Author Topic: A question about year 3067  (Read 6541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • l33tp0intz: +205/-9
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #15 on: December 01, 2010, 05:24:26 AM »
There's a few 3067 mechs that would be great additions.

The only objection I have tech-wise is, as before, stop giving the IS all the toys. Clan doesn't even have their Heavy Lasers or ATMs, and we're talking about giving the IS Heavy PPCs to 'narrow the gap' between their PPCs and Clan PPCs. Not needed right now.

Offline Flyingdebris

  • Bushy B is my homeboy
  • MWLL Contributor
  • Living Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 2398
  • l33tp0intz: +135/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2010, 09:50:21 AM »
i voted yes because i love to have more different toys to play with. Let the individual tourneys figure out what year of gear they want to allow in their games, but i'd like to see as much variety covered to suit as many tastes as possible.

Wherever mechs are needed, I am there

Offline dCK-Ad_Hominem

  • Lance Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 632
  • l33tp0intz: +16/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2010, 11:35:19 AM »
We had this already...

Offline (TLL)Sky_walker

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2638
  • l33tp0intz: +66/-1
  • Close Range Attack Forces
    • MWLL Wiki
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2010, 01:07:56 PM »
We had it but this was a different thing. I'd like to have some of stuff made till 3068, notably Mechs/ASFs but not really an equipment or weapons from TRO 3067.
MWLL Wiki Newsletter: Wiki suffers from spammers and lack of activity - change it now, jump in and contribute with something useful! :D


Proud to be C.R.A.P. inspiration # MWLL Wiki Admin # MWLL Alpha Tester # Dev Team # MWLL Defense Force Mercenary - Battlemech Barracks

Offline CHH Siege

  • Lead Texture Artist
  • MWLL Developer
  • Lance Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • l33tp0intz: +44/-0
  • Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus
    • Clan Hell's Horses: Gamma Galaxy Reborn
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2010, 09:35:09 PM »
As far as I'm concerned, CBT died with 3065: too much of what happened after that is nonsense, most especially the Jihad. No offense to the lurking former FASA employees/writers, but... really, anything that came after that should be called Battletech 2.0 WizKidsTech or something, and generally considered an entirely separate game, much the way AD&D and D&D 3.5 are more or less completely incompatible, regardless of any shared base premise or lore.



Proud designer of the Mk II E 'Siege Engine' and the 'Perseus'...
Lo-Wang say, "Animated .gif is worth one mega-word."

Offline HAARP

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2338
  • l33tp0intz: +212/-1
  • I regret nothing
    • Clan Jade Wolf
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2010, 12:08:06 AM »
As far as I'm concerned, CBT died with 3065: too much of what happened after that is nonsense, most especially the Jihad. No offense to the lurking former FASA employees/writers, but... really, anything that came after that should be called Battletech 2.0 WizKidsTech or something, and generally considered an entirely separate game, much the way AD&D and D&D 3.5 are more or less completely incompatible, regardless of any shared base premise or lore.
qft
don't bother sending me PMs, I probably won't be reading them in time.

Offline Hartsblade}12th VR{

  • Alphatester
  • Lance Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • l33tp0intz: +25/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2010, 12:22:08 AM »
I voted no because I'm more of a fan of Pre-Clan BattleTech.  I'd be happy if the whole the mod was Pre-Clan ;) (that'w why I have big hopes for MW5...I know I'll probably be disappointed)  :-\

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • l33tp0intz: +205/-9
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2010, 04:03:24 AM »
Out of curiosity what would you people have been happy with as a continual follow-up to the Battletech timeline?

Now this is an outsider looking in - I never cared about tabletop or even the novels, but I am familiar with a lot of the major players and history - a lot of the BT history that you're "happy" with makes me roll my eyes and I'm sure it's entirely to blame on the book authors. Science fiction writers have this awful habit where their main characters basically end up as being superhumans and everyone else is a redshirt plebeian. Take Tukayyid - the entire process and events surrounding it sounds like the writers painted themselves into a corner and needed some moronic way to let the IS win. So you end up with 'superhuman' mech pilots, absurd coincidences, and unbelievable odds.

I know early early battletech revolved around a lot of key players. Then you get to 3060 and you have like... Victor Steiner-Davion who is basically made out to be a flawless, perfect messianic character. The entire history revolves around him.

That's why I avoid sci-fi novels. I have read some fantasy or sci-fi by a few of the authors of BT, such as Stackpole. It all kind of follows the same formula.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2010, 04:11:22 AM by Frostiken »

Offline CHH Siege

  • Lead Texture Artist
  • MWLL Developer
  • Lance Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • l33tp0intz: +44/-0
  • Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus
    • Clan Hell's Horses: Gamma Galaxy Reborn
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2010, 05:21:48 AM »
Er, I read the first three Clan invasion novels back when they came out... I believe I was in 7th or 8th grade. The stuff I love about Battletech came from years of 3025 - 3050 era tabletop games,  a campaign or two of the Mechwarrior RPG , and many hours studying the TRO's and other source material, and playing very *Battletech* video-game ever made. Yes, I did read and game with some of the later source material, but I never cared for any of it. A lot of the designs were too anime/mecha styled for my liking (in terms of the Battletech universe, at any rate), and much of the tech and story I thought to be... too over the top, shall we say.

As for a follow up... Not all good things need to be expanded on indefinitely, and all artists need to learn that there is a point where you stop messing with that particular piece and move on to the next thing before you ruin it irrevocably, such as George Lucas has done. Whether 3065 was the time for that for CBT for certain, or not, I can't say for sure. I can say I didn't care for the path they took, but I just don't know if it should have kept going at all, train-wrecked entirely, or something completely different.



Proud designer of the Mk II E 'Siege Engine' and the 'Perseus'...
Lo-Wang say, "Animated .gif is worth one mega-word."

Offline Hartsblade}12th VR{

  • Alphatester
  • Lance Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • l33tp0intz: +25/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2010, 05:50:24 AM »
... The stuff I love about Battletech came from years of 3025 - 3050 era tabletop games,  a campaign or two of the Mechwarrior RPG , and many hours studying the TRO's and other source material, and playing very *Battletech* video-game ever made...

This is my experience also.  I never read the books, never really had an interest, maybe because of what Frostiken said about the authors:

...Science fiction writers have this awful habit where their main characters basically end up as being superhumans and everyone else is a redshirt plebeian. Take Tukayyid - the entire process and events surrounding it sounds like the writers painted themselves into a corner and needed some moronic way to let the IS win. So you end up with 'superhuman' mech pilots, absurd coincidences, and unbelievable odds...

Long before the books were written, I fell in love with what the table top game and TRO's did to spark my imagination, and that is the BattleTech/Mechwarrior experience I look for...not what some hack of a SciFi writer dreamed up  ;)  and the further you get from that core experience, the less desireable it becomes for me.

Offline dCK-Ad_Hominem

  • Lance Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 632
  • l33tp0intz: +16/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #25 on: December 06, 2010, 12:11:15 PM »
The problem with the books is that most sci fi authors suck. I know this wil sound like heresy to some, but after reading the Jade Phoenix trilogy I was majorly disappointed. Aidan Pryde is depicted to be a lucker beyond belief. Also there are a lot of logical fallacies involved.

As for the progression of the universe: I would have liked to have had a second invasion (let's face it, the houses would have continued to eat each other up after Bulldog) preceded by the absorption of the Ghost Bears and annihilation of the Novacats and exiled wolves. It should have turned into an all out war taking place on more settings than one would be able to count (also bringing along all of the clans [how come there is next to no literatue involving the Star Adders?!]).

Offline Kelmola

  • Star Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 841
  • l33tp0intz: +62/-1
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2010, 07:40:36 PM »
Out of curiosity what would you people have been happy with as a continual follow-up to the Battletech timeline?
The one justification behind Dark Age was to be a point of entry for new players. Why this needed a "reboot" of the universe is questionable because the point of entry could just as well have been 3025 as it still is in CBT. (But then the players could not have made the story themselves because they would have known what will happen... why didn't this prevent people entering the hobby during the intervening years?) And to get into a situation where Mechs are primitive and priceless, you had to tear the universe apart, because at the end of FedCom civil war, every minor nobleman seemed to have a division of 'Mechs oozing with Clan & SL tech at his disposal, making them as rare and priceless as a hovercar. Yes, I understood that this was not quite the original vision what BT was all about, and I could have accepted some sort of toning down of this...

...but then just after 9/11 they come up with the idea of a "Jihad" to accomplish the fall of civilization. Cheap. I know, sci-fi has always been about mirroring actual issues into a speculative setting, but this was just plain retarded. Sure, Weisman & co claim they had planned this all along, before DA and before 9/11, and that the decision to launch DA just caused them to "jump forward" in the already-planned timeline with no real-world connection involved whatsoever. I believe that about as much as I believe in honest politicians.

Yes, WB were dangerous fanatics but from all other material up until the Jihad one was led to assume that they had just about enough troops to take and hold Terra and IRL troll the galaxy for the lulz, not that they would be able to overrun most of known space with ease. The common sci-fi trope "old enemies have to unite against a common foe" was already used with the Clans, using that again so soon was just lazy. Plus Devlin Stone got the Great Houses to cooperate too easily considering how easily the new Star League had fallen just recently.

Now, if the DA would have been a result of Fifth Succession War with IS fighting itself and Clans fighting both IS and each other, continuing along the unresolved plotlines, that would have felt more "natural".  Say, Wolves (aka Vlad) thought they were not bound by the Great Refusal plus they already had a beef with LC and Wolf-in-Exile, plus they were still bitter that they had to temporarily ally themselves with their old enemy the Jade Falcons. But if the Wolves had made a move against either (IMO Katrina would probably have coaxed Vlad against the LC to get back into power), the other would have certainly pounced them. Wolf invasion of LC would have drawn in the GB & NC, now sworn to protect IS, which would have provoked a response from Crusader clans from Homeworlds, which would have prompted the left-behind Clans to start grabbing land and power there. Resurgent FWL could have made a move against weakened FS with the help of ascent CC, drawing in DC as well. Some "southern" Periphery states which were spared from the Clan invasion could have started grabbing at FWL/CC/FS territories in turn. With so much going on and WB's attention drawn elsewhere, ComStar could have tried to retake Terra, causing WB to start terrorist attacks against ComStar across IS. A true free-for-all would have ensued with much the same results as the First Succession War, but it would have felt much less forced than the Jihad we got.
Then you get to 3060 and you have like... Victor Steiner-Davion who is basically made out to be a flawless, perfect messianic character. The entire history revolves around him.
Maybe the authors realized that eventually, or maybe they were building up to make him a tragic figure all along. After he's achieved nearly everything, his world is all but destroyed. Only three and half of the clans actually pay any attention to his offer of coexistence after the Great Refusal (Nova Cat, Ghost Bear, Diamond Shark, plus Wolf-in-Exile), the others (Wardens and Crusaders alike) just keep preparing for Revival II. His one true love is assassinated. His sister continues her treachery and as a result his realm falls into a civil war, never to unify again. All his political ploys fail (the clone plot is exposed, St. Ives is reannexed). Even the second Star League becomes a victim of political intrigue before it collapses. If this is not hubris and downfall worthy of a Greek tragedy, then I don't know what is. But I admit, before that he was becoming quite the Mary Sue. And also, they were on the verge of making an universe wholly unsuitable for endless war: if Victor had been able to keep FedCom together, marry Omi, and keep his puppet on FWL throne then he could have easily become a new Cameron - Cappellan Confederation and the non-unified Clans would not have stood a chance.

Offline Nebfer

  • MechWarrior
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • l33tp0intz: +28/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2010, 10:07:11 PM »
IIRC FASA was planning on doing a WOB Jihad of sorts before they went kaput. Then Wizkids showed up and put DA some 75 years into the future of B-tech, which forced FanPro who picked up regular B-tech to make sence of what DA said happend, and to fill in the gaps...

Though it did not help that for a bit that the DA fluff was a bit disjointed and incomplete which put a bad taste into the preexisting player base...

Offline MatthewPryde

  • Lance Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 735
  • l33tp0intz: +66/-0
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2010, 10:11:50 PM »
As far as I'm concerned, CBT died with 3065: too much of what happened after that is nonsense, most especially the Jihad. No offense to the lurking former FASA employees/writers, but... really, anything that came after that should be called Battletech 2.0 WizKidsTech or something, and generally considered an entirely separate game, much the way AD&D and D&D 3.5 are more or less completely incompatible, regardless of any shared base premise or lore.

I can say that half-way through the FedCom is essentially the end of CBT lore currently published. Everything post is up to you if you consider it canon, or an alternate universe, waiting paitently for the real one to be released as soon as people stop being such @#$%es about copyright control in the United States.
Comstar: Star Colonel Matthew Pryde, Commander of the 1st Peregrine Strikers, Delta Galaxy

Offline CHH Siege

  • Lead Texture Artist
  • MWLL Developer
  • Lance Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • l33tp0intz: +44/-0
  • Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus
    • Clan Hell's Horses: Gamma Galaxy Reborn
Re: A question about year 3067
« Reply #29 on: December 08, 2010, 12:50:23 AM »
+1



Proud designer of the Mk II E 'Siege Engine' and the 'Perseus'...
Lo-Wang say, "Animated .gif is worth one mega-word."