Battletech is back!!!

[mikeck]

Unlike Jarhead, I'm not a big fan of the Thunderbolt. It's a great mech but I'm not s laser fan and prefer Auto Cannons and PPC. I use a Highlander (which carries a mix of medium lasers, AC and LRMs  and has great armor) and an Orion as my frontline brawlers. On my Orion I carry an AC20++with 2 ammo and an AC 10++ with 2. The rest is armor except for 2 sinks. Both hold their own in any fight but I move them close.  I do use my Jager to good effect as a sniper...which i think is it's only real role late game. I arm it with a PPC+ and 2 AC5++. The Orion can hit just about anything it can see.

The 4th spot is usually a Catapult fitted as an LRM boat OR -one of my favorites - I use a QuickDraw as a melee brawler; especially if i there are enemy vehicles on the map. It is highly maneuverable and with a leg mod and full leg armor, is great at killing tanks and DFA on wounded mechs. I used to use my dragon for this but the QuickDraw is just as good at it but is more maneuverable.

So, you can still use the Jager but keep it out of brawls. The Dragon....don't know. Anything you would use it for something else works better

[Jarhead0331]

Don't forget there are several different variants of the Thunderbolt. I've seen at least three. S, SS and SE. But they do all seem to be laser heavy, so if for some reason (i.e. heat management) you shy away from lasers, the TB probably isn't the best choice.

I liked the quickdraw mid-game but think it is too light for late game combat. My QDs have also been laser heavy and not the best heat managers. I'm surprised mikeck prefers the QD over the TB, especially if  looking for a brawler. The TB is heavier hitting in melee, although definitely more lumbering.

[FlickJax]

i think i need 5th class of heavy.. although i have 8 of the 4 types i have they are not the best ;)

[FlickJax]

Got an orion last night so will try it out today :)

[Jarhead0331]

Got an orion last night so will try it out today :)

That's a keeper. Mine likes double-tapping fallen mechs on the ground.

[mikeck]

Don't forget there are several different variants of the Thunderbolt. I've seen at least three. S, SS and SE. But they do all seem to be laser heavy, so if for some reason (i.e. heat management) you shy away from lasers, the TB probably isn't the best choice.

I liked the quickdraw mid-game but think it is too light for late game combat. My QDs have also been laser heavy and not the best heat managers. I'm surprised mikeck prefers the QD over the TB, especially if  looking for a brawler. The TB is heavier hitting in melee, although definitely more lumbering.

Highlander and Orion are my favorites. BUT, the reason I like the QD over the TB for melee is maneuverability. I can move much further in a turn. So with jump jets, I can sprint one turn and then DFA on a vehicle the next. I DONT use any of the mechs for classic punching-kicking melee. Just DFA on vehicles. That's why I bring the catulpult or Thunderbolt instead if I'm just fighting mechs.

I always bring the Orion and Highlander. The Jager, Cat, TB And QD are interchangeable for the last 2 slots

[jamus34]

Somewhat off topic however I just saw a post on RPS that Paradox bought Harebrained.

Overall I guess it should be good for the longevity of the game.

[DennisS]

Somewhat off topic however I just saw a post on RPS that Paradox bought Harebrained.

Overall I guess it should be good for the longevity of the game.

Harebrained just got paid.

If there is one, single thing that Paradox does best, it's DLC's. This is very good news.

[jamus34]

I mean it could always be worse.

They could have gotten bought by EA to shut them down after the first underperforming game they release under their bloated release schedule with unrealistic timelines.

[ComradeP]

I've been reading this thread for a few weeks now, comparing it with reviews on Steam and elsewhere.

The main complaints elsewhere seem to be:

-generic story, which doesn't really do much with the lore or clan affiliation.
-repetitive missions.
-a limited number of side missions.
-enemy random lance generation balance feels off.

Aside from the story, most of those weak spots have been covered here as well, and yet you guys like the game enough to keep playing. That, the gameplay being good enough to overlook what's wrong with it, is quite a redeeming quality.

As someone who has never played tabletop mech games, Battletech in general, and put only a few hours of the MechWarrior franchise, I do still wonder if the game will be as enjoyable for me as it is for you. From what you post, many of you are veterans of the universe and/or series in one shape or the other (which does make it surprising that the game being a bit light on lore and clan customisation options doesn't bother you) so you had some idea of what you were getting into, but the negative points in the reviews are just the kind of thing that have kept me from making the plunge until now.

I liked Shadowrun: Dragonfall, but from what I gather the story in the Hong Kong was already quite a bit less inspired. Maybe they fired their writing team, which would explain why there's not much of a story in this game either.

I do hope Paradox doesn't take over quality control, as though it indeed does DLC well, their games tend to contain more bugs than a Tyranid infested space ship.

[Jarhead0331]

Its not the story that makes this game great. If its a really engrossing story that someone wants, then they would probably be better off playing a straight up RPG. The thing that makes Battletech such a great game is the opportunity to manage and command a mercenary company of mechwarriors. To choose contracts, manage pilots and mechs, scrounge for salvage and travel around the periphery improving your lance. On top of this, the tactical combat is fun and rewarding.

While most of the criticisms raised in your post are valid (i.e. missions do get repetitive, enemy lance creation does seem to be random and unbalanced and main story plot is a tad bit on the bland side, and I could even add some other criticisms), these things don't significantly detract from the game and the overall experience. Its not perfect, but there is very little else out there like it and my time with it has been very enjoyable. Furthermore, the game has so much potential to be expanded upon and improved. The possibilities are quite limitless.

Really...if you like management games, sci-fi strategy, turn-based combat action, giant robots, etc. This is not a game you need to think twice about getting.   

[Steelgrave]

Really...if you like management games, sci-fi strategy, turn-based combat action, giant robots, etc. This is not a game you need to think twice about getting.

+1  :bd: :bd: :bd:

[DennisS]

I've been reading this thread for a few weeks now, comparing it with reviews on Steam and elsewhere.

The main complaints elsewhere seem to be:

-generic story, which doesn't really do much with the lore or clan affiliation.
-repetitive missions.
-a limited number of side missions.
-enemy random lance generation balance feels off.

Aside from the story, most of those weak spots have been covered here as well, and yet you guys like the game enough to keep playing. That, the gameplay being good enough to overlook what's wrong with it, is quite a redeeming quality.

As someone who has never played tabletop mech games, Battletech in general, and put only a few hours of the MechWarrior franchise, I do still wonder if the game will be as enjoyable for me as it is for you. From what you post, many of you are veterans of the universe and/or series in one shape or the other (which does make it surprising that the game being a bit light on lore and clan customisation options doesn't bother you) so you had some idea of what you were getting into, but the negative points in the reviews are just the kind of thing that have kept me from making the plunge until now.

I liked Shadowrun: Dragonfall, but from what I gather the story in the Hong Kong was already quite a bit less inspired. Maybe they fired their writing team, which would explain why there's not much of a story in this game either.

I do hope Paradox doesn't take over quality control, as though it indeed does DLC well, their games tend to contain more bugs than a Tyranid infested space ship.

Let me give this a shot.
"-generic story, which doesn't really do much with the lore or clan affiliation."

It is a generic story. I strongly suspect that DLC's will address this, and give each "House" their own story or campaign. Personally, I like the back story, and I think it works very well.

"-repetitive missions" --- Nope. I have never seen a mission even close to another mission. Tonnage is randomized, as well as mech types and amounts. Each new mission is a complete surprise to me, in a tactical sense.

"-a limited number of side missions." --- Nope. Not unlimited. Only issue is that as you progress in the main story, the missions will get progressively more difficult. For me, I have only played 3-4 story missions, and I am two upgrades from a COMPLETELY upgraded ship. Others can tell you how many side missions I must have played to get 15 million credits or so.

"-enemy random lance generation balance feels off." --- Ummm....maybe. This last mission, I fought EIGHT mechs, ranging from 45 to 60 tons each. Easily 400 tons opposing my lance. It claimed to be a 2.5 skull. Toughest mission I have ever had. Good news/bad news here....I LIKE the variability of difficulty, and that the estimate of enemy forces is just that, an estimate, and one that may not be correct.

I played X-Com, from the original all the way to the newest iterations. This game is as good, or better, than any X-Com game. This is pretty high praise for me.

I have started a campaign for my grandson, who is a very, very bright young gentlemen, and he loves it. We have to fight over who gets to play, when he comes over. Now that I am completely retired, it's an easy call. He plays, goes home, I bust out a Leinenkugel Shandy, and beat the snot out of some mechs!

[Jarhead0331]

"-repetitive missions" --- Nope. I have never seen a mission even close to another mission. Tonnage is randomized, as well as mech types and amounts. Each new mission is a complete surprise to me, in a tactical sense.

I disagree with this. The side missions are undeniably repetitive. Its part of what is going to impact the longevity of the game. Sure, the mix of enemy forces is randomized, as is their location on the map, but the objectives are always the same and once you've done a mission type a few times, you more or less know whether you are going to face one lance, two lances, a mixture of mechs and vehicles, or automated turret defenses.

Compounding this problem, I think overall there is a lack of tactical complexity to the game. The only way to really be successful in late game action is to field the heaviest mechs available and alpha strike the crap out of everything. Maximum tonnage and maximum firepower. There is no real incentive to use lighter mechs and there is a striking dearth of technology to add to player strategy...no ECM, no stealth, no smoke, no shields, etc.  If there is one thing I would like to see fleshed out, its more useful gear to equip your mechs with in order to open up the tactical possibilities. 

[DennisS]

"-repetitive missions" --- Nope. I have never seen a mission even close to another mission. Tonnage is randomized, as well as mech types and amounts. Each new mission is a complete surprise to me, in a tactical sense.

I disagree with this. The side missions are undeniably repetitive. Its part of what is going to impact the longevity of the game. Sure, the mix of enemy forces is randomized, as is their location on the map, but the objectives are always the same and once you've done a mission type a few times, you more or less know whether you are going to face one lance, two lances, a mixture of mechs and vehicles, or automated turret defenses.

Compounding this problem, I think overall there is a lack of tactical complexity to the game. The only way to really be successful in late game action is to field the heaviest mechs available and alpha strike the crap out of everything. Maximum tonnage and maximum firepower. There is no real incentive to use lighter mechs and there is a striking dearth of technology to add to player strategy...no ECM, no stealth, no smoke, no shields, etc.  If there is one thing I would like to see fleshed out, its more useful gear to equip your mechs with in order to open up the tactical possibilities.

My main beef is the tactical requirement to field the heaviest mechs you can. It would be terrific to be able to have a light mech lance, and missions tailored to your force.

The randomization of the lance, and their placement, is sufficiently random for me to accept that the developers can only do so much.