What's your favorite previous Battletech game?

[BARBOSA (Aries)]

A rewrite of Crescent Hawks Inception through flashpoints (and events) is a DLC i´d be eager to buy.

I just think the protagonist shouldn´t be Kamea. I like her, but she has her own story.

 

[Sable Phoenix]

Easy. MechWarrior 2: Ghost Bear's Legacy. MW2 is what introduced me to BattleTech's universe and I fell for it hard, and the expansion when it came had an even better storyline, better mission design and new mechs... and some actual voice acting and great additional music on top of it. I've been a Ghost Bear at heart ever since.

 

[Aotrs Commander]

MechCommander 2.

Stands as one of the VERY rare games I've played multiple times (i.e. more than once or twice). If i play something three or four times, that's right up there. (So it stands a little behind DungeonKeeper 1, TIE Fighter, Planescape Torment, but alongside C&C Generals and Civ 2 and 4.) Was in the most accurate BT game? Oh heck, no, but it was bloody good fun, with just the right amount of progression and stuff to fiddle about with.

Last time, in fact, was shortly after BATTLETECH was annouced. And it was a hassle, because the only way to play it an have the movies (and the movies are integral to the game as far as I'm concerned) - you can't have them in Omnitech - was to use the main game and play in windowed mode at a resolution that wasn't squiffy during the actual missions. (It was fine enough outside those...)

I never got through MechWarrior 3, though I tried a couple of times. I played MW4 a bit when a friend had it, but it never grabbed me. What I liked most about MW3 was it allowed me to essentially play with the mechs like it was HeavyMetalPro and I could, sans graphics, make my own designs, near enough. My last MW3 game ended when I rage-quit after getting all the way through a later mission and getting killed by some unseen overhead obstacle and I never went back.

I have tried about three times, but I have never managed to finish MechCommander 1. Just... Couldn't seem to keep up the enthuisam, even at the point I had lots of mechs to play with. I think the last one I gave up at was on the timed mission where you get a really big tonnage, but I had to pause it to go do something and the timer continued to run while paused and I was sufficiently miffed at that that I just went and did something else instead, I think.

 

[Apocal]

MechWarrior 2.

Nova with: JJ + ER MLas in the torsos + as much armor could fit, maybe some heat sinks too. You could lose an arm and not care because there was nothing in there that you cared about. If you lose a leg, just skate along the ground using your JJ. Alpha strike a bit, cool down, alpha strike again. Most lights and mediums couldn't even take one hit, let alone two.

 

[Hoi Neuling]

That´s very hard to say, because all MW Games had their Advantages and Disadvantages.

It´s sad that you can´t play them anymore on the newest Systems like Win 7 and 10.

But if I remember my correctly Mechwarrior 3 and it´s Add-On had the best Mix from all things like Graphics, Fightdamages, Part Recovery and such.

Mechwarrior 4 and Mechwarrior 4: Mercenaries were very good too, but the Graphics and the all around mix wasn´t as good as Mechwarrior 3 had before.

 

[MeiSooHaityu]

...But if I remember my correctly Mechwarrior 3 and it´s Add-On had the best Mix from all things like Graphics, Fightdamages, Part Recovery and such.

Mechwarrior 4 and Mechwarrior 4: Mercenaries were very good too, but the Graphics and the all around mix wasn´t as good as Mechwarrior 3 had before.

I think it's kind of amusing that MechWarrior 3's mechs looked better than MechWarrior 4's mechs. The damage modeling especially was better in MW3. In MW3, when mechs were hit, the texture would swap out to damage textures and missing limbs would look more detailed as well. In MW4, the mechs looked more fuzzy, textured often looked even smeared a bit, and damage was just overlaying a black splotch over parts of the mech. Missing limbs looked uninspired.

MW4 is superior in many ways, but when it comes to the mechs themselves, MW4 always seemed like a bit of a downgrade. Also, MW3 was more simulator like and MW4 more arcade like, but whether that is good or bad will depend on personal preference. I suppose the same goes toward the mech detail too.

 

[BZA]

The problem that I had with MW 3 was that it was pointless to aim to any part of the mech but the legs. They could be as armored as the torso, but with one leg off, you not only defeated the opponent but also salvaged the whole mech. Of course, that makes complete sense in a real-life scenario and that's why no modern army would attempt to build such a machine, but gameplay wise was kind of boring.

Also, there was the thing with the coolant from MW3 and beyond. Maybe it was a little worse on MW4 when it became a slugfest.

 

[MeiSooHaityu]

The problem that I had with MW 3 was that it was pointless to aim to any part of the mech but the legs. They could be as armored as the torso, but with one leg off, you not only defeated the opponent but also salvaged the whole mech. Of course, that makes complete sense in a real-life scenario and that's why no modern army would attempt to build such a machine, but gameplay wise was kind of boring.

Also, there was the thing with the coolant from MW3 and beyond. Maybe it was a little worse on MW4 when it became a slugfest.

That was something that both MechWarrior 2 and MW2:Mercs also had an issue with. I'm not sure, but I am thinking that it had to do with directly carrying over the TT values (including leg armor and internals) over to the MechWarrior games. The less armor and internals were ok when using RNG to determine hit locations, but when it comes to being able to aim, it didn't work as well.

MWO still has a similar problem with that, but it helped by often buffing the durability of legs, and still allowing a mech to move with one destroyed leg (albeit with reduced speed).

It is something that I will be curious to see how MW5 addresses it. I'm guessing that the legs might be buffed a bit and that mechs won't fall over with one destroyed leg (will stay mobile similar to MWO).

P.S. MW2 had it where if a leg was destroyed, the mech would balance on the remaining "good" leg. It was completely immobile, but would still torso twist to try and shoot you. It just took you getting completely behind it and killing it after that.

In MW2:Mercs...If I recall, blowing off the leg now caused the mech to fall over, but it could still shoot you while laying on the ground. Similarly, you could get behind it and destroy it.

 

[Apocal]

That was something that both MechWarrior 2 and MW2:Mercs also had an issue with. I'm not sure, but I am thinking that it had to do with directly carrying over the TT values (including leg armor and internals) over to the MechWarrior games. The less armor and internals were ok when using RNG to determine hit locations, but when it comes to being able to aim, it didn't work as well.

MWO still has a similar problem with that, but it helped by often buffing the durability of legs, and still allowing a mech to move with one destroyed leg (albeit with reduced speed).

It is something that I will be curious to see how MW5 addresses it. I'm guessing that the legs might be buffed a bit and that mechs won't fall over with one destroyed leg (will stay mobile similar to MWO).

MW2 and MW2:Mercs also had an issue where they kept TT damage values for the AC20/UAC20 but also followed the fluff that such weapons were rapid fire. So they just poured out 20-damage shots at the cyclic rate. A double UAC/20 Dire Wolf in MW2, once in range, could delete anything in the game in under a second. However, at the same time it would burn through something like 20 rounds doing it if you didn't fingernail clip the fire button, when the ammo came in batches of 5 per ton. It was the worst balance possible, especially when you could afford an AC20 or UAC20 as your Sunday Punch, while still boating enough lasers to handle small fry and other miscellaneous threats.

P.S. MW2 had it where if a leg was destroyed, the mech would balance on the remaining "good" leg. It was completely immobile, but would still torso twist to try and shoot you. It just took you getting completely behind it and killing it after that.

In MW2:Mercs...If I recall, blowing off the leg now caused the mech to fall over, but it could still shoot you while laying on the ground. Similarly, you could get behind it and destroy it.

You recall correctly.

 

[MeiSooHaityu]

MW2 and MW2:Mercs also had an issue where they kept TT damage values for the AC20/UAC20 but also followed the fluff that such weapons were rapid fire. So they just poured out 20-damage shots at the cyclic rate. A double UAC/20 Dire Wolf in MW2, once in range, could delete anything in the game in under a second. However, at the same time it would burn through something like 20 rounds doing it if you didn't fingernail clip the fire button, when the ammo came in batches of 5 per ton. It was the worst balance possible, especially when you could afford an AC20 or UAC20 as your Sunday Punch, while still boating enough lasers to handle small fry and other miscellaneous threats.

I don't remember the exact details, but the last time I played MW2, I used dual ballistics in the Marauder IIC for that reason. It just tore through enemies. I want to say it was dual 10s of some nature. I think A/C10s but it might have been Ultras or LBXs too. It has been a while. I think the game actually listed standard A/Cs, but even that I'm not sure about. In either case, I ran a dual 10 setup and I think 3 or 4 Medium Lasers.

This was crucial (for me anyway) to get through the Limo mission. I forgot how much I hated the Limo missions :/

 

[Yeach]

MWO still has a similar problem with that, but it helped by often buffing the durability of legs, and still allowing a mech to move with one destroyed leg (albeit with reduced speed).

That was first done in MW4 and one of the main reasons I MW4 is the my favourite / best of the lot so far.
Other reasons are
1. Hardpoints - so weapons were forced into the vulnerable arms; MW2 and MW3 having free criticals ment weapons all go into the torso/legs for protection with no disadvantages
2. Jumpjets - jumpjets were restricted to certain chassis and only did what they were meant to be; to get you over terrain and not to skate around the battlefield
3. Distinction between main weapons and backup weapons; ie PPC/Gauss/AC20 high damage, slow recycle, Medium lasers - low damage, fast recycle
4. Group fire-weapons - (may have been possible in the previous games but) the tutorial showed you how to use weapons as a different groups; low damage fast recycle group and high damage slow recycle, LRMs)
5. Unit details, you can put you own unit logo on your mech to show affiliation

 

[Apocal]

4. Group fire-weapons - (may have been possible in the previous games but) the tutorial showed you how to use weapons as a different groups; low damage fast recycle group and high damage slow recycle, LRMs)

It was entirely possible in MW2 and MW2:Mercenaries. The tutorial also spelled out how to set them up, but since it wasn't really required, most people probably just skipped right over it.

 

[Yeach]

It was entirely possible in MW2 and MW2:Mercenaries. The tutorial also spelled out how to set them up, but since it wasn't really required, most people probably just skipped right over it.

Little fuzzy on memory, but I seem to remember in MW2 you could choose a weapons group but you were still chain-firing through the weapons group; not firing all the weapons at the same time ie alpha.
At least thats what the tutorials showed; I think.

 

[Timaeus]

Little fuzzy on memory, but I seem to remember in MW2 you could choose a weapons group but you were still chain-firing through the weapons group; not firing all the weapons at the same time ie alpha.
At least thats what the tutorials showed; I think.

Chain/Group Fire was toggle. it could be individual, or everything in a group (or everything if ungrouped).

 

[Artificius]

MW2 Mercenaries. I liked Ghost Bear's legacy enough that I stumbled into the secret missions, but Mercs had the FRR and a gritty frontier vibe. And the soundtrack was much more metal than the other two: the piano parts of Gotterdamerung actually feel like the autocannons.

...Actually, GBL would have to take a back seat to the expansion campaign of Mechcommander for second favorite. Your company is chasing a rogue Smoke Jaguar commander around an ancient Star League munitions dump, an ominously desolate victim of the succession wars. They don't know why he's here, only that he's a war criminal with nothing to lose. Turns out there's a forgotten nuclear and chemical weapons cache, and he's fixated on going aggro on the IS with it.

 

[Ganggreenkhan]

While earlier versions of the MechWarrior series were more simulation oriented, I felt MW4 reached a peak in terms of the finished product along with community modding efforts.

Yes, MW4 had graphical issues that it should not have as the newest version upon launch, but by the time we got MW4 Mercenaries in 2002, the next several years offered a very complete package, with a wide variety of mechs, weapons and maps.

MekTek was at the time the top producer of community content, and I volunteered some time to help them get it done. The game was able to hold 100 mech chassis, and they maxed it out with a wonderful selection of Clan and Inner Sphere mechs, and their quality modeling put mechs in the game that were among the very best looking in any MW game up until then.

Guys like Ash rounded out the experience by putting in top shelf custom maps, and the custom map building tools that were released meant a really wild and creative spectrum of open maps and Solaris style arenas were available.

What the MW4 games got most correct was that they first pioneered the hardpoint system.

Sorry haters, but it IS a superior system for configuring mechs in the lab. While it was new at the time and I did approach it with considerable hesitation, in retrospect it was an upgrade to the old, open slot system on the classic record sheets for tabletop play.

The community used and abused free slots like a dead horse. In retrospect I felt the system translated poorly to video gaming media.

Sorry haters, but the hardpoint system keeps mechs more within their designs and roles:

There is a nice handful of 55-tonners in THIS game, and they all stand out as slightly different performers; something that would not have happened with full open slots.

I'll likely make few friends with this statement, but the only real argument for open slots is boating...plain and simple.

While we all know that boating is effective, it also makes a game with that system pretty damn vanilla, and dull in some respects.

If your mech hangers in MW2, MW3 and MWO were or are stuffed full of pure boats, especially jump-capable for pop-tarting, then you are not a fully rounded player, lacking creativity and flexibility. Sorry, but it is what it is.

We've all boated at some point and to some degree, but the open slot system has largely sapped the spirit and the spectrum of Battletech's deep lore and ambience.

After 30+ years as a Battletech veteran, I have to say one of the things that makes HBS BT a superior product among the many games in the franchise IS the hardpoint system.

Sure...it would be an easy and simple thing to go free slots. To make my lance a collection of brawlers loaded to the max with medium lasers...to make pure LRM boats...to specialize with crit and heat seeker variants, stacked with machine guns and flamers.

Sure.

But having to take each chassis on its own terms and functionality, and at least earlier in the game, also limited by the weapons and equipment I have in store, ultimately makes me a better player, and makes the game feel more correct.

Same here.... Though I must shamelessly admit the only thing in my current lance not a boat is the hatchetman. I tried playing stock in the begining of this campaign until I couldn't get through the higher skull missions. I'm farming heavies and boating seems to make that easier.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

Same here.... Though I must shamelessly admit the only thing in my current lance not a boat is the hatchetman. I tried playing stock in the begining of this campaign until I couldn't get through the higher skull missions. I'm farming heavies and boating seems to make that easier.

The only real boating I'm doing within the constraints of the hardpoint system is mostly LRMs. Which is done out of necessity, given how often we end up outnumbered and out tonned. I've resorted to a spotter to sensor tag and mass sling LRMs until the the opfor is low armor.

Some maps are just bad, and it's too dangerous to expose even an assault mech. It's the best way I've come to deal with this serious scripting problem.

 

[Apocal]

The main reason I don't boat is because AC20s can't fit everywhere.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

The main reason I don't boat is because AC20s can't fit everywhere.

I've found two rare models on a King Crab to be quite sufficient...

 

[Yeach]

The main reason I don't boat is because AC20s can't fit everywhere.

Boat Gauss Rifles instead then.