guerrero?  It was a story about mercs working the sides in a conflict- yes it reinforced the Davion white-hat syndrome.  The whole thing was not too different than what we get for some scenarios and fiction.  The mechanics still had you taking lights b/c they were the sensor platforms, like MC.  Story was pretty simple- the FedCom garrison hires you off IIRC Outreach to come hunt bandits . . . and then you find out they are Liao backed insurgents who are linked to the former Liao nobles of the planet.  Then the commander of the FedCom unit declares for Katherine and uses you to try to keep the Victor loyalists in line- because your paid troops are more reliable than the two thirds who follow the CO for Katherine.  Then we get the obligatory double cross due to shifting alliances.  And because of the placement of the world used, the independence movement actually takes . . . heck, IIRC BT even changes the name of the planet for a little bit.

But MC2 duplicated the limited drop weight/slots of MC- the Lyran single mech drop to raid the support areas for the Cho nobles, the Davion single mech drop for the prison break, and a few more.  The situation gets broken when you had the field recovery VTOL . . . start the battle with a pair of mechs, end it with a full company using your MFBs to repair everything as much as possible to cut between mission costs.  But that is part of the horrid mechanics Micro$haft put in the game- I think I already ranted further up topic about the AI.

The story is typical BT.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

Seer

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • One must imagine Sisyphus happy
Re: When will we finally get another solid Battletech video game?
« Reply #29 on: 03 September 2020, 09:26:44 »
There's one called RougeTech that tries to bring as much CGLBT aspects into the game as possible. Lots of people seem to like it, though I found it a bit overkill for the PC version, especially when it came to the UI. There is another one called Commander's Edition that stays true to the HBS BT format but adds all the Mechs and planets.
I'm currently playing with Battletech Revised myself. You don't have the whole galaxy but you still have the same faction conflict system and a much better 'mechlab, amongst a lot of other improvements. Rougetech is a classic example of feature bloat but it's also kinda amazing they were able to do so much to the game and have it still work.

Of the most popular overhaul mods they kinda go like this in terms of features and complexity:
XAI BattleTech 3025 (the only one where you can do the campaign like normal)
Battletech Revised (campaign as flashpoints only, start with Argo)
BattleTech Extended 3025 Commander's Edition
BattleTech Advanced 3062
RougeTech
"The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."


BattleTech Non-Fiction Publications list | Argo Running Costs | MGS REX | The "Sea Monster"

 

Register