Right. Today I'm going to be exploring something from more of a
fluff/system perspective, instead of just purely addressing gameplay.

There's a few (heh, few) threads that have been circling around lately,
decrying charge. On them, several people have inadvertently activated
another of my (many) pet peeves...but feeling that discretion is the
better part of valor I have chosen in each case not to address them at
the time.

However, I think it's been a bit too long since I've "ranted," so I'm
going to do so now. In the course of things, I'm going to blatantly
steal ideas from people without giving them credit. Hah! Plagiarism is
the sincerest form of flattery, and don't you forget it.

So...as the subject line says, Mechwarrior: Dark Ages (MW:DA) is not
Battletech (BT). Moreover, it's also not realistic. It's not meant to
be realistic. Heck, Battletech also wasn't meant to be realistic
(anyone who tells you otherwise is a bit too deeply buried in the plethora of
fluff that accompanied the game). But that's not what I came here to
rant about, so let's get the main subject out of the way, shall we?

Let's see if I can explain my point of view (here's the blatant
stealing). Let's say I'm fond of music, right? So I listen to, hmm,
Evanescence. Good band, nice rhythm, pleasant melody, good instrumentation. I
like it. Sure, I could do without the lyrics, but that's neither here
nor there (nothing's perfect). My grandfather hears this music, and in
the Old-as-time-itself tradition of grandfathers and grandchildren
everywhere, proceeds to inform me that what I'm listening too isn't music.
Sure, he admits, it sounds a bit like music...but only a bit. Really,
it's just caterwauling, says grandpappy. If I want some *real* music,
I should be listening to Lawrence Welk. That's music. Heck, how can I
even call Evanescence a band when they don't even have a brass section,
and only uses phony synthesized strings? Kids these days, eh? Gramps
will be happy to tell you, this modern music is an insult to the
composers of yesteryear; they'd be turning in their graves if they could hear
what kids where listening to these days...

Now I'm not saying Lawrence Welk sucks. I'm also not saying fans of
Lawrence Welk can't also like Evanescence (or visa versa). Obviously,
they can...many people have a fondness for *music* that transcends style
(to a certain extent, at least). I'm just saying...I like my
Evanescence, and I really wish Lawrence Welk fans would stop trying to talk the
band into changing their style into some kind of horrid
Evanescence/Lawrence Welk crossover. Seriously, man, *no one* wants that. Can you
imagine the horror?

So, to bring this metaphor to a close, every time I see someone write
"well, in Battletech charging did more damage if you were a larger mech,
based on your tonnage, so..." or "in battletech charging wasn't a
viable strategy, so it shouldn't be one in MW:DA" it makes my teeth hurt.
Kinda like Evanescence-Welk.

Please let my game be it's own game. Seriously. I know you (long term
Battletech players) feel like somehow it belongs to you because it
happens in the same Universe as the games you've been playing for years,
but it doesn't. Let it go: don't chain it to the mistakes of the past.
MW:DA took everything wrong with BT and made it fun and playable for me
again. Every time I see some post looking to overcomplicate some
system, or make something more "real" by basing an argument on "how it works
in CBT" my blood pressure rises a little more. Please, think of my
health here. ;)

I'm okay with arguments like "charging makes too many mechs
unplayable." I'm just not okay with "it doesn't work like that in CBT, so we
should change it." Ugh.

Now we'll talk about the fluff.

I know much of the problem devotees of BT have come into some sort of
idea that the new Dark Ages fluff and/or systems are somehow betraying
"their" universe. Yes, it's the same universe. 60-80 years later, in
the same universe, to be exact. One of the things that makes me chuckle
most is when someone says "the Clan/Kuritans/Comstar/etc never would do
that! They couldn't possibly change that much in such a short time!"
Makes me think people skipped their history classes. Tell that to,
say, Germany. Or England (good lord, 80 years ago the sun never set on
the British Empire...now, well, things are a little different). Look at
the differences in even American society between, say, the 1930s and
today. Pretty wacky, when you actually look at it.

Times of great upheaval are always when the greatest changes happen.
And, to be perfectly frank, the return of the Clans (followed by the
Word of Blake Jyhad) was the greatest upheaval in the Battletech Universe
since the first Succession War. Especially for the Clans (so isolated,
and suddenly so exposed to such a new variety of cultures). I'd be
more offended if they *hadn't* changed.

Finally I'll briefly address the idea of "realism." Putting aside for
the moment the silliness of talking about realism in the face of
'mechs, I'm going to just say one thing. MW:DA is a miniatures game: an
abstraction of combat. It's not really combat. It's not a simulation of
combat. It was never meant to be. It was meant to be an abstraction:
fun, easy, and quick to play...yet still with a good amount of variety
(a thing that was sorely missing in BT, IMO). It was meant to be a
combined arms game, where the role of the mech was reduced, and the
important of combined arms was enhanced. To try to justify an argument that
ends up unbalancing the game with a short word about "realism" is
patently ridiculous.

And that's enough for today. This wasn't a very helpful or insightful
post (sorry about that), but it's not like my helpful and/or insightful
posts make much of a difference anyway, so...*shrug*

-Nick

Most complaints about charging aren't that it doesn't work like it did in BT, but that it's a broken element of the game. It's the single most damaging and longest-ranged attack in the game.

did your grandfather used to play CBT? (just kidding)

Feel free to rant whenever you want. I like it!

Box says "Official product of the Battletech Universe." That is, undeniably, an attempt to get people to buy the product based on their association and familiar experiences with that gaming product. The statement basically implies you are buying Battletech. This is not the same thing as, say, when a movie is marketed by saying "Based upon the events..." wherein you know that some artistic license has been taken, and you aren't expecting the story to be accurately portrayed in a 100 minute movie. It is more like buying a sporty car, and a different company is selling aftermarket accessories they promise will work with what you've got. So if I buy a new Mustang, and then buy aftermarket rims that should fit, and then they don't fit....

Please remember, anyways, that most of the so-called complaingin is by people who love the BT universe, and are supporting it's continuity with their money. It's hardly to believe that MWDA would have done so well so fast over the world without that existing fan abse driving it.

And my pet peeve is the word 'fluff'. I believe 'lore' or 'canon' are the appropriate words.

This game isn't supposed to be CBT, no one (at least that I know of) thinks it needs to be exactly like it. People just think it should be more like it than it because its basiclly the same univerese.

Most of them, yes. But there's a solid minority (check the threads on charge) that aren't. Those are the ones that annoy me.

For my opinion on charge, well...

I think nerfing it is a horrible idea...unless you leave it the same against vehicles. I think it's an important part of mech/vehicle balance. I could care less how charge works against other mechs. No matter how you change mech/mech charges, it'll just change what the new uber units are. If you change mech/vehicle charges, though, you've messed up hardcore.

-Nick

I think that needs some explanation. How is changing the mech/mech dynamic any different? Mechs are a bigger threat than vehicles. When I see someone plop down a tank, I'm far less worried than if they plop down Arnis.

If you're referring to the "Tank Drop" cheese, that needs to be fixed as well.

Sure. People have already said it better than I (NickName, for one), but I'll be glad to explain.

I believe the mechanics gives mechs a weapon that vehicles don't have, and thus qualifies as an advantage.

I believe that it is an important balancing of low-cost, low-defense artillery, to force your opponent to constantly worry about his cheap unit being hit and destroyed from 20+ inches away.

I believe that it is an important balance of repair vehicles, mobile HQs, and other support units...to force your opponent to protect them from a great distance.

I believe that it is an important balance of VTOLs, to make them second guess *ever* going Nape of Earth, even if they really could use the repair (or want to duck down behind cover).

I think, for all those people asking to give mechs move-'n-shoot...that they already *have* it. And I think it's a large part of their relative point cost (when compared to vehicles and infantry).

Enough?

As far as mech on mech goes, as I said...whatever. Balance that however makes you happy. Just don't change the way it works versus vehicles.

-Nick

Gameplay wise, yes, MW is not CBT, and I don't expect it to be.
It uses a totally different game system (one that still needs work I might add). However, it isn't using basically the same universe, it is the same freaking universe. There is no getting around that. Many of the characters in the game are hereditary descendants of CBT characters. Heck, Victor Steiner-Davion IS STILL ALIVE.

People and groups do change over time, even in CBT. ComStar went from a theocracy to a bureacracy. Some of the Clans changed their political position during the Invasion. Change is the way of life.

What bugs me is people who think that just because MW:DA is a different game, we should forget all of that which has gone before it.

To put it simply, IMHO, MW:DA is just CBT using a new rules system that is still being refined. Thats the only difference.

Same universe. Same units.

-Precentor Wolf

When does anyone ever go NOE with a VTOL, anyways? (sarcasm) You're own argument works against you, in that people are so scared of charge they won't use an available game mechanic that was actually intended by the designers to be a credible tactic.

Good point about Victor being still alive and in the new books. Heck, if that isn't saying THIS IS THE BATTLETECH UNIVERSE then I don't know what is.

I didn't even know what clix games were- never heard of'em, I was just a CBT fan and saw on the web somewhere last year that this new MWDA was coming out by one of the former FASA guys (Weisman), and that's how I got in.

Good post.

One statement though, CBT was never meant to be quick and easy. It was for the hard core player. TO say it was sorely missing is contradiction to your own words on your rant about the topic you ranted about.

CBT was a wonderful idea and I am glad to see it making a strong revival. The histories were there to add more depth to the game which FASA did a wonderful job. More then most other SCI-FI games focused on combat.

I think WizKids, overall has done a great job of bringing the history and feel of the CBT to the click world and by speeding up the game it opened it up to more people to step into the CBT WORLD that MWDA is founded on. If I remeber the founder of WizKids was one of the founders of BattleTech.

ANyway, I think the biggest complaint from the CBT people is that the foundation of MWDA is very shacky. MWDA foundation is CBT and the hole theory of Delvin Stone getting the crusader clans to lay down arms and bring piece and work with the IS.. totally off. Jade Falcon and Hell's Horses for example.. would NEVER do this.

Last thing before you state MWDA isn't CBT.. its a two sided sword. NO its not.. game play for sure.. HOWEVER, there is a large YES IT IS, the MWDA world IS FOUNDED on CBT history. the founders of MWDA wanted to keep the link... however, they didn't do their research like they should.

At the current average BATTLE POINT limits and the cost Mechs are placed... its not following the title of the game MECHWARRIOR... aka.. there is mechs. Right now, to put mechs a high end or medium end mech in a 300 point game is suicide. A couple of people at the venue here have NON-Mech armies that are undefeated to this day by any mech force. WIth the new rules coming out and 450 point games become more a reality the MWDA will become worth of its title.

Well with me going totally off the subject, CHARGE is broken and needs to be fixed.. thats it.

And MWDA is not CBT.. But it IS. WHen issues arise they fall back on CBT to fix problems or open new ideas. The foundation is there. As soon as WizKids starts to break the link... MWDA is dead at that point. What has made MWDA so popular is the Foundation for CBT... Microsoft helped with MW series.

Not quite. New rules system, same universe, same units...80 years later. You think that's the same? 'cause I don't.

I love the history of the universe, I do. I played CBT back in the 80s. I learned all about it. I read the books.

But I like it, with regards to MW:DA, as a *history*. You dig?

@Warriorsage: I don't want to turn this thread into another "let's argue about charge" thread, so I'm not responding further here on that topic. Plenty of other threads to choose from, though.

-Nick

Mechs are supposed to rule over vehicles. Otherwise, why have mechs at all?

There will never be two different sets of charge rules for vehicles and mechs. That's ridiculous. Both will operate under the same conditions.

All of your examples are valid uses of a charge. That I'll give you. However, all of those situations would call for a ranged attack first (if you were in range). Why do a click of damage to yourself by charging, when it can be completely avoided?

Look at it this way...which is faster: a speeding mech or a slug from a gauss rifle? If you even need to think about that, you have a problem. Which will travel farther during a given (very short) time period? And what about acceleration? The bottom line is that charging covers far too much ground and makes ranged attacks almost useless.

in your last post, nick, you said that charge effectively gave mechs "move 'n shoot", well i beg to differ....is it too much to ask for a mech to move/run into another mech's range and take a shot without first being made vulnerable to the target mech's (or any nearby pieces) attacks? what happened to "no guts, no galaxy"? i mean, really: i mech can't run into the fireing range of three other's and take a single shot before getting cut down? can't the little guy get a chance to plink someone before getting hacked to pieces? just one freaking shot before turtlers who keep all their #### clustered together blow my lowly mech to bits?

Maybe my post was over simplifing things a bit. Let me restate it.

MW:DA is set in the CBT universe. I am not expecting the story to be the exact same as CBT. I also believe that MW:DA should not play like CBT. However, from what I interepreted from Phantom's post, people are saying that MW:DA is only based on the CBT universe when, from what I and many of my friends see, MW:DA is not just based in the CBT universe, it is whole-heartedly a part of the CBT universe. I do not have a problem if WK changes the power and mission of the various factions in from CBT into their MW versions. What I have a problem with is that WK says that MW:DA is set in the CBT universe and people still saying that since its not the same game(which I agree it is not), that its ok for MW:DA to contradict some of the hard facts of CBT.

-Precentor Wolf