MaiShirunaiispretty
03/31/09 06:58 PM
207.160.205.13
|
I disagree. Total Warfare is intended to be a tournament rules book only. LAM rules are not tournament rules. LAMs contradict Clan tournament fighting.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
03/31/09 07:01 PM
207.160.205.13
|
How does a Clan aeropilot and a Clan MechWarrior have equal tournament status? Aeropilot prefers space to make MechWarrior incapable of lots of movement therefore easy to hit and MechWarrior prefers ground to have aeropilot run out of fuel. LAMs are necessary to get rid of this unequalness.
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
03/31/09 07:03 PM
207.160.205.13
|
I see, sounds like you want to get rid of Clan tournaments; that won't ever happen.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
03/31/09 07:05 PM
207.160.205.13
|
Sure it will because as Clan players that are MechWarriors or aerowarriors realize that neither will have a victory, they'll come to a truce, request a new type of tournament rules, or quit altogether.
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
03/31/09 09:06 PM
207.160.205.13
|
It's unlikely that Clan tournaments will be done away with. There are many players that like Clan tournaments. You're better off getting updated LAM rules in Tactical Operations.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
03/31/09 09:10 PM
207.160.205.13
|
I don't recognize many players that like Clan tournaments. In fact, Randall said that advanced rulesbooks like Maximum Tech, Tactical Operations, and MechWarrior RPG books sold more than any other rulesbooks. Furthermore, there's captions and picture of large surface naval craft (aircraft carriers & battleships) described in Total Warfare, therefore there should at least be a picture and caption that talks about Land Air 'Mechs.
|
Zandel_Corrin
03/31/09 10:18 PM
123.2.140.247
|
LAMs have never been more then an oddity in battletech... plain and simple....
You may love them you may hate them but the fact of the matter is that as far as the current BTech game is concerned they are DEAD!
I personally do not mind them and love the idea but they just do NOT fit with BTech and so they have been let go.
Trying to keep them around is like that guy that got fired yesterday but shows up today at his desk to work denying that it ever happened and has to be dragged off by security....
The only reason Newtype has not been dragged off by security here is because the security (mods) have already left.
Galaxy Commander
Zandel Corrin
Night Dragon Clan
|
Cray
04/01/09 10:23 PM
97.97.243.184
|
Quote:
Sure it will because as Clan players that are MechWarriors or aerowarriors realize that neither will have a victory, they'll come to a truce, request a new type of tournament rules, or quit altogether.
OMG, HeroChip, you're arguing with yourself. We know MaiShirunaiispretty and NewType are both you.
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.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
04/02/09 12:13 AM
205.202.120.216
|
Wow. And it was getting pretty good for awhile, there.
|
Christopher_Perkins
04/02/09 02:47 PM
24.127.68.31
|
Quote:
LAMs have never been more then an oddity in battletech... plain and simple....
True enough, the way that they were brought in in AeroTech I without any real description of how the Air Mech Mode Works (i.e. for much of the time that the original rules were used, people {me included} actualy thought that it got extra armour for the wings in AirMech Mode when what the rules actually stated was that if the Front and Rear side torso armour lost a combined total of half the armour for both locations it was no longer flight-worthy in airmech mode, I.E. the wings crapped out at 50% of front and rear side torso armour, not 150%... the Later Change to 100% made it clear that even the PTB of the THB period were confused) makes it clear that LAMs were very much only an after thought...
Quote:
You may love them you may hate them but the fact of the matter is that as far as the current BTech game is concerned they are DEAD!
the Current BattleTech game is for all eras, including
BattleTech: Star League and
BattleTech: Succession Wars as well as
BattleTech: Clan War,
they are only dead for
BattleTech: Civil War, and for
BattleTech: Jihad as well as
BattleTech: Dark Age
Quote:
I personally do not mind them and love the idea but they just do NOT fit with BTech and so they have been let go.
They need to exist in the current rules for one simple, (two part) reason,
They ever existed, and AeroTech 2 Broke the previously published rules.
Quote:
Trying to keep them around is like that guy that got fired yesterday but shows up today at his desk to work denying that it ever happened and has to be dragged off by security....
LAMs are being revamped, and even if MacAttacks more ungainly ideas get used (using rear torso armour as the wings, OH RLY? so the only way to crash an AirMech LAM is to get back shots!!? um , no), it will either be brought back in InterStellar Operations Manual (new rumor from PTB, third hand) or Historicals: Liberation of Terra (Old Rumor from Herb, first hand)
Quote:
The only reason Newtype has not been dragged off by security here is because the security (mods) have already left.
Just because he is a bit nuts, don't be disgusted with all that he supports...
Even a stopped analog clock is right occasionally
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
04/03/09 11:44 AM
207.160.205.13
|
Quote:
I don't recognize many players that like Clan tournaments. In fact, Randall said that advanced rulesbooks like Maximum Tech, Tactical Operations, and MechWarrior RPG books sold more than any other rulesbooks.
I think you meant Tactical Handbook, Newtype. Tactical Operations hasn't been out long to sell copies of.
Quote:
Furthermore, there's captions and picture of large surface naval craft (aircraft carriers & battleships) described in Total Warfare, therefore there should at least be a picture and caption that talks about Land Air 'Mechs.
Which is why that updated LAM rules should be in Tactical Operations.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
04/03/09 12:00 PM
207.160.205.13
|
Quote:
The only reason Newtype has not been dragged off by security here is because the security (mods) have already left.
Yeah, left me to talk some sense into you all as to why improved LAM rules should, no I mean, must be in Total Warfare.
Quote:
OMG, HeroChip, you're arguing with yourself. We know MaiShirunaiispretty and NewType are both you.
No Cray, MaiShirunaiispretty and I each use a computer here at the library. Why would I even care to suggest improved LAM rules be in Tactical Operations (thus dividing my ambitions) when I want improved LAM rules to be in Total Warfare? And I'd still like an answer from you Cray, is CBT just a game or is the CBT Universe real?
Quote:
Which is why that updated LAM rules must be in Tactical Operations.
No, improved LAM rules must be in Total Warfare. I've listed several reasons why improved LAM rules must be in Total Warfare; why don't you all list several reasons why they shouldn't? Or maybe you'd like to concede that improved LAM rules belong in Total Warfare for the reasons I've stated above. Having improved LAM rules in Total Warfare won't hinder your games; you don't have to play against those that want to play with LAMs.
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
04/03/09 12:25 PM
207.160.205.13
|
Newtype, you're outnumbered here. Why are you so insistent that LAM rules be published in Total Warfare? Tactical Operations should be fine. By the way, you'll notice that Newtype's reply to this message should be just a few seconds; not time for either of us to login/logout. That should indicate to you he and I are different.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
04/03/09 12:25 PM
207.160.205.13
|
LAM rules must be in Total Warfare!!!!!!!!!!!! This way many more players (both beginning and experienced) will come back to Total Warfare. Here's an ultimatum: if you all don't want LAMs in Total Warfare, then just concede that you don't want these tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of talented players playing CBT games and purchasing CBT products.
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
04/03/09 12:29 PM
207.160.205.13
|
Newtype, listen to reason: an updated Tactical Operations book could contain rules for LAMs. This way, everybody can be happy. New players won't be confused by LAM transformation modes and those that like LAMs can play with them.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Newtype
04/03/09 12:35 PM
207.160.205.13
|
What I'm listening to is the voice in my head telling me that improved LAM rules must be in Total Warfare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The survival of the Inner Sphere Federation depends on it. I saw the space-time traveller and her ship in my mind's eye. I saw her ship in real life.
http://www.sarna.net/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/153051/an/0/page/0#153051
I didn't meet with presumably her but she wants me to have LAMs legal for tournament play soon. Here's another ultimatum: either admit that LAMs can be in Total Warfare games and admit that CBT is just "a game", or admit that CBT Universe is real in that I've remotely influenced it into existence.
|
Christopher_Perkins
04/03/09 01:37 PM
24.127.68.31
|
Quote:
Which is why that updated LAM rules should be in Tactical Operations.
settle for InterStellar Operations Manual...
Indications are that they and the "other eras of BattleTech" rules will be in InterStellar Operations
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Lafeel
04/03/09 02:06 PM
157.157.126.53
|
In your place I would, Newtype, as they could have just written them out of the game entirely.
|
Fang
04/03/09 02:13 PM
12.54.128.7
|
Not really. Could have multiple windows open. no need to log in or out, just switch windows.
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
04/04/09 12:29 PM
207.160.205.13
|
I think rules for LAMs could be in an updated Tactical Operations book. More players seem to like LAMs than tornadoes. I don't know of any House, Clan, or any other group for that matter that uses scalar weapons to make tornadoes to affect battles. I don't know of any players that have opted for tornado rules but there are websites that do indicate players are much more interested in LAMs.
Wow, those bracing maneuvers sure do come in handy when firing proximity fused precision cluster flak ammo at a Balancer LAM. Unfortunately they make my 'Mech an immobile target for that LAM. Oh well, at least I'm getting partial cover.
|
Lafeel
04/04/09 01:15 PM
157.157.126.53
|
Post links, Newtype, because no one is just taking you on your word alone any more.
|
Cray
04/04/09 03:08 PM
68.205.198.74
|
HeroChip, please stop this arguing with yourself stuff. When you and MaiShirunaiispretty have the same IP address, it's pretty damned obvious that you're the same person (even if your record of sock puppets on www.classicbattletech.com, www.heavymetalpro.com, and rec.games.mecha weren't open to public review).
Whenever you show up, Chip, and find a little bit of disagreement with your posts, you start creating new accounts to argue more than one side of the story. Its happened over and over, and by now the pattern is extremely obvious.
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.
|
MaiShirunaiispretty
04/07/09 01:00 PM
207.160.205.13
|
I suppose I should introduce myself. My name is Ryan Cole. I'm a friend of Newtype (HeroChip). I've purchased Rick Raisley's HM programs. Ask Rick Raisley if you don't believe me; I've contributed to his forums years ago and hopefully he still remembers me. I also left a review of Total Warfare on Barnes and Noble website. I took pity on Randall Bills and so I gave it a 3/5 rating.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
04/07/09 05:44 PM
71.215.57.61
|
Quote:
MaiShirunaiispretty said:
BAAAAWWWW
Another post I had to fix...SPELLCHECK MOTHERFUCKER, HAVE YOU HEARD OF IT?
|
SwordofLightwaiver
04/10/09 01:50 PM
72.133.227.6
|
I too would like to see LAMs in Total Warfare. But I know that won't be a reality because the scumbucket rule typists are so Clan biased. I'm in a way glad LAMs aren't in Total Warfare because given how that FASA/WizKids/FanPro mismanage so much of Classic BattleTech, i.e., Stackpole's money & keeping many books out of print, I won't be surprised when WizKids goes out of business. And good riddens. Once Microsoft agrees to sell such gaming rights to my game designing business I'll buy Classic BattleTech from WizKids. Then I'll have LAMs as the premier units to be played with. I've got over half a billion dollars I can spend and I KNOW how to manage and make better Classic BattleTech.
If 9/11 was part of God the system's plan then should the USA surrender to the terrorists or go to war against God? I say surrender.
|
GiovanniBlasini
04/10/09 02:57 PM
64.183.4.46
|
Quote:
I too would like to see LAMs in Total Warfare. But I know that won't be a reality because the scumbucket rule typists are so Clan biased.
Huh. Gonna disagree on that assertion.
Quote:
I'm in a way glad LAMs aren't in Total Warfare because given how that FASA/WizKids/FanPro mismanage so much of Classic BattleTech, i.e., Stackpole's money & keeping many books out of print, I won't be surprised when WizKids goes out of business. And good riddens. Once Microsoft agrees to sell such gaming rights to my game designing business I'll buy Classic BattleTech from WizKids.
What game designing business would that be?
Quote:
Then I'll have LAMs as the premier units to be played with. I've got over half a billion dollars I can spend and I KNOW how to manage and make better Classic BattleTech.
O RLY?
Member of the Pundit Caste
"Which side are we on? We're on the side of the demons, Chief. We're evil men in the gardens of paradise, sent by the forces of death to spread devastation and destruction wherever we go. I'm surprised you didn't know that." -- Col. Saul Tigh, BSG2003
|
SwordofLightwaiver
04/10/09 03:14 PM
72.133.227.6
|
Quote:
Huh. Gonna disagree on that assertion.
Which that I want LAMs in Total Warfare or that the scumbucket rule typists won't put LAMs in Total Warfare because they're Clan biased or both?
My game designing is that in which uses the Torque engine; not that crappy game desgning engine Microsoft used for MCG. I used to work for Jerry McManus designing Super Conflict: The MidEast for the SNES.
Yes, I really do. I use the HDR to win lotteries.
If 9/11 was part of God the system's plan then should the USA surrender to the terrorists or go to war against God? I say surrender.
Edited by SwordofLightwaiver (04/10/09 03:15 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
04/10/09 05:04 PM
24.5.141.133
|
So, newtype has a forth account.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
SwordofLightwaiver
04/10/09 05:10 PM
72.133.227.6
|
Hold it, asshole donkey. I'm not this Newtype person. Who are you supposed to be, Givonnai? Just because I like LAMs doesn't mean I'm Newtype. I'll point out that not all Classic BattleTech players are Clan players.
If 9/11 was part of God the system's plan then should the USA surrender to the terrorists or go to war against God? I say surrender.
Edited by SwordofLightwaiver (04/10/09 05:13 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
04/10/09 05:50 PM
24.5.141.133
|
Quote:
Hold it, asshole donkey. I'm not this Newtype person. Who are you supposed to be, Givonnai? Just because I like LAMs doesn't mean I'm Newtype. I'll point out that not all Classic BattleTech players are Clan players.
Yes, by default asses/donkeys do have ass holes.
Me thinking that your newtype has nothing to do with you liking LAMs or not being pro Clan. You are not the only one on list that are pro LAM and anti Clan. Me calling you newtype has everything to do with you claiming that you have a half billion dollars, and even more so that you got it by some way by cheating lottery's. That is exactly something that I would expect newtype to say.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|