MechWarrior: Destiny

[Tolrak]

I'm curious to see how Destiny is going to lend itself to theatre of mind mecha combat. I can see it being a breeze with a storyteller taking on the role of opposition and theatre of the mind the hell out of it, but when it comes down to doing player vs player action without an storyteller (or GM) the determining of the terrain the mecha are fighting in seems to be problematic without maps or tokens, which is something I want to avoid.

If anyone have any ideas please share. I will be homebrewing some ideas to alleviate the issue, but I can't play test the ideas until November. So I'm on the lookout for possible solutions to this issue.

Thanks in advance for any positive contribution to my post.

[Fear Factory]

There are rules to use Destiny in Total Warfare and Alpha Strike play.

[Orin J.]

I'm curious to see how Destiny is going to lend itself to theatre of mind mecha combat. I can see it being a breeze with a storyteller taking on the role of opposition and theatre of the mind the hell out of it, but when it comes down to doing player vs player action without an storyteller (or GM) the determining of the terrain the mecha are fighting in seems to be problematic without maps or tokens, which is something I want to avoid.

If anyone have any ideas please share. I will be homebrewing some ideas to alleviate the issue, but I can't play test the ideas until November. So I'm on the lookout for possible solutions to this issue.

Thanks in advance for any positive contribution to my post.

There are rules to use Destiny in Total Warfare and Alpha Strike play.

This is your best answer. maps have been the way to avoid this problem for as long as resolving these things has been a problem for a good reason, it shuts the argument down before it starts. you'll never get a bunch of people to imagine the same thing unless you start dictating the space everything is at anyways, so a map is a much more flexible way of doing that.

[Fear Factory]

The other thing is, just looking at the rules for combat in Destiny, all you have to do is use the stats provided without any conversion. You're just using a hex map for a visual instead of going abstract. IMO, I would rather use a hex map, because we got those awesome neoprene maps for a reason.

[mbear]

The other thing is, just looking at the rules for combat in Destiny, all you have to do is use the stats provided without any conversion. You're just using a hex map for a visual instead of going abstract. IMO, I would rather use a hex map, because we got those awesome neoprene maps for a reason.

OTOH something like Alpha Strike would be a good fit for dsteelegm's situation where the roleplayers aren't necessarily familiar with wargaming.

[Fear Factory]

OTOH something like Alpha Strike would be a good fit for dsteelegm's situation where the roleplayers aren't necessarily familiar with wargaming.

It would be.

Destiny in hexmap play, unless I missed something, needs some work. The only problem I see is having 1 or 2 movement on a hex map. Considering how combat works doubling movement would probably be a good workaround. Or using Walking MP combined with the Destiny conversion stat for modifiers (example: Assassin having a MP of 7J, but the Destiny TMM would be 4J). That way you can just stick with the stats in the book, and combat really would not be that much different. Doubling range brackets would probably be a good idea too.

I would like to post more of the rules here to explain how it would work, but I don't know if it would be allowed.

[Giorgio76]

Feedback #1 (500 character limit)
.
(A) Focus on AGOAC 3025 era; drop the clan info into an expansion, add more missions, GM advice, and BTU lore. (B) MWD reads as a one-shot and con experience; it lacks the depths of prior editions for extended campaign play. (C) Gear and weapons section is too limited. (D) Healing in combat unclear, with regards to using a skill, using a med kit, normal healing and/or a combination of all the above. (E) Don’t like the “cue system”, I prefer more options for GM/referee style play.

[Giorgio76]

Feedback #2 (500 character limit)
.
(A) MWD Pre-gen PCs aimed for combat, one-shots and conventions, not campaign play.
(B) ATOW+Comp: Aerospace Pilot, Battle Armor Specialist, Battlefield Tech, Canine Soldier, Chopper Pilot, Communications Specialist, Elemental, Faceman, Grizzled Veteran, Hot Shot, Information Broker, Martial Artist, Mechwarrior, Renegade Warrior, Scout, Sniper, Tanker
(C) MWD: Aerospace Fighter (x2), Communications Specialist (x1), Covert Ops (x2), Infantry (x2), Insurgent (x1), Mechwarrior (x11), Tanker (x2),Technician (x1)

[nckestrel]

You did send that feedback to the form in the Kickstarter update?  This isn’t where to submit the feedback.

[Giorgio76]

You did send that feedback to the form in the Kickstarter update?  This isn’t where to submit the feedback.

Yes, also here, on the BT CGL KS page, and the BT CI KS Update #40 comments. I like reading other people's survey feedback and responces to my own (I always learn new things).
.
As far as I understand from this forums rules its allowable as I am not sharing any files or beta doc info?

[nckestrel]

Yeah, I just wanted to make sure it got where it needed to go.

[Cubby]

Yes, also here, on the BT CGL KS page, and the BT CI KS Update #40 comments. I like reading other people's survey feedback and responces to my own (I always learn new things).

Fine, but one of those four places is the only one I'm looking at as I'm starting to weed through and sort feedback.

[Ursus Maior]

Yes, also here, on the BT CGL KS page, and the BT CI KS Update #40 comments. I like reading other people's survey feedback and responces to my own (I always learn new things).

We answered each others posts on the KS Update and I think I might try at least a one shot with MW:D, it looks pretty good so far. I think my players will like the proprietary 'Mech combat system. And my back-up plan is Mongoose Traveller mixed in with some MW2 rules. But that solution sorely lacks a 'Mech combat system other than switching to Total War.

[Giorgio76]

Fine, but one of those four places is the only one I'm looking at as I'm starting to weed through and sort feedback.

1- Can you share which one is your primary focus? (I'm guessing the actual survey link.)

2- Any particular type of feedback results standing out?

3- What kind of feedback (of the various types you can select in the survey link) is the most useful?

[Cubby]

1 - The link. That's where we've asked people to share edits with the development team. I have no plans to try to comb hundreds if not eventually thousands of comments across multiple forums for specific edits.

2 - Too complex an answer to give here, it's all over the map. But there are some valid points being made, some worthwhile stuff.

3 - We're open to any feedback as long as it's specific and actionable. "I hate this system, this is garbage, I'll never play it" is not useful. And yes, we have gotten several comments along almost those exact lines.

[Giorgio76]

Thanks for the quick and informative responce @Cubby. :)

[Daryk]

Cubby, I appreciate the clarity here, but as this is the OFFICIAL FORUM of CGL, I'd expect some "official" review of posts here.  If this forum isn't intended to be "official" anymore, I understand but would really like some explanation.

[Scotty]

Cubby, I appreciate the clarity here, but as this is the OFFICIAL FORUM of CGL, I'd expect some "official" review of posts here.  If this forum isn't intended to be "official" anymore, I understand but would really like some explanation.

This is the county courthouse.  Please direct all vehicle inquiries to the DMV.  Both are still official buildings; you're in the wrong place to be heard on a specific issue for which instructions have been issued to follow.

[Daryk]

I have provided feedback via the form, but seriously... if this is an OFFICIAL forum, it should be heard.

[DarkSpade]

And it may or may not be heard, but they did ask every one to put their feedback in a specific place so I'm assuming their attention is centered there first.

[Daryk]

I agree with it being first, but not "only"...

[nckestrel]

Most writers want to spend their time writing, not combing through social media all day long.  (Exceptions do occur).
They've got a process for collecting feedback.  If you think that's too much trouble, there's hundreds and thousands of you, and a mere handful of writers/developers.  Making the hundreds do a couple minutes extra work saves the writers hundreds of hours of work that they can spend getting their actual job done. 

[Daryk]

Which then begs the question as to why they maintain these forums are "official"...

[nckestrel]

Errata, Rules Questions, Announcements, the pretty logo?

[Daryk]

Which all reinforce my claim that "official" means "official"... these forums shouldn't be ignored.

[Syzyx]

Let me also add that while these forums are official, they are also public and won't let the writers easily ask for clarification discretely nor easily. This is not a public beta and using a public forum for such purposes would weaken if not obviate the kickstarter exclusiveness of the beta.

[Paul]

I have provided feedback via the form, but seriously... if this is an OFFICIAL forum, it should be heard.

No. The method by which the data has to be submitted in order for it to be parsed and used has been identified. The fact that this is an official forum is irrelevant. The amount of labor needed to collect *and process* every possible post is prohibitive.
Thats like saying you submitted playtest data because you chatted with a Demo agent that ‘one time’ at that ‘one place’. Just not a reasonable stance to take, especially when youre collecting info from possibly 11,000 people. You need a system, and you need 1 system.

[Asgo]

given they provided a specific and structured feedback form, I'm not really sure what "the forums being official" has to do with collecting feedback.
Oh sure they might use some of what they read on some random thread on the forum, but if you want your voice be heard there is a defined channel. :)

PS: once they ask for the canon character infos, I would bet they also only accept info provided through a defined channel not stuff thrown at them on the forum. ;)

[Daryk]

You don't need to process "every post" for the "forum" to be heard.  There are a few issues here that have been debated at length and in detail by multiple users, with participation from apparent powers that be.  Again, I've submitted several issues by the requested form.  I'm just saying that establishing the form shouldn't give TPTB a free pass from reading their official forum.

[Asgo]

... 
 I'm just saying that establishing the form shouldn't give TPTB a free pass from reading their official forum.

actually, it does, at least in this specific context.
it doesn't say they aren't allowed to use extra input, but if someone institutes a specific feedback channel (email, web-form, etc) for a specific purpose you can bet that that this will be the main input source for that purpose.