Power Gaming Designs in the Mechwarrior Universe

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
Akirapryde2006
03/25/16 08:34 PM
108.9.214.19

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:
And since everyone chose to ignore the point I brought up a few comments back, let's pick the some of the designs from here mech wise to start with, picking what each of us feels is a power gamer mech and then see what folks say.



Karagin, I didn't ignore your suggestion.

I just don't feel comfortable pointing fingers the design of someone else.

But I know this suggestion means a lot to you, and I know the importance of making a point.

To help you without compromising my own feelings on picking on another person's design allow me to do this.

Here are my picks.

My Aegis II Class Cruiser (you will have to scroll to the last post to see the current version)

My own Thomas Rein Class Destroyer (Again scroll to the last post for the current version)

Don't worry about being critical, both designs are currently going through revision so I can bring them more in line with current rule sets. Karagin (or anyone else), be as critical as you want. I put myself on the chopping block so that Karagin can make his point knowing how some feel about how I handle crew quarters.

All I ask, is that everyone takes a role in this conversation.

Akira
Retry
03/25/16 09:08 PM
68.103.19.152

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Retry the Hellstar is one mech, and I agree it does meet the level of power gaming that we are talking about, if someone says hey let's not use that mech and here is the reason why, then the other player either agree or they don't and the group of players figure it out.



You can do the same thing with a home-brew. Problem solved.

Quote:
One mech though, and yet how many on here alone are over the top on everything? How many times do we see some post a design that is clearly a min/max machine that is built for one reason to win?



Not that many, actually. The ones that are simply take most of the attention. Even ATN doesn't build everything as a Death Star, e.g. the Patriot mech and the Boomstick hovercraft.

Quote:
Even the vaunted Gausszilla mech is slow and can be beat, seen that happen and it fell to a Warhammer. I have a copy of one of the mechs that I am speaking of, I will post it and you can tell me if you would allow it or not in your game or with your group.



Sure. Why wouldn't we? It's basically a modified Rifleman IIC.

Quote:
Yes sure if folks are playing a campaign or official scenario then yes limits can be imposed, but not everyone is going to have the time to set up a scenario and power gamers normally will not play in those settings since they know their wonder mechs will not be there. The majority of games are lance on lance or a couple of mechs vs another couple of mechs. There is a vast difference between a Hunchback fighting a Stinger and you keep trying to justifty power gaming by saying the same can be done with book mechs and that is not true, the book mechs are set in stone, yes you can use the variants but again those are known things. A player made mech has no such limit, you can build what ever you want as long as you don't break the rules, but again the rules have loop holes. An example or i.e. the pulse/targ combo.



If you're doing a quick match that's lance v lance or mech v mech you can still apply limits if your group will agree. If they don't agree you'll either have to join them or find another group.

It shouldn't matter whether or not you get destroyed by a canon mech created a decade ago or a near identical home-brew developed today.

Quote:
How out of control? Let's see since they won't play in a scenario since that limits them, then their normal MO is to have their home design with max armor, max heat sinks so they can alpha strike every turn, then they have to have the best pilot going for them no more the a 2 gunnery and 2 pilot and if they can get away with it then their pilots would be in elite warriors with modifers to the to hit roll resulting in all you need to roll is a two or less and even then they haven't broken the rules since the game allows this. Then the mech would be at top of the speed scale for the weight class. Next to no ammo weapons, and then this same mech would have it's clones that are part of the lance if they is the force they are field.

Meanwhile you have the other players running with average to decent mechs that had some thought put into them, that are built to work together as part of a lance etc...



More information is necessary. What tool is being used to balance, if any? (E.G. BV, Tonnage, C-Bills) Are the players aware of the parameters beforehand like the pilot limit or the technology level? Was the map size or type specified before the match began? Did they have an opportunity before the match to make or pick whatever they wanted to use?

If they very well knew the technology limit and still chose to field low tech, low efficiency mechs, then they played the pre-game poorly and suffered the consequences during the actual match.

In a no-holds-barred match, creating vehicle designs and selecting them is part of the fun. There are plenty of options available if you don't want customs, or at least the best-of-the-best ones, and failure to excercise them does not constitute some sort of power-gaming cataclysm.
Karagin
03/25/16 09:24 PM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So what you are saying Retry is that you favor and would allow power gaming and their style of play with in your group and would use the same levels of play that they use?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/25/16 09:39 PM
68.103.19.152

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

So what you are saying Retry is that you favor and would allow power gaming and their style of play with in your group and would use the same levels of play that they use?



If we're doing a match without tech restrictions, then it means without tech restrictions. Every player competes with each other not just tactically but design-wise as well.

If we want, we do scenarios restricted to IS tech, or scenarios restricted to canon vehicles, or scenarios restricted to a basic tech level (No XLE, no fancy ER or pulse lasers, etc.). It really just depends on what we feel like doing.


Edited by Retry (03/25/16 09:39 PM)
ghostrider
03/25/16 09:56 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
How bad can power gaming get?

In battle tech terms, using a warship to destroy one infantry person on a planet.

The latest posts has me realizing something about the designs as well.
Does a power gaming have anything on the mech that might kill the pilot besides a fusion explosion?
Do they retreat from a battle to save the unit?
It seems the game pushes towards power gaming in some instances.

And for karagin, the original awesome was a power mech when it came out with the exception of speed. I think that is part of why the lighter engines came out.
Not the idea of a power mech might also come from massed weapons of the same type. Yet the game promotes that style of thinking, as bracket firing seems a waste. Use lrms past 7 hexes, and lasers under, but most would fire both when ever they have the chance.
One on one seems to promote the power gaming like others have mentioned. As part of a team or scenario, it cuts back on what can be done.

The ac 20 and now the gauss rifle seems to set up power mechs, All or nothing style of play. For the lighter mechs, the ac 20 is almost an instant kill weapon. Gauss rifle isn't as bad, but has the range to cause the same effect with 2 hits. The erppc can be added and being an energy weapon, it will be fired more often then the ammo carriers.

So from what it looks like, power gaming seems to stem from a lack of anything other then arena style play. Kill or be killed.
Karagin
03/25/16 10:32 PM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Ghostrider I think you summed it up, the kill or be killed arena style play, that is NOT Battletech, tactical thinking and use of your lance as team is Battletech, hence why they came out with Solaris 7 game and rule set.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Akirapryde2006
03/25/16 10:36 PM
172.56.27.53

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

So from what it looks like, power gaming seems to stem from a lack of anything other then arena style play. Kill or be killed.



I would have to agree.

The single issue is in Arena (event style) gaming not from a role playing point of view.

Karagin, Retry is right. In Arena (event style) gaming, the rules are created ahead of time. Such as no holds barred means just that. Sure it's a crapy way to play, the whole win at all costs mentality. But these players tend to earn a reputation for themselves as such.

I understand what you are saying and you have every right to speak your peace. But once you said it, drop it. These players will not change the way they play off of what you say. Choose your battles wisely. Because you can have better influence over players willing to listen. Earning a reputation for yourself as being a jerk or a rule thumper (not saying you are, just saying) only takes away from the knowledge and experience you can offer someone who is willing to listen.

Retry, you have to understand that Karagin is passionate about the game he loves. Are you less? Of course you are not. You both have the best interest of the game in mind. While you only differ in gaming styles.

What ever bitterness might between you two in the pass, is really the past. And I could care less about this history. What I care about is the future of the game that we all love and enjoy.
Karagin
03/25/16 10:40 PM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Fair enough Akira
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/25/16 10:41 PM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
And for the record Korean cell phones and the internet are not a good combo...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Akalabeth
03/25/16 11:47 PM
108.180.183.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

Ghostrider I think you summed it up, the kill or be killed arena style play, that is NOT Battletech, tactical thinking and use of your lance as team is Battletech, hence why they came out with Solaris 7 game and rule set.



So a clan Trial of Position is not Battletech?
A clan Trial of Bloodright is not Battletech?

Sorry to break it to you. But it IS.
Further from an objective point of view, the level of detail in the battletech game system makes 1-on-1 duels interesting, making it well suited for 1-on-1 arena style combat.
Karagin
03/26/16 12:26 AM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The two things you talk about are single combat similar to Arena style fighting so Akalabeth I hate to break it to you but THEY are the same as playing Solaris 7 style games.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Akirapryde2006
03/26/16 12:32 AM
216.53.168.60

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Akalabeth writes:

Quote:
Karagin writes:

Ghostrider I think you summed it up, the kill or be killed arena style play, that is NOT Battletech, tactical thinking and use of your lance as team is Battletech, hence why they came out with Solaris 7 game and rule set.



So a clan Trial of Position is not Battletech?
A clan Trial of Bloodright is not Battletech?

Sorry to break it to you. But it IS.
Further from an objective point of view, the level of detail in the battletech game system makes 1-on-1 duels interesting, making it well suited for 1-on-1 arena style combat.



You are taking what he is saying out of context.

There is more to the game than the mech or other weapon system. There is a robust story behind the battles (regardless of where it takes place).

Take Phelan Kelly (Ward) and his story. In your own statement he too took part in both trials. But these battles did not solely define him as a leader/pilot.

This is what Karagin is talking about. When you have a design that is over the top and you bend the rules to the point of breaking, you are robbing the story from the pilot and forcing the story to be about this one battle. And that is not what Battletech is about.

Even some of the greatest single battles, like the Battle of Tukayyid, there was much more to what happened. There was a series of battles that created the over all campaign of Tukayyid not to mention the story that actur made this battle possible.

Akira
ghostrider
03/26/16 01:16 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Clan trials focus on the better warrior, not the better machine. Hell, sometimes there is no machines in the fight.
But then that is story line, not actual game play.
You would not advance in a clan if you mech is the only reason you are successful. If I know right, the trial of position is in a clan accepted unit, not one of your choosing. Even configuring omnis is limited. But then that also depends on those playing.
You are there to defeat the units, not necessarily kill the opponents.

Akal, you seem to focus on dueling more then the rest of the game. That is fine. Try fighting mirror matches as that should be how the story proceeds. Sooner or later someone else in the same mech will rise up to challenge you. Even in the fields sooner or later others will use the same unit. As it is suggested, the most efficient machine will prevail and be produced.


The last novels I read were in the dark ages, and the idea of honorable battles was still part of the clan thoughts, though not as well practiced at that point. You do not take a direwolf in battle with even a fire moth in a trial of position.
Now the trial of bloodright is a blood bath, yet there are limits to it as well.
And to restate it, not all of them are augmented. There are times when an elemental trooper will win the chose of combat and choose hand to hand.
If you actually play this way, you can see the unit of choice means nothing. Face an aerofighter with your mech.
The point with the clans is you are limited on what you can bring and do. If you insist on a machine that is so overpowering, they may revoke your right to even be there.

But I do understand there are times when one on one is what it comes down to. If you need the overpowered units to win, then the idea of tactics is tossed out the window.

Thought about this after the post, but the clans would NEVER use tsm. Physical combat is something the are repulsed by, so that limits them a little further.


Edited by ghostrider (03/26/16 01:19 AM)
Akirapryde2006
03/26/16 01:50 AM
172.56.5.12

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Karagin can correct me if I am wrong. But that seems like his point.

Ubber mechs, fighters ect, ext.. take away from the game by denying the effort of the pilot.

Take my character, he didn't start out strong but in the end he was a remarkable leader and strategist. His skills were raised by hard work and his mech was a warhammer IIC (Captured from Tukayyid). Yes, a stock mechanism from the book.

I worked really hard to build him up to where he was at the time of his death.

So you don't play the story line version of the game. That a fine, and no one says it's wrong. What we are saying is when you power game, you are robbing the game of one of its greatest features, the story.

And don't get me wrong, it's okay to toss down the map and take a mech to the extreme. But also think about the other side of the game as well.

Akira
Akalabeth
03/26/16 04:03 AM
108.180.183.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

The two things you talk about are single combat similar to Arena style fighting so Akalabeth I hate to break it to you but THEY are the same as playing Solaris 7 style games.



Era Report 3052 - Battletech Book. Rules for Trial of Position. publication date 2010

Solaris 7 - a TWENTY FIVE year old, outdated, archaic, unsupported rules variant that almost no one plays anymore.

1 on 1 duels are battletech.
Mechs are moved one at a time. Purchased one at a time.

Duels don't belong to a different system. They're a subset of Battletech. And in terms of fluff they encompass some of the most iconic moments in battletech fiction.

Quote:
Akirapryde2006 writes:

You are taking what he is saying out of context.. . .

Take Phelan Kelly (Ward) and his story. In your own statement he too took part in both trials. But these battles did not solely define him as a leader/pilot.




Speaking of taking out of context, I never said a word about Phelan Kell.
But Phelan Kell, as a character, is defined by his Trial of Position. It is his only raison d'etre, he is an inner sphere character who became a clanner. Without that one event, he's just another bozo who goes missing on the Rock.


Edited by Akalabeth (03/26/16 04:28 AM)
Karagin
03/26/16 06:41 AM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Okay Akalabeth you win, clearly you can understand what has been explained.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Akirapryde2006
03/26/16 07:17 AM
216.53.168.60

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Look I stand by what everyone has said.

It doesn't matter how you play the game. As long as you are having fun at it.

It is my sincere hope that this conversation explained why some people take offense to power gamers. Why some people enjoy going out there and power gaming.

Look, everyone. Battletech/Mechwarrior is a dynamic universe filled with great storylines, characters that come to life from the pages. And yes large weapon covered robots that crush each other.

So the next time you are wondering the forum and you see a design that pushes the limits or violents your ideals of what should be. I hope that you will express the same level of respect that you want. Talk with the designer about the reasons why he/she took the direction that he/she did. instead of snide comments, be supportive and if you can't do these things. Then take the higher road and move along.

These are my closing thoughts, as I can't think of anything else that would add to this conversation.

Akira
Akalabeth
03/26/16 08:00 AM
108.180.183.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

Okay Akalabeth you win, clearly you can understand what has been explained.



Yes. And just to re-iterate my point. What I understand is that it's arrogant to try and define what Battletech IS or IS NOT.

Quote:
Karagin writes:

Ghostrider I think you summed it up, the kill or be killed arena style play, that is NOT Battletech, tactical thinking and use of your lance as team is Battletech,



If you find it offensive that someone create a munchkin design which forces you to play another way, then how offensive is it for one player to try and define what Battletech is? Battletech is different things for different people. It's Mechs, Warships, Battletroops, RPG, Novels, Collecting, Painting, Campaigns, Competitive play, solo play, golden age, dark age, PC games, custom designs, canon designs, etcetera.

Battletech is a game with some, 35 years of history which has manifested itself in a multitude of forms and lore. What it is or is not depends on the player, and for each player how they define it is true and valid, because no one's experience or preferences are more or less valid than any other player's.


Edited by Akalabeth (03/26/16 08:01 AM)
Karagin
03/26/16 11:14 AM
61.40.222.5

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Akalabeth writes:



If you find it offensive that someone create a munchkin design which forces you to play another way, then how offensive is it for one player to try and define what Battletech is? Battletech is different things for different people. It's Mechs, Warships, Battletroops, RPG, Novels, Collecting, Painting, Campaigns, Competitive play, solo play, golden age, dark age, PC games, custom designs, canon designs, etcetera.

Battletech is a game with some, 35 years of history which has manifested itself in a multitude of forms and lore. What it is or is not depends on the player, and for each player how they define it is true and valid, because no one's experience or preferences are more or less valid than any other player's.



Thank you for telling me what I find offensive, don't recall saying it was offensive, but okay clearly you missed my points and are really taking this even further. I think I made my points clear and as Cray said it's an opinion. If you feel duels are the heart and soul of the game then congratulations and game on. I don't, but hey guess what I am not telling you how to play, the topic was about what we thought about Power Gaming and such, yet some how it turned into an argument against my opinion on things, odd how that happen, and I must have really hit a nerve around here for this much flak to happen.

Play how you want, and recall if the designs are share be ready for folks to offer their input and be ready for all shades of comments, and if you don't like the comments then ignore them or don't.

So I think we have covered this, each made their point and shown their egos for those who felt the need to do that, so let move on to other topics.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ghostrider
03/26/16 01:10 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
One player trying to define the game?
Is there private messages going back and forth that the rest of us don't know about?
Or did I get left out of this?

I have stated power gaming tends to ruin the game unless all in the group want to do it. Yet some how this seems to be taking shots at Karagin.

Now unless I am mistaken, the game was supposed to focus on more then one person in battle.
And I know few seem to really follow some of the guidelines for things like customization or even building units. Making a single unit that only one person uses is so highly unlikely, but yet seems to be normal for a few.
I will compliment retry on this, as his is production for the alternative storyline, not just a single unit for his character.
I know a few seem to have more then just one in their universes, but a few seem to be just a single battle to play in.

How many of the overpowering units are used in battle?
Just the one?
Why isn't the entire unit using the same unit?
Because it moves the focus from the person's character to the group. And this seems to be another basic issue of power gaming.
Being the spotlight of the group in the games. Otherwise, let your opponents use the overpowered units and take the canon units and defeat it.
Yeah, that won't work. That tends to go back to the clan invasion. Hard as hell to overcome some of the tech advantages.
And the chance of losing jumps so much, it isn't worth the risk.
Akalabeth
03/26/16 05:14 PM
108.180.183.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

Thank you for telling me what I find offensive, don't recall saying it was offensive, but okay clearly you missed my points and are really taking this even further.



The point is you don't like the way some people play and you believe that they shouldn't get offended if you tell them so.

This statement of yours right here by the way, in the context of a Battletech game it would be called Rules Lawyering. Because you're clearly offended by what you define as power gaming, whether you specifically used the word offensive or not is irrelevant.

And what is power gaming?
Is it creating 100-ton pulse boat?
Is it using 0/7 Vehicle Crews?
Is it using 20 Savannah Masters?
Is it only driving Heavy and Assault Mechs?
Only playing Clan machines?
Never following clan honour?
Always using jumpers?
Using high-movement Pulse Jumpers?
Using Land Air Mechs?
Using Assaults with TSM and Hatchets?
Using the same, optimal designs in each weight class?

Power gaming means different things for different people. The ONLY constant in power gaming, is that it's one person doing something that some other player doesn't like. Something that offends that other player's sensibilities of what a game or the spirit of Battletech should or should not be.

And trying to define power gaming, or trying to define the proper way of playing is only an attempt to dismiss or discredit one person's opinions or contributions when the powers of persuasion have failed.

Ie, "This design seems a bit overpowered, you should add drawbacks to make it more interesting and fit the fiction" becomes "This design is purely about power gaming, it's not what this game is about".

And no, no specific person said those exact words in that exact order.
It's an example to illustrate a point.



Quote:
ghostrider writes:

One player trying to define the game?
Is there private messages going back and forth that the rest of us don't know about?




Not sure if you're trolling or not but given that I quoted the relevant portions it should be fairly clear what and who I'm referencing.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/26/16 06:12 PM
70.122.160.150

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
"such as Steerage and Officer/First Class quarters in place of Standard crew quarters"

Steerage is five (5) tons "EACH" person and "NOT" a ton "EACH" person.

Officer/First Class quarters is ten (10) tons "EACH" person and NOT two tons each person.

The design is illegal period. Cheating is cheating no mater how you try to justify it.

I would love to see you take any of these war ship designs to an official battletech competition and see how far you get with the officials to be allowed to use them. as for Power gamer they would be allowed to compete as long as there designs are legal.

Which is worse a power gamer that uses legal designs or someone that has to cheat to do their power gaming?

ATN who is always being accused of power gaming uses very creative but legal designs and does not feel the need to cheat.
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!!!


Edited by His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey (03/26/16 06:40 PM)
ghostrider
03/26/16 08:35 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Atn has made a few units that are considered over the top, but you are correct. They follow the written rules of the game. A few errors from time to time, but nothing that breaks the written rules.
Same thing with Retry. Same with a few other designs.

But you are suggesting power gaming breaks the rules, yet I believe we are contending that power gaming uses the rules against itself to create the unbeatable unit. Normally it is one on one.
Some issues skirt the lack of rules, but are still considered legal as they are from home games.

The main issue with ATN skirting the rules is there is no canon bay out there to carry the over 100 ton units. That can be gotten around by saying they are disassembled and stored, the rebuild at the sight. But canon rules do not have anything that would allow those oversized mechs to be dropped. I don't know why ATN is singled out, other then his, for a lack of a better term, love for oversized units.
The issues with mixed tech, and being able to get all the new tech without any penalties is another lack of rules, yet the canon sources are adamant the IS will never be on par with the clans. Some issues form with unbalancing the game as they do so. But again, not defined rules to do anything about it.

Screaming illegal design because they didn't follow the rules. I understand and agree with it partially. The fact the few here that scream not canon should have been against the design. It was presented in a fashion to have comments made to suggest if it was viable or crap. Not following the rules is fine to say. I do not know if the person was one of those that jumped on you about a past design or not.

I know a few suggested others went to far to comment on other units put on the site. They will see it from their point of view, and some may be correct. It may be something to think on about responding to things as saying something 2 or 3 times then dropping it.
There will always be a difference of opinions.
Interpretation of the rules and even assuming some that are unwritten will differ.
But power gaming is a fact. Wether you think you do it or not is the key.
Granted it is opinion, but just because someone else does it, doesn't mean it's good to do it as well.
Nic JansmaAdministrator
03/29/16 09:48 AM
73.191.226.169

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Hi everyone,

This thread was getting a little heated at times. Thanks for the discussion, but we're going to lock this thread and suggest followups (with an eye towards respecting your neighbor) can be posted if desired in other threads.

Thank you,
-- NicJ
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
Extra information
0 registered and 82 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

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

Topic views: 27265


Contact Admins Sarna.net