Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
RPG Evolution: How a RPG Company Launched Virtual Reality Gaming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RangerWickett" data-source="post: 7926452" data-attributes="member: 63"><p><strong>Mechwarrior Online</strong> was a fun game that never really got its sharp edges polished properly. There's something satisfying about gameplay where you gradually grind down your opponent, and where you suffer damage that forces you to adjust your playstyle.</p><p></p><p>I mean, if we made games realistic, we'd each have fighter jets on opposite sides of the horizon, and we'd launch missiles and hope our chaff could distract them, because if they don't we'll be obliterated in one hit. That's not really a fun game.</p><p></p><p>Big giant robots that can take massive damage and keep working, though, are awesome.</p><p></p><p>Now, how could such technology actually get built? </p><p></p><p>You'd have to reach a point where defensive technology outpaces offensive technology. It's kinda weird, actually, how missiles work in Battletech. You fire a bunch of short-range things that each weigh literally 20 pounds according to canon. They fly maybe a thousand feet and then peter out. And instead of firing the biggest gun possible, they usually have 'autocannons' that spew a bunch of tiny shots. (Later on, though, they did get rail guns.) They also have fusion engines, and shuttles that can fly into and out of atmosphere repeatedly. </p><p></p><p><strong>Retooling the Tech of Battletech</strong></p><p>I think if I were going to retool Battletech for modern sensibilities, I'd keep the vibe of "far future, wracked by war to the point that we lost the ability to create our best technology." They've got fusion engines mass produced by factories, so power production is easy. Let's say that fusion engines can project force fields, but force fields interact badly with the ground, so tanks can't use them - they keep losing traction.</p><p></p><p>Likewise, forcefields muck with air flow, so helicopters and jets can't use them, though space planes can. </p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, they have reached the technological limit of how much damage you can cause with an explosion or kinetic projectiles. Lasers are better at pouring damage onto a surface, since a force field can't stop photons. Other weapons are designed to pepper the target with multiple strikes in short succession, which can overload the force fields.</p><p></p><p>That's the flavor.</p><p></p><p>The mechanics of the game would remain much the same, though we might retool the math to match the flavor (and maybe for some better game balance).</p><p></p><p>Instead of 'armor' and 'internal structure,' you have 'shield' and 'structure.' The rationale is that shield emitters are placed along the outside of the mech, with this being abstracted into different 'body parts.' As they block damage, they eventually get overloaded and stop working, but if you are out of a battle for a few hours, it's fairly easy to reset them to replenish their defensive abilities.</p><p></p><p>Some weapons would be better against shields, like autocannons and small missile barrages; maybe even give machine guns their due. Then other weapons like gauss rifles and thunderbolt launchers are mostly ineffective if shields are up, but can really devastate the structure if the shields are down. Lasers <em>might</em> bypass shields entirely, but do relatively low damage. PPCs might be <em>amazing</em> against shields, but fairly useless against structure.</p><p></p><p>You might also rework the combat system a bit, so that there's an ability to aim at components, instead of having all hits be random. This lets you use a combo of weapons to soften up an opponent, then get a big shot in. It also makes lance tactics more valuable: a light mech could rush in and try to lower someone's shields with missiles or machine guns, while the heavy hangs back and slams powerful projectiles into the now vulnerable targets.</p><p></p><p>naughty word, I want to make this game now.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RangerWickett, post: 7926452, member: 63"] [b]Mechwarrior Online[/b] was a fun game that never really got its sharp edges polished properly. There's something satisfying about gameplay where you gradually grind down your opponent, and where you suffer damage that forces you to adjust your playstyle. I mean, if we made games realistic, we'd each have fighter jets on opposite sides of the horizon, and we'd launch missiles and hope our chaff could distract them, because if they don't we'll be obliterated in one hit. That's not really a fun game. Big giant robots that can take massive damage and keep working, though, are awesome. Now, how could such technology actually get built? You'd have to reach a point where defensive technology outpaces offensive technology. It's kinda weird, actually, how missiles work in Battletech. You fire a bunch of short-range things that each weigh literally 20 pounds according to canon. They fly maybe a thousand feet and then peter out. And instead of firing the biggest gun possible, they usually have 'autocannons' that spew a bunch of tiny shots. (Later on, though, they did get rail guns.) They also have fusion engines, and shuttles that can fly into and out of atmosphere repeatedly. [b]Retooling the Tech of Battletech[/b] I think if I were going to retool Battletech for modern sensibilities, I'd keep the vibe of "far future, wracked by war to the point that we lost the ability to create our best technology." They've got fusion engines mass produced by factories, so power production is easy. Let's say that fusion engines can project force fields, but force fields interact badly with the ground, so tanks can't use them - they keep losing traction. Likewise, forcefields muck with air flow, so helicopters and jets can't use them, though space planes can. Meanwhile, they have reached the technological limit of how much damage you can cause with an explosion or kinetic projectiles. Lasers are better at pouring damage onto a surface, since a force field can't stop photons. Other weapons are designed to pepper the target with multiple strikes in short succession, which can overload the force fields. That's the flavor. The mechanics of the game would remain much the same, though we might retool the math to match the flavor (and maybe for some better game balance). Instead of 'armor' and 'internal structure,' you have 'shield' and 'structure.' The rationale is that shield emitters are placed along the outside of the mech, with this being abstracted into different 'body parts.' As they block damage, they eventually get overloaded and stop working, but if you are out of a battle for a few hours, it's fairly easy to reset them to replenish their defensive abilities. Some weapons would be better against shields, like autocannons and small missile barrages; maybe even give machine guns their due. Then other weapons like gauss rifles and thunderbolt launchers are mostly ineffective if shields are up, but can really devastate the structure if the shields are down. Lasers [i]might[/i] bypass shields entirely, but do relatively low damage. PPCs might be [i]amazing[/i] against shields, but fairly useless against structure. You might also rework the combat system a bit, so that there's an ability to aim at components, instead of having all hits be random. This lets you use a combo of weapons to soften up an opponent, then get a big shot in. It also makes lance tactics more valuable: a light mech could rush in and try to lower someone's shields with missiles or machine guns, while the heavy hangs back and slams powerful projectiles into the now vulnerable targets. naughty word, I want to make this game now. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
RPG Evolution: How a RPG Company Launched Virtual Reality Gaming
Top