HOTSPOTS 3070

BattleTech : General Previous Index Next Threaded
Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Karagin
06/25/06 10:33 AM
24.243.176.24

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Okay having gotten this book as birthday present, I finially got the chance to look it over.

The news style reporting is getting old. How about TPTB go back to the older style reporting that gives things in third person and gives us hard data and factiods instead of "what ifs" and "rumors".

The art work is getting better, though the picture on the page between 101 and 102 is a very near copy of Ralph MacGuires Battlestar Galatica painting showing the Cylon attack on Caparia. In fact it's to close in my opinion.

The TRO section in the back was nice. But the Nuke rules well those could have been left out, just like they could have been left out of the game as well. Story line items if they really need to be there, but not for the gamers to be using...really nice munchkin toys TPTB have given power gamers. Oh well.

Over all the book was okay. But it could have been better and again it doesn't, just as the last book about the Jihad didn't, answer or explain anything about the how, why and the money trial etc...so how about we get that info and step away from a book that reads like the nightly news?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Toontje
06/25/06 11:30 AM
84.24.165.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There is still one or 2 in the works if I'm not mistaken..

WoB is losing steam, but maybe they are just a few years from archieving their goal (creation of the Rots).

Which struck me a few months back, the ending of the jihad leaves the Wobs with a total victory (recreation of the TH), why is it depicted as a loss? The guy that ends up saving the sphere is imo just another fanatic wobbie.. undercover.


The new layout is great for RPG style play; the more hooks with minimal explanation, the better for teh GM.
Rather to blow up, then.
Karagin
06/25/06 01:59 PM
24.243.176.24

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It may be better for the GM, but the style doesn't give the average player anything to go on. There is nothing there that can be used as fact...it's all rumor or hearsay.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
CrayModerator
06/25/06 02:52 PM
68.200.109.191

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:

The news style reporting is getting old. How about TPTB go back to the older style reporting that gives things in third person and gives us hard data and factiods instead of "what ifs" and "rumors".




Newp. So long as there are players who can't get their heads out of "armchair general mode" about the Jihad, this sort of in-character reporting will be used to get them into a first-person perspective on the Jihad and maybe - just maybe - help them to see all the factors they ignore from their OOC perspective.

Look at it this way: If you want information on the Jihad events, you get it the way every PC and NPC does, in-character, as it happens. Just like Dubya and the CIA have to handle RL events, right?

Besides, this Hotspots DID give you a solidified, "these are the confirmed 3067-3068 events" summary in the beginning. Realistic, neh? You have to wait until after the fact to (more or less) figure everything out. That'll probably happen with the next Hotspots, too, so you'll have nicely summarized, 3rd person version of 3070 events.

Quote:

The TRO section in the back was nice. But the Nuke rules well those could have been left out, just like they could have been left out of the game as well.




The players demanded nuke rules after the last Hotspots, so the writers listened and gave them nuke rules. If you're worried about them upsetting your game's balance, just remember: you have to agree to let them onto the table. Nukes're not a problem until that happens.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Karagin
06/25/06 02:58 PM
24.243.176.24

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If I want real life first person events, I will do what I have been doing for the last 3 years, spending time in Iraq. I don't need first person view points in BT.

The sourcebooks have been 3 person point of view with first person bits added in from time to time, and those worked well enough, so why change?

And if the storyline can't handle folks armchair generaling it, then it has way to many problems and should have been better planned from the start. And seeing how a lot of folks have expressed their dislike of this new format it should be clear that it's not going over well. But then again why listen to those who spend the time to try and point out things that could be done better, when it's easier to listen to folks who do nothing but praise things.

The nukes will show up, because you will have folks who don't want to listen to players cry about not getting to use them etc...thus the rules should have never be published. They should have stayed part of the relam of the GM and the writters, where they weren't abused until this current storyline...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Toontje
06/26/06 04:38 AM
84.24.165.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Karagin, without these rules that are rather ok, players would use the old BS rules for nukes:

Only Alamo out there; any Alamo hit in space = instant kill. (instead of this being reserved for the Santa Anna (?).)
On BT maps, 25 hex radious (iirc) is completely destroyed (no terrain remaining), and damage beond that.

With secondary effects on tactical scale nukes, they are more or less decently put in stats.
Rather to blow up, then.
CrayModerator
06/26/06 05:43 AM
147.160.136.10

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:

Only Alamo out there; any Alamo hit in space = instant kill. (instead of this being reserved for the Santa Anna (?).)




The Alamo's performance was reverse-engineered into these nuke rules. You can get instant kills from most nukes if they get a good hit, just like the Alamo only hit - i.e., only insta-killed - if it rolled a 10 or better. Below that, it was reckoned the Alamo didn't get a good hit and thus only did minor damage (since nukes are just radiation flashbulbs without atmosphere to transmit a blast).

About the only ship that can passively survive a (small) penetrating nuke hit is the Leviathan 2. Pretty much every other ship is fragged.

The Santa Anna is big enough that it can kill with non-penetrating hits.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
JackGarrity
09/18/06 11:41 PM
71.207.230.120

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Im just reminded that the Ares Convention was created Just for the purpose of saving lives, now they wanna say feg it Fry basthads.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
CrayModerator
09/21/06 12:51 PM
68.200.109.191

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:

Im just reminded that the Ares Convention was created Just for the purpose of saving lives, now they wanna say feg it Fry basthads.




The Ares Conventions were abandoned in 2575, when the Star League conquered the Periphery states in the Reunification War with extreme brutality. Since then, no war has obeyed the Ares Conventions to any extent, certainly not the Succession Wars or Clan invasion.

So, fry away.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Pages: 1

Extra information
0 registered and 2 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, mattbuck, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 2231


Contact Admins Sarna.net