I played/collected MK 1.0. I play competitively but do not collect MK 2.0 (won the Faction War for EF!!).

I've collected MW but due to the possible 2.0-ization, I've reduced my collection to my favorite playable pieces from each faction.
My input for MW 2.0 would be:

Domains: I like them for MK 2.0, but don't want them for MW. I like the campaign scenarios dictating the battlefield conditions rather than the opposing army 'bringing the weather'.

Relics: In MK play there is really no need to 'equip' the figure with the styrene sword (or shield, etc.). Just bringing the card and placing it where your opponent can view it is sufficient. . That said, for MW, special equipment upgrades would be interesting but would undoubtedly lead to nasty combinations (such as direct fire-untouchable super-armor or armor piercing retrofits for artillery). I vote no on these also.

Constructed Terrain: Have a bunch of MK 2.0 but have NEVER used it, because the normal tourney-approved terrain templates are more useful for me. Perhaps an anti-artillery infantry bunker or similar fortification to reduce tank basing would be good and help to eliminate two common complaints of current play.

Ability Nexus: On the fence. As long as the new figures that receive these abilities are properly costed I see fewer difficulties arising with this.

Objectives: I prefer that the campaign scenarios, written with interesting twists dictate this. VC3 addresses this to a degree. The objectives in MK 2.0 make the game (at the end) into a musical chairs run and I greatly prefer the scoring of MW over MK 2.0.

Sub Faction abilities: Since the intro of the Liao faction abilities I've wanted at least ONE faction specific ability retrofitted onto each of the existing factions. They would not have to be as Awe inspiring as the Liao abilities. Examples would be:
Spirit Cats: 'Ghosting'- Spirit Cats vehicle units may infiltrate to 2x their printed infiltrate speed.
Steel Wolves: 'Pack hunt': Movement formations of 3-5 Steel Wolf infantry and/or vehicle units may add one to their base rate of speed.
Highlander: 'Resolute': Any Highlander infantry or vehicle not in base contact with a friendly unit may add one to its attack roll. ('There can be only one...')

Relics would be good to customize the omnimechs in the game. Also have special pilot cards that can go along with non unique mechs to give them plus abilities on certain stats.
Constructed Terrain for official games would be very nice, looking at pieces of felt and card stock just doesn't do the same as some 3d modeled terrain has.
Subfaction abilities or regimental abilities would be very nice, like in a standard 450 game if all 450 points of an army or battle force is regimental pure within a faction then that user gains one extra order per turn or get's command through out the game.

Domains: I voted yes on this. This would be a great addition to the game. And there are TONS of possible variations this could have on play.

Relics: I voted no on this. I DO like the idea ... but given WKs past performance in playtesting & catching broken units/mechanics I suspect one or more relics would get produced that totally break the game once they're combined with certain units. So unless they can improve their playtesting process ... I'd say hold off on this idea for the moment.

Constructed terrain: I voted yes on this but I'm not sure how well this would do. Mechs are 2 elevations in height. You'd need a pretty big piece of terrain to act as a piece of blocking. And anything smaller than that mechs would likely ignore. You could use prepared bunkers that vehicles can get behind to act as a prepared defense but considering how much everything moves (and HAS to move thanks to arty) I don't see how much constructed terrain would be useful. Maybe pillboxes for infantry to act as an arty shield. Now THAT might be nice.

Ability Nexus: I voted yes on this. I don't see why anything that had camo would suddenly lose it, for instance. This would be something that should be on a nexus.

Objectives. I voted yes on this. But I think this needs to be conditional. I would say maybe having something like this replace VC3. VC1 and 2 still work as they do now ... but use the objectives from MK as VC3. Whoever has more objectives gets VC3 at the end of the game. I'm not sure if this would work any better or worse than the current VC3 determination ... would have to be playtested.

Subfaction abilities. I voted no on this. A lot of players have trouble remembering the faction abilities for Liao (myself included). Adding more stuff like this would really be a headache especially if all of the factions started getting them. If anything needs to be done regarding factions I would think playing FACTION PURE be REQUIRED in tournys (with the allowance of Mercs as well). MW games are VERY small scale ... we're talking lance level engagements and smaller for the most part. You simply are NOT going to see a force composed of 2 or more factions (aside from a mix of merc with the primary force) in such a small army. Every faction has a strength and a weakness. By allowing to use anything you want in army composition you can effectively ignore those weaknesses. It doesn't take a genius then to make a killer army and the game sorta loses some of its sense of of identity (IMHO) as a result. But if you are forced to stick to only your faction, now you are forced to deal with those weaknesses as best you can. Things get a lot more challenging at that point.

Domains (Styrene cards) - Thumbs up. This gives a whole different spin on army creation.

Relics (Styrene cards) - Thumbs up. I've written a few threads regarding this and I'm a big fan. It should only be a Mech only ability (Omnis).

Constructed Terrain (Styrene Cards) - Thumbs down. The scale of the pieces in the two games are different and wouldn't really add much unless it was given a reason to be on the board.

Ability Nexus - Thumbs sideways. Nice to have but would this require a 2.0 reboot?
Objectives - Thumbs down. I like the VC the way they are, however, I'd change it to Thumbs up if they were combined with the Domains. Make it a roll at the beginning, Player One plays an objective card with a mission to accomplish for the game. Player Two plays a domain card to set the board conditions.
Subfaction Abilities -Thumbs up. One subfaction ability would be nice. It could even be given once a splinter is absorbed. BR would gain a subfaction ability once it became part of Liao.

of all I think Domain/Condition cards and Lance abilities would really add to the fluff and game experiences.

I love all the "no, becuase it would make all my current figs useless" comments. Everybody seems to complain that a 2.0 reboot would make all current figs obsolete. It all depends on the severity of the reboot, as well as what the newer pieces look like.

Also you have to take something else into consideration. You claim that all your original pieces will be rendered useless, but what if 2.0 in offered up in conjuction with set rotation. We know retirement of previous sets is coming soon. If set rotaion and 2.0 were introduced in tandem, then you'd have a whole lot less figures to complain are useless, becuase many figs would only be playable in an unrestricted format.

Now as for the survey questions:

I'm not keen on the idea of adding objective tokens to the game. The idea itself is an ok idea, but we already have an objective based scenario. It's just that it's more abstract than holding points on a field. Our victory conditions work perfectly well in my mind. Of course that's just my opinion.

On domains - I love the idea but I can see some severe abuses if certain types were made. Certain speed mode types could potentially be eliminated before you even fire a shot if you allowed the domains to make the entire board a certain type of terrain. Imagine a force constiting of large ammounts of hover units all of a sudden wiped out becuase the whole board is now hindering terrain, or wheeled units being decimated becauase the whole board was turned into water. I do however love teh idea of setting up a rainstorm to play in, or other weather conditions that could affect game play.

Relics/equiptment could be fun and I could defiantely see them being used in a omnimech capacity.

Two valid reasons to complain, introduced at the same time, will not result in less complaining.

Mage Knight is struggling (and that's being generous) because the way 2.0 was introduced, it was just too obvious that WizKids wanted to make all your older figures worthless (or at least a lot less interesting) to play, so you would buy new ones. In my opinion they took their last golden opportunity to make that game more fun and balanced, and squandered it through this forced obsolescence.

Right now about 5% of MW figures are competitive. If the game gets a 2.0 treatment and the number decreases to 2% for prior sets, the game will die. If the game gets a 2.0 treatment and the number increases to 20% for prior sets, the game could thrive. It's a simple matter of recognizing customer loyalty.

If all my figures become worthless, so I am basically forced to "start over" my game collection, why shouldn't I look at other games and consider "starting over" with another game entirely? I have lost any incentive to be a loyal customer.

Just a few thoughts.

I voted against Domain cards. I think these are a neat idea, but way too easily abused. If they were something like Mission cards, though, that could be really cool. Something like this:

You must eliminate all opposing infantry units by the end of the time limit. If you fail, you must subtract 50 points from VC1; if you succeed, add 75 points to VC1 score. Captured infantry do not count towards this limit. If your opponent has no infantry units, ignore this card. All standard VC rules are in effect.

These would be especially cool if your opponent was not required to see the card. The card could be revealed to the BM before set-up, and then placed face down on the table - but only if the missions are not overly powerful.

I voted yes on constructed terrain and relics only. I like the idea of adding a pilot card from the fiction to any Mech unit, or even to uniques only. It could just be placed face up on the table, next to the Mission card (if you have one).

I Voted For:

Domains, Terrain - I like the idea of these and they could be workable.

Relics - I like the idea of relics but I'm against the idea of it being unique only and the idea of having a physical slot requirement on the miniature. The idea is that it should be that any unit can take advantage of both tactics and equipment upgrades. If anything, given the large amount of unique units in Mechwarrior, cards should not apply to them at all but rather to non-unique units. In fact the idea of the card can be applied to a special pilot card (or unit leader in the case of infantry) that effectively turns a non into a unique. In any case special attention should be paid to regimental and factional purity (or near purity) requirements and that the cards are minor tweaks not game breakers.

Objectives -
I like the MK objectives but on the other hand MW has the 3 victory conditions. Perhaps objective tokens can be used to work with victory condition 2 and 3?

One nice thing about the previous 4 tweaks is that if they prove to be unbalancing (ala Swordsworn Arrow IV) they can be cheaply updated via internet distribution.

I did not vote for:
Ability Nexus -
I don't like the idea of this since it would probably require an overhaul of the game. Part of my dislike of the idea is the retirement rule. Both together would destroy old pieces which should not have been gotten rid of in the first place since Mechwarrior is a full-fledged wargame where diversity of pieces is very important.

Faction ability -
This would require an overhaul of the point cost system again and is therefore not that good of an idea.

To be honest if people really wanted Ability Nexus and Faction ability they can both be simulated by Relic cards with out upsetting any existing game balance.

Please note I'm not asking this as a "what would you like to see in a Mechwarrior 2.0" question. Assume they add one or maybe two of these in an expansion. For examples, domains would be easy. Just put the styrene cards in each booster of the next expansion as well as the rules sheet for using them.

Given the nature of the game, it's virtually mandatory for the slot to be present. Otherwise it would be far too difficult to determine which "relic" went with which unit. I suppose it would be possible for something else that attaches to a miniature, but the slot would be most likely.

Admittedly, it wouldn't have to be Uniques only. Indeed, if it were pilots, I think a case could be made for anything but Uniques.

To Dblizzard
Regarding the need for slots to represent which relic went with which mech. I always felt sticking these cutouts on a figure was unattractive in MK. In mechwarrior I would think it being even more unattractive. Besides collectors hate messing up their stuff by punching things out :)

I suggest the following solution where you have a "control panel" or in MW's case a cockpit. Which was basically a piece of paper with printed sections for you to place personnel, equipment, special orders etc. You can even add some elements of surprise by having things placed face down. I mean not everything shows up on a "sensor scan". There's a lot of room for gameplay elements to be added this way and adds a greater sense of immersion into the game.

Voted for some, not for others. By the sound of it, lots of these things could be horribly horribly abused. Got a card that gives +2 attack to a mech? Nifty, people arent going to put it on HL Ullers, HL Legos, and other 8 attack mechs. Theyre going to put it on Arnis Drummond, Danni Haag, etc.

It all depends on how well executed the ideas are. So the question is, how confident do we feel about Wizkids' ability not to botch things?

DBlizzard -
Requiring a physical slot would reduce backwards compatibility which is one of the reasons I'm against it.

Furthermore, a "Relic" does not necessarily have to apply to a single unit. A given relic could apply to an entire force/faction/regiment depending on what the relic is. For example:

"Superiour Tactics Card

The force possessing this card receives one additional action this turn. After this action is used the card may not be used for the remainder of the game."

And so forth. The Relic card concept is conceivably endless in application.

Warflail -

I would cheerfully play a Lego with a +2 attack card. That would be fantastic. The only problem with the Lego is the weak attack. Unlike the Uller which is a dismal unit in almost every respect.

Yeah, I'd give the HL Lego a long second look with +2 attack. But if you were a competitive player who was more concerned with winning easily would you slap a +2 attack on a HL Lego or a BR Lego, Arnis, or whatever?

I think you get the idea anyway. What happens when someone playing WarPog plays the "expert recon" card (or whatever) that doesnt let his opponent infiltrate at all? They key to any relics, SE, whatever, is how abusive it will be on the worst case unit.

That said, I'd much rather see "pilot" cards that are only usable on nonunique mechs. Could do it lots of ways, even possibly making them faction specific. Example...

Lt. John Wayne
### points.
Highlander Pilot (may only deploy on a HL nonunique mech)
Lt Wayne has grit. Twice per battle he may reduce damage just suffered from a single attack by 2.

... or whatever. Again, really easy to make something horribly abusable without even doing it intentionally.

I would like to see the domain type cards and the constructed terrain items. Also the "relic" idea as maybe a special pilot modifier for non uniques, not just uniques. I'd like somehting that encourages people to play more non unique Mechs in battles instead of just uniques and LEs. Other than the trusty LI Targe, I rarely use non unique Mechs but that is usually because they have a severe shortcoming like only an 8 attack or no AP or less than 14" range, the list goes on and on. I think that "relics" could be used as special pilot training cards or Mech enhancement cards for non uniques and not just added SE for uniques which usually have a very good set of numbers and SEs. Also, make it so it doesn't require a slot ont he base but can be used with any unit. The card just plays to the table and you tell you opponent which unit it is affecting at the start of the battle.

I really don't think a MW 2.0 with the larger window bases is a good idea. If they wanted to do that, they should have done it up front at the beginning. Even if set retirment (another BAD idea BTW) comes through and wipes out units eventually, it is still a bad idea to substantially change the bases. Maybe a new color could be assigned to a combination of JJ and Evade, like purple or something instead of ruining the bases and the entire game by alienating lots of cash-strapped players.

Not sure on Objective tokens. Don't like the idea that I lose just because I don't grab some silly token on the field.

Not sure on subfactions and abilities and such, since we are kinda playing with subfactions as it is right now. HL, SC, DF, SS, BR, etc. are all subfactions of the Republic as it splinters into warfare. Mercs are Mercs, and the only true "powers" we have are House Liao, Clan Jade Falcon, and the Republic of the Sphere. Should House Davion be introduced in a future expansion, it is a really easy trick to put on the rules sheet that all SS units are compatable with House Davion units and they may freely mix and cooperate in formations. Nice and easy and one sentence.

From where I see it, a MW 2.0 would severely kill the game in this area, just like MK is nothing but a memory too. My Steam Golems that I love so much sit on the computer desk right now and make me yearn for the day (very soon) that my new Warmachine stuff arrives. Other than that, MK stuff doesn't do much for me since no one else in this area plays MK :(

Just my opinion,

Chris