Too soon? Battletech 2

[kgbraun]

First of all. Thank you very much for this game. Spent a lot of time as teenager with the novels and MechCommander 1 & 2. This game brought back lots of memories and even made me order the last missing novels of Classic Battletech. Furthermore your game became the one in my Steam-library I spent the most time with, even though it is such a "young" game.

I hope your success also made you think not only about DLCs but also about part 2. Some restrictions are just a pity. As far as I understood it mainly has to do with the game-engine you're using.

I guess this kind of discussion is

already ​

running somewhere but in my age you get too lazy to search some times. ;-)

You can call it a wish-list and I hope I don't sound too greedy.
1. Number of Mechs on the battlefield should at least be raised to company-size. For easier handling Lances could be controlled by AI. Tactical Maps/battlefields should be larger so that manouevering could get more flexible. Some Maps offer no real choices how to be played.
2. Strategic Planet Maps. You should be able to choose strategic targets by yourself. Targets could be Depots, Bases, convoys etc. Mission-types that already exist so to say. But it could be much more flexible. Instead of attacking an enemy directly you could wear him down by destroying or capturing his supplies for example.
3. Real Dropships. I was not so happy with the Argo. Most novels describe Merc-Companies as "Dropship-based". I think that should be adapted. Would work great with #2. Moving troops around the planet and hitting where you think it's best. Another aspect that came into play would be supplies. Instead of infinite supply you had to think about transport-capacity. Buying new/larger Dropships would also be great.
4. Air-support. Most Dropships allow to take Aerospace-Fighters along. I guess I don't need to say anything more. ;-). Implementation could be in the sense of a one-time-usable pilot-ability. Larger Dropships would mean stronger air-support of course.
5. Mechs. As much as I like Mech-customization, it should be restricted to OmniMechs or at least it should be made expensive to use non-standard Mech-variants. Running a Company/Battalion/Regiment of standard Inner Sphere Mechs should be awarded in some way. Not going into bankcruptcy is just a start.
6. Timeline. As #5 intends an expansion of the timeline is inevitable. ;-)
7. Reputation. The rep-system seems a bit shallow to me. It would be awesome to able to make real bonds with the factions. In novels you can read about merc-units beeing awarded with estates and even planets. Training-grounds and factories included.
8. Staff. Medical and technical staff should also be experience- and wage-based. Low-experienced and equipped staff should not be able to do certain tasks. For example fusion-core changes or attaching artificial limbs. And they could Play an even more important role in strategic gameplay. For example disaster-relief for planetary population or technical support for local farmers. Up to now this was "hidden" in in-game-events, but it would be great to do such stuff actively.
9....to be continued

Should be enough daydreaming for now. Keep up the great work and also a salute to the modders that add to this great Project.

Edit: Most points I made refer to the sandbox-mode. Though I liked the story the sandbox is what makes me play this game. Writing the story by myself so to say.

 

[MeiSooHaityu]

First of all. Thank you very much for this game. Spent a lot of time as teenager with the novels and MechCommander 1 & 2. This game brought back lots of memories and even made me order the last missing novels of Classic Battletech. Furthermore your game became the one in my Steam-library I spent the most time with, even though it is such a "young" game.

I hope your success also made you think not only about DLCs but also about part 2. Some restrictions are just a pity. As far as I understood it mainly has to do with the game-engine you're using.

I guess this kind of discussion is

already ​

running somewhere but in my age you get too lazy to search some times. ;-)

You can call it a wish-list and I hope I don't sound too greedy.
1. Number of Mechs on the battlefield should at least be raised to company-size. For easier handling Lances could be controlled by AI. Tactical Maps/battlefields should be larger so that manouevering could get more flexible. Some Maps offer no real choices how to be played.
2. Strategic Planet Maps. You should be able to choose strategic targets by yourself. Targets could be Depots, Bases, convoys etc. Mission-types that already exist so to say. But it could be much more flexible. Instead of attacking an enemy directly you could wear him down by destroying or capturing his supplies for example.
3. Real Dropships. I was not so happy with the Argo. Most novels describe Merc-Companies as "Dropship-based". I think that should be adapted. Would work great with #2. Moving troops around the planet and hitting where you think it's best. Another aspect that came into play would be supplies. Instead of infinite supply you had to think about transport-capacity. Buying new/larger Dropships would also be great.
4. Air-support. Most Dropships allow to take Aerospace-Fighters along. I guess I don't need to say anything more. ;-). Implementation could be in the sense of a one-time-usable pilot-ability. Larger Dropships would mean stronger air-support of course.
5. Mechs. As much as I like Mech-customization, it should be restricted to OmniMechs or at least it should be made expensive to use non-standard Mech-variants. Running a Company/Battalion/Regiment of standard Inner Sphere Mechs should be awarded in some way. Not going into bankcruptcy is just a start.
6. Timeline. As #5 intends an expansion of the timeline is inevitable. ;-)
7. Reputation. The rep-system seems a bit shallow to me. It would be awesome to able to make real bonds with the factions. In novels you can read about merc-units beeing awarded with estates and even planets. Training-grounds and factories included.
8....to be continued

Should be enough daydreaming for now. Keep up the great work and also a salute to the modders that add to this great Project.

Edit: Most points I made refer to the sandbox-mode. Though I liked the story the sandbox is what makes me play this game. Writing the story by myself so to say.

Hello @kgbraun , welcome to the forum .

Those are some interesting ideas. From the sounds of it though, that might make for a good spin-off title more so than a sequel to this BattleTech. It kind of sounds like a solid framework for a BattleTech 4X title or something along those lines which would be pretty cool to see.

 

[AngeliDiAvanti]

1. Number of Mechs on the battlefield should at least be raised to company-size. For easier handling Lances could be controlled by AI. Tactical Maps/battlefields should be larger so that manouevering could get more flexible. Some Maps offer no real choices how to be played.

More Mechs would drastically increase the duration of a round, I'm not sure whether the AI can handle it and I'm pretty sure it would break the current Ini-system.

2. Strategic Planet Maps. You should be able to choose strategic targets by yourself. Targets could be Depots, Bases, convoys etc. Mission-types that already exist so to say. But it could be much more flexible. Instead of attacking an enemy directly you could wear him down by destroying or capturing his supplies for example.

You are a grunt. You do as you are told.

3. Real Dropships. I was not so happy with the Argo. Most novels describe Merc-Companies as "Dropship-based". I think that should be adapted. Would work great with #2. Moving troops around the planet and hitting where you think it's best. Another aspect that came into play would be supplies. Instead of infinite supply you had to think about transport-capacity. Buying new/larger Dropships would also be great.

Supported.

4. Air-support. Most Dropships allow to take Aerospace-Fighters along. I guess I don't need to say anything more. ;-). Implementation could be in the sense of a one-time-usable pilot-ability. Larger Dropships would mean stronger air-support of course.

Option 1: Airstrikes like in Mechcommander. Which means, we would need a mechanism for designating areas.
Option 2: Actual Aerospace-fighters on the map. Doable. I've presented on this forum a few ideas how to do it. But A LOT of work for the devs.

5. Mechs. As much as I like Mech-customization, it should be restricted to OmniMechs or at least it should be made expensive to use non-standard Mech-variants. Running a Company/Battalion/Regiment of standard Inner Sphere Mechs should be awarded in some way. Not going into bankcruptcy is just a start.

I'm not happy either how easy it is to customize a mere Battlemech. I think, we can thank MWO for that balancing-issue.

6. Timeline. As #5 intends an expansion of the timeline is inevitable. ;-)

Nope. We are BY FAR not finished with the historic possibilities 3025 has to offer.

7. Reputation. The rep-system seems a bit shallow to me. It would be awesome to able to make real bonds with the factions. In novels you can read about merc-units beeing awarded with estates and even planets. Training-grounds and factories included.

A mere merc-company won't get that kind of rewards. I can't even think of a Bataillon-sized merc-band that got that kind of reward.

8. Staff. Medical and technical staff should also be experience- and wage-based. Low-experienced and equipped staff should not be able to do certain tasks. For example fusion-core changes or attaching artificial limbs. And they could Play an even more important role in strategic gameplay. For example disaster-relief for planetary population or technical support for local farmers. Up to now this was "hidden" in in-game-events, but it would be great to do such stuff actively.

Careful. This would blow the game up from a Battlemech-game into a full RPG.

 

[kgbraun]

More Mechs would drastically increase the duration of a round, I'm not sure whether the AI can handle it and I'm pretty sure it would break the current Ini-system.

I'm fully aware that most of the suggestions would require a new framework and of course a new engine. I guess sth. like Total War with Mechs would fit best for what I'm daydreaming off. Biggest difference would be a stellar map and a planetary stragegic map instead of just one world map like in TW.

You are a grunt. You do as you are told.

Nah, I named my unit after Snord's Irregulars. They even left fights to search for relicts of the Star League. ;-)

Option 1: Airstrikes like in Mechcommander. Which means, we would need a mechanism for designating areas.
Option 2: Actual Aerospace-fighters on the map. Doable. I've presented on this forum a few ideas how to do it. But A LOT of work for the devs.

I guess Option 1 would be the best. On the strategic level/map they could do invaluable reconaissance-work.

Nope. We are BY FAR not finished with the historic possibilities 3025 has to offer.

Of course there are lots of possibilities. But I think that is personal preference. I think it would be great to experience the technological advance that came with the Helm memory-core and the Clans.

A mere merc-company won't get that kind of rewards. I can't even think of a Bataillon-sized merc-band that got that kind of reward.

Come on. Let me dream. A small training base in the outskirts of a small town would be enough. (for a start)

Careful. This would blow the game up from a Battlemech-game into a full RPG.

Actually I want exactly that as the commander of a merc company. I skip most of the dialogues. Though most of them are well written and also some of the flashpoints are great, I see the RPG-aspect more in shaping a company as I want instead of clicking through short stories. But that's only my personal view.

 

[EmptyPepsiCan]

You are a grunt. You do as you are told.

Why? That's boring.

Besides, I'm not a grunt. I own a renovated Lostech ship and nearly a full regiment of pristine battlemechs. I command a company of mechwarriors so skilled that they're basically wizards. We're famous throughout the Periphery and well known in the IS. Our victories are the stuff of legend. If we met the Black Widow Company or McKinnon's Raiders in battle we'd straight up curbstomp them. Yet somehow, despite all of that, I'm still the same low end migrant worker I was on day one. Where's the sense of advancement?

The fact is you're a grunt because BT1 has no meaningful strategic layer and is therefore incapable of making you more than that. Perhaps BT2 can take the already excellent tactical layer and flesh it out with strategic and diplomatic layers that give the player some interesting, meaningful choices to make outside of battle.

 

[BARBOSA (Aries)]

1. 2 lances, one being AI controlled, its a short company and wouldn´t slow the game more that these new UW mission types are doing. The devs only need to let us drop from our roster rather than give us generic npc units.
2. I think i said that in other thread as well. They could give the game a strategic layer based on "mini-games" light on graphic (like UFO interception in xenonauts/xcom 1 route, that is vital to progress, but hardly resource consuming). We could have contested drops in orbit and/or infantry battles on a mission aftermath.
3. I like the Argo, but i agree being able to progress by purchase, even something limited like Leopard - Union - Overlord would be better.
4. The Argo can carry Aerospace-Fighters. They could act like artillery in campaign, including with the need of a spotter.
5. I like my custom mechs. We disagree here. And argo fluff justify the ease of refit. Its almost a mobile mech factory when fully upgraded.
6. Yes. I can´t wait at least for the 4SW.
7. Agreed. We aren´t the GDL, but house Arano isn´t the FedCom either. I can´t understand how Kamea didn´t offered a Barony and/or a planet to keep the MC company in retainer.
8. I think it pushes Suspension of disbelief Farah being both chief engineer and chief doctor. We could use another NPC in the Argo crew. And some medtech related stuff to play would be cool too.

 

[kgbraun]

1. 2 lances, one being AI controlled, its a short company and wouldn´t slow the game more that these new UW mission types are doing. The devs only need to let us drop from our roster rather than give us generic npc units.

I think it should be considered to switch to real-time with pausing for the tactical battles instead of turn-based. As much as I like turn-based strategy games but I think sth. like the Total War series or even Mech Commander are a good example how larger units could work.

2. I think i said that in other thread as well. They could give the game a strategic layer based on "mini-games" light on graphic (like UFO interception in xenonauts/xcom 1 route, that is vital to progress, but hardly resource consuming). We could have contested drops in orbit and/or infantry battles on a mission aftermath.

Sounds interesting.

5. I like my custom mechs. We disagree here. And argo fluff justify the ease of refit. Its almost a mobile mech factory when fully upgraded.

OK, maybe customization could be depending on skill of the technical staff and how far the dropship (not Argo) is upgraded.

6. Yes. I can´t wait at least for the 4SW.

FedCom Civil War. ;-)

8. I think it pushes Suspension of disbelief Farah being both chief engineer and chief doctor. We could use another NPC in the Argo crew. And some medtech related stuff to play would be cool too.

I think it should not be restricted to characters like Yang and Farah. In the novels companies consist of numbers of nameless techs, medtechs and so on. Would be great to bring into play that you are responsible for more than some Mech-Jockeys and 4 NPCs.

 

[AngeliDiAvanti]

The fact is you're a grunt because BT1 has no meaningful strategic layer and is therefore incapable of making you more than that. Perhaps BT2 can take the already excellent tactical layer and flesh it out with strategic and diplomatic layers that give the player some interesting, meaningful choices to make outside of battle.

Actually, that's fully intentional on part of the devs. YOU ARE NOT FORREST GUMP. You do not get to shake hands with famous politicians, you do not get to influence the BT-timeline.

If the player actually were able to rise to a position where his decisions influence the IS as a whole, that would break the suspension of disbelief.

A BT-universe in which each player has their own scrappy band of adventurers, that works.
A BT-universe in which each player is a hero whose actions resonate throughout the Inner Sphere, that doesn't work.

 

[kgbraun]

I think it wasn't meant to influence the BT-timeline. But I would also agree, that diplomacy shouldn't really be part of the strategic gameplay. But I think you should be able to play a vital role on a planetary level. For example conquering a planet that is just defended by a small garrison. Taking vital infrastructure, capturing the local government are some possible missions on a tactical level to achieve that. If the planet is finally taken by the employer or the former owner recaptures it by sending a regiment is then sth the player can't/mustn't influence.

 

[EmptyPepsiCan]

First off, please look at the awesomeness linked in my sig. Then please find my rebuttal below.

Actually, that's fully intentional on part of the devs.

I disagree. I think they'd have liked to do more with the strategic level, but they ran out of time and money and had to make some concessions to the reality of the situation.

YOU ARE NOT FORREST GUMP. You do not get to shake hands with famous politicians, you do not get to influence the BT-timeline.

If the player actually were able to rise to a position where his decisions influence the IS as a whole, that would break the suspension of disbelief.

I honestly don't understand where this silliness is coming from, because I didn't say any of that. You're raging at your own strawman. Maybe next time you could ask a clarifying question or two...

A BT-universe in which each player has their own scrappy band of adventurers, that works.
A BT-universe in which each player is a hero whose actions resonate throughout the Inner Sphere, that doesn't work.

There's a fair bit of wiggle room between some grunt and the leader of a Great House, no? Do you think maybe HBS could work within that space to give us the opportunity to make meaningful strategic decisions without breaking the timeline?

I was thinking of something like this (which is taken from another thread):

The race to heavier mechs is a symptom of an even deeper fundamental flaw - this is a purely tactical game with no strategic level.

That's a problem because the game is billed as being one in which the player runs a mercenary company. The result is a constant tension between the reality of what the player is doing - completing an endless series of one-off jobs for an interstellar temp service - and what the player is told they're doing - running an up and coming mercenary company in a dangerous, unforgiving galaxy.

We need a strategic level. We need deep, complex contracts that can be approached in multiple ways. For example:

• Destroy a heavily guarded enemy installation. The installation is too heavily guarded to attack immediately, so you'll need to launch raids, lay ambushes, foment dissent, and generally raise Hell until the enemy is forced to redeploy enough troops that a direct assault on the target is feasible.
• Same scenario, but now you're commanding the garrison.
• Assassinate an enemy officer/scientist/whatever. The target must first be located. Then an assault must be planned that will flush them out and cut off their escape so that they can be pinned down and engaged.
• Same scenario, but you're guarding the target.
• Send a fast lance to exfiltrate an enemy defector, then escape. The area around the target is heavily garrisoned and has formidable anti aircraft defenses, so the extraction point is 150 km away. Your lance is being pursued, and the enemy is looking to cut off your escape. You must use your other lances to slow the pursuit and keep the route to the evac point open.
• Same scenario, but you're trying to prevent the exfiltration.
• You're the garrison of a planet that's under assault. Reinforcements are coming, but space is vast. You're on your own for the next 6 weeks. Hold the line.
• Same scenario, but you're the attacker. Get it done before reinforcements arrive or you're not getting paid.

We also need a recon mission mechanic similar to the infiltration mechanic in Long War 2. If you don't XCOM, the idea is that you send the squad to do the mission, but it doesn't start until after a period of time spend infiltrating the target. A fully infiltrated target is unprepared and lightly defended, while attacking a target that you haven't infiltrated is basically D-Day. The point of the mission would be twofold - first, to give recon mechs a strategic role to play, and second, to set the stage for the contract. It would go something like this:

You get a contract to land on a planet and do something difficult and interesting. You know the obvious stuff - the location of the base, other large garrisons, and the major settlements, the name of the defending unit (as of the last time new intel arrived) - but you don't know the current enemy deployment, their force composition, their patrol routes, and so forth. So you launch a recon mission.

The player decides which mechs and pilots to send and how long to deploy them, then hits "Deploy." From there it's a bunch of RNG rolls, influenced by the player's decisions. The mission would be biased toward rewarding players who send recon (aka fast, mobile, and/or light) mechs with recon (aka Piloting/Tactics) mechwarriors. They would have the greatest likelihood to gather good information and the lowest likelihood of getting into trouble. However, to keep things interesting, there would also be random targets of opportunity. For example:

• The enemy force commander is spotted moving between units. He's in a Centurion, escorted by what looks like a heavy lance. If we kill him the enemy will be dismayed and disorganized. Should we try to pick him off, or stay hidden?
• We intercepted a transmission about an enemy supply cache. Supposedly they've got some Lostech gear stashed there. It's close by and they're not expecting trouble. Should we hit them?
• We spotted an enemy Long Tom emplacement. It's heavily guarded, but if we hit them fast we might be able to destroy it and escape before the defenders can react. That would take a major enemy asset out of the fight. Is it worth the risk?
• We spotted an enemy Long Tom emplacement. It's lightly guarded, but there are enemy units in the area. The artillery is set up near a landing pad. If we move fast we can take out the defenders, get the Long Tom loaded onto our Leopard, and get out before the opposition can react. The recon lance would have to hold until the Leopard got clear. It's a big risk, but the payoff would be huge. Should we attack?
• We intercepted a message saying that an enemy Leopard had to make an emergency landing near our position. Its weapons are offline, but it's guarded by what looks to be a company of tanks and missile carriers. Should we try to destroy the dropship? It would put a big dent in their mobility.

So recon is important, and the system is biased toward rewarding the lightest, fastest, jumpiest lance possible, but a Raven and 3 Spiders aren't going to fare well in any of the missions listed above. An assault lance would stomp through any of the random encounters, but will fare very poorly in the recon portion of the recon mission. Maybe a Raven, a Jenner, and a couple of fast mediums? Or maybe random encounters aren't worth it. Regardless, hooray for interesting strategic choices!

Anyway, at the end of the allotted time you collect your recon lance (assuming they didn't get spotted and have to bug out early, or get mauled trying to take out a target of opportunity, or take out the target, but then fail their Escape and Evade roll and have to bug out early, or whatever). They give you information on the enemy deployment, force composition, state of readiness, patrol patterns, and the like. Then you start making plans and doing missions. However, unlike today's one-offs, these missions are simultaneous deployments (perhaps limited by how many Leopards you have on hand) and they're interconnected. For example:

• You want to isolate and kill the enemy rapid reaction force - a mech company - before you launch your final base assault. You start by sending your Recon Lance to raid a depot guarded by their Medium Lance. You do some damage, get their attention (Mission: Fight X turns, Kill X targets, Withdraw to Point X), and then run for it. They pursue, only to run into an ambush set by your Command Lance (heavies and assaults). Your bigs outgun their mediums, so they send in their own Command Lance (heavies) to assist. Meanwhile, your Recon Lance has doubled back to hit the depot again. Lacking any other option, the AI sends its own recon lance to defend the depot. On the way there it runs into the ambush set by your Striker Lance (fast mediums and heavies) and gets annihilated (or you set an ambush with a Steiner Scout Lance, the enemy Recon Lance runs right by them and escapes, and then shows up during the base assault as spotters for enemy turrets and artillery).
• After a recon and a few raids you finally locate the assassination target in a fortified base, defended by two heavy lances. You launch a frontal assault with your Assault Lance and deploy your Striker Lance to cover the escape route. The Assault Lance mission is Flush Target: Kill X defenders, Destroy Turrets, Destroy X buildings). The Striker Lance mission is a stock assassination - evade the guards, kill the target, hit the evac point.
• You're the garrison commander on a planet beset by pirate raids. You have to figure out how to convince the pirates to practice piracy elsewhere. You have 3 bases to defend. You garrison 2 with a lance each. The third you leave wide open, but you hide your heavies near the only nearby spot where a Leopard dropship can safely land. When the pirates arrive you cripple their dropship and wipe out their lance. Perhaps this is a path to getting another Leopard.

You get the idea. The point is to make all of the mechs useful by giving the player a limited force and a lot of stuff to do all at once, some of which can only be accomplished with the right kinds of mechs. There aren't any weight restrictions on anything, but if the player brings the wrong mechs to a mission then sometimes the natural consequence will be a loss.

I don't honestly see how they could put something like that into this game, or why they'd even try, but I'm hopeful that the next BT title will include a meaningful strategic element to go along with the excellent tactical experience. Mostly I'm just really hopeful that the next one won't be the same thing as this one, only with Clan mechs making everything else obsolete.

See how something like that could give the player a sense of progression while simultaneously massively increasing immersion rather than breaking it? See how the player has a chance to make meaningful choices and act independently on a scale that's both big enough to be interesting and challenging and small enough to have no impact on the BT timeline?[/QUOTE]

 

[AngeliDiAvanti]

I honestly don't understand where this silliness is coming from, because I didn't say any of that. You're raging at your own strawman. Maybe next time you could ask a clarifying question or two...

That's not a strawman. YOU namedropped famous BT-characters and how famous your merc-company is.

Besides, I'm not a grunt. I own a renovated Lostech ship and nearly a full regiment of pristine battlemechs. I command a company of mechwarriors so skilled that they're basically wizards. We're famous throughout the Periphery and well known in the IS. Our victories are the stuff of legend. If we met the Black Widow Company or McKinnon's Raiders in battle we'd straight up curbstomp them. Yet somehow, despite all of that, I'm still the same low end migrant worker I was on day one. Where's the sense of advancement?

I was thinking of something like this (which is taken from another thread):

See how something like that could give the player a sense of progression while simultaneously massively increasing immersion rather than breaking it? See how the player has a chance to make meaningful choices and act independently on a scale that's both big enough to be interesting and challenging and small enough to have no impact on the BT timeline?

Looks like a scripted mini-campaign to me.

 

[EmptyPepsiCan]

That's not a strawman. YOU namedropped famous BT-characters and how famous your merc-company is.

It's absolutely a strawman.

My merc company is famous. We've got powerful allies and powerful enemies. We could stomp the hell out of the Black Widow Company and their crappy, beat up mechs. Every word of that was true. And the same can be said of your company, and every other player's company.

In other words, while we do begin our careers as a handful of unemployed nobodies, as the game progresses we become a hell of a lot more than that. We may be grunts on day one, but by day 500 we're an elite mercenary company, well known the major factions and rated among the very best by the Mercenary Review Board. I'm sorry that those facts conflict with your claim, but there it is...

WE'RE NO LONGER JUST GRUNTS.

Unfortunately the game has no meaningful way of expressing the change in our status. Hopefully next time they'll find a way to give us more responsibility as we gain strength and prestige. That would provide a sense of advancement and increase immersion. It would also give the reputation system and the MRB a reason to exist. It would make those 18 slots in the mech bay invaluable, rather than the sad joke they are now. In short, it would make a good game great.

 

[kgbraun]

Don't let your argument escalate. I think you both have some good points and I hope one of the devs will have a look. Besides that, with Paradox in their back, I think HBS could pull off a lot more complex game than Battletech is now. Paradoxs' strategy games are complex as hell and I think we can all agree that some more strategy would be great for Battletech 2 ;-)

 

[EmptyPepsiCan]

I'm optimistic about the next title. The most important part of the game is the tactical mech combat, and that's already really good. HBS is already good at RPG titles and Paradox is good at grand strategy, so yeah, it seems like the resources are in place to put a lot more work into making the tactical combat feel like part of something dynamic.

I agree that our company shouldn't be impacting the timeline in a big way, but an experienced, respected mercenary commander being given the latitude to accomplish a complex goal seems like something that would have happened pretty frequently. We're talking about huge, lengthy wars taking place across vast distances. It all comes down to scale - we can do a lot while still only being a very small part of the unimaginably vast conflicts in BT.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

Seriously?

 

[kgbraun]

Seriously?

Maybe.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

I guess I'm hoping to get a lot more time and studio support out of this one, to even consider another game. Plus, my focus will be expanding to MW5M.

 

[kgbraun]

I guess you won't be disappointed. HBS and modders will give you a lot to enjoy about BT. And also it wasn't meant to be a whining thread. But there is room for improvement, mainly because HBS lacked ressources as such a small team. But as said before, with Paradox in their back and the success this game has, part 2 simply is a must. ;-)

 

[AngeliDiAvanti]

It's absolutely a strawman.

My merc company is famous. We've got powerful allies and powerful enemies. We could stomp the hell out of the Black Widow Company and their crappy, beat up mechs. Every word of that was true. And the same can be said of your company, and every other player's company.

In other words, while we do begin our careers as a handful of unemployed nobodies, as the game progresses we become a hell of a lot more than that. We may be grunts on day one, but by day 500 we're an elite mercenary company, well known the major factions and rated among the very best by the Mercenary Review Board. I'm sorry that those facts conflict with your claim, but there it is...

WE'RE NO LONGER JUST GRUNTS.

Unfortunately the game has no meaningful way of expressing the change in our status. Hopefully next time they'll find a way to give us more responsibility as we gain strength and prestige. That would provide a sense of advancement and increase immersion. It would also give the reputation system and the MRB a reason to exist. It would make those 18 slots in the mech bay invaluable, rather than the sad joke they are now. In short, it would make a good game great.

There is another way to describe the situation you are lamenting about: We have finished leveling our character. We have all items, we have explored all skills. There is no way for us to get any better and the game no longer holds challenges for our character.

Please consider why BT created the whole lore about the Aurigan Reach in the first place: They wanted a sandbox where they can unfold a story that won't conflict with the rest of BT-lore. The bigger and bigger they make the sandbox for the player, the harder it gets to position that sandbox somewhere in the BT-canon.



Let's say the devs would accept your proposal. Let's say there is a merc-band "EmptyPepsiCan's Marauders", fielding a Mech-Bataillon, top-of-the-line Mechwarriors and excellent reputation.
When and where could they fight in a player-campaign AND give the player FREEDOM OF CHOICE without messing with BT-canon? Which planet? Which year?

 

[kgbraun]

Let's say the devs would accept your proposal. Let's say there is a merc-band "EmptyPepsiCan's Marauders", fielding a Mech-Bataillon, top-of-the-line Mechwarriors and excellent reputation.
When and where could they fight in a player-campaign AND give the player FREEDOM OF CHOICE without messing with BT-canon? Which planet? Which year?

Though you didn't ask me, I'll put my 2 cents in. BT-canon went out the window with the player-campaign in BT in my opinion. And I could do great without a story-driven campaign like that in BT2.

As for the FREEDOM OF CHOICE-part I don't see any bigger problems. Of course it shouldn't be possible to get too powerful. And for everything the size of a bataillon or smaller the big houses should have a proper response.
As for the planet-question. Why should there be a restriction? Nearly every planet could be suited for garrison-duty. Pirate-hunting in the periphery, border-conflicts between houses or punitive measures against planetary governments could take place any time.

Taking part in large conflicts like 4th Succession War would be sth. different though, but not impossible to handle without breaking lore. A bataillon could just make little difference in large-scale conflicts. Being ordered to retreat by superiors or being forced away by strong reinforcements or by just having to surrender the planet to its former owner as part of a peace-treaty. All that could be used to not have to break lore too much.