Sign in to follow this  
Rob Zacny

Episode 432: BATTLETECH

Recommended Posts

Three Moves Ahead 432:

Three Moves Ahead 432


BATTLETECH
Harebrained Schemes' BATTLETECH is here and it has stomped its way into our hearts. The strategy game based on the PC simulations based on the RPG based on the tabletop game (or something like that) appeals to the more modern tactics fan and the Gen X supernerds that were there at the beginning. Rob, Rowan, Rob Daviau, and Jonathan Bolding discuss the merits of the game and come up with a strong recommendation for it despite some launch-time technical problems.

BATTLETECH

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I was disappointed to hear David Heron on this podcast. He has his good points, but he tends to be so negative and nitpicky, even about games he likes, that he has a chilling effect on an episode. It's not even four minutes in, just after introductions, that he's explaining his history with the BattleTech franchise largely by way of pointing out how bad the tabletop game was and how broken the MechWarrior games were. When the panel starts to discuss the game itself, his first substantive comment is to talk about how easy the first two thirds of it were (because he found a degenerative strategy, David loves his degenerative strategies), followed by a dismissive description of the game's character progression as "magic powers" and a litany of the game's other design compromises and bugs. Surely the first twenty minutes of your podcast are better spent on something more consequential than how wonky enemy reinforcements can sometimes be... I don't know, like covering the core game loop? I'm not against a nuanced or vigorous critique of a game that the panel overall likes, but Heron doesn't really seem interested in talking about a game unless he can frame it by its shortcomings.

 

After hearing Rob talk with Austin on the Waypoint article read for the game, I was hoping to get further conversation along similar lines, but with a panel of friends from across the industry. Instead I got a repeat of awkward bug-obsessed gripe sessions like Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion or XCOM 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2018 at 2:07 PM, Gormongous said:

Surely the first twenty minutes of your podcast are better spent on something more consequential than how wonky enemy reinforcements can sometimes be... I don't know, like covering the core game loop?

 

Taking this point by itself: I would tend to agree with you. It's something I've noticed over a couple of different episodes and I brought up in our chat. Sometimes the panelists dive into the minutiae right away and forget that it can be useful to give an overview of the game at hand for those that are unfamiliar with it. I'm guilty of that, too. Anyway, you have a fair point and I forwarded it on to the group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is often a problem. It's great when you talk about a game you're all familiar with so you get into deep right away, but quite often - especially with some complex wargames - it's hard to grasp something beyond a theme of a game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sunk the best part of 50 hours into this now and, for the most part I've been thoroughly enjoying myself. There is an absolute solid core to the game, and HBS's slavish (understandably so) respect and subservience to Battletech's history and origins shines through everything this game does - it's as clear as day and other than playing a little Mechwarrior 2 on the PSone back in the day, is nothing I have any prior knowledge or experience of at all. 

 

The tactical engine is really really good - It works superbly well for a TBS game, where the tactical decisions you make, and positioning, and heat management, and Mech loadouts all clearly have a direct baring on just how well you'll do in a mission - In having to address the elephant in the room these days when it comes to TBS games, what this game does not do is expose the player to it's RNG in anything like the way firaxis's XCOM reboots do. Sure, you can get a lucky headshot on occasion, and yes it's astonishing just how often one of your mechwarriors ends up in the med bay for months because they somehow take 3 successive headshot injuries in a row, but beyond that it's an engine that relies on the skill of the player to process in combat rather than occasionally just leaving it up to a "dice roll". 

 

All the mechs have their roles on the battlefield, and outfitting them properly has a real impact on your mission - the maps are really good, with proper topography and terrain to deal with, all with meaingful tactical positioning and effects to consider when maneuvering your oversized robots around. The writing is excellent, I love the characters and the story is compelling enough to make me look forward to seeing how it ends. 

 

Where it lets itself down in the very uneven difficultly spikes - some deliberate, some seemingly a consequence of the game's coding quirks - and a failure to explain itself very well to the player when it's doing so. Unfortunately on the storyline missions HBS's tendency to through you into very difficult situations with little explanation of exactly what they are expecting of you leads to some very frustrating experiences. It's just bad design at times, and something that really wasn't necessary.

 

Yes, it does have a lot of silly little animations and chase cam cinematics and things which slow things down a lot (I am sick of seeing my spaceship travel from one system to another for example. it looks lovely, I just don't need to see it for 3 minutes every other mission or so) but they are all fixable and nothing too much to get your knickers in a twist over. I wish missions could be a little shorter at times and they really need to vary mission types and maintain the viability of all the different mech types throughout the campaign (Light Mechs go into storage or get sold not that long into proceedings) but all in all I'm deeply impressed with this game. It's a definite Game of the Year contender for me. 

Edited by Sorbicol
Spelling mostly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The comment in the episode about indirect fire is completely wrong.  You don't need a Narc beacon to do indirect fire in the boardgame, and in fact, hitting a guy with a Narc beacon does nothing for indirect fire.  All that a narc beacon does is increase the number of missiles that hit in a salvo, thereby increasing the damage.  Indirect fire only ever needed a spotter and a firing mech with LRMs.  It may be possible that Narc gave this benefit to # of missile hitting during indirect fire, whereas its competitor Artemis IV did not, but I don't think that's the case.  The only piece of equipment that actually benefitted Indirect fire is the TAG laser which when combined with semi-guided indirect missiles could allow those specialized munitions to hit more easily. 

That said Indirect Fire was kind of trash a lot of the times because firing would take penalties of both the spotter's movement and firing mech's movement, so you'd have a much higher to hit number.  It was mainly good when using infantry which didn't incur penalties at all. 

 

On 5/1/2018 at 12:07 PM, Gormongous said:

I have to say, I was disappointed to hear David Heron on this podcast. He has his good points, but he tends to be so negative and nitpicky, even about games he likes, that he has a chilling effect on an episode. It's not even four minutes in, just after introductions, that he's explaining his history with the BattleTech franchise largely by way of pointing out how bad the tabletop game was and how broken the MechWarrior games were.

 

I personally appreciated his point of view, at least with respect to his declining interest in the board game.  Having played Battletech for a long time, and seen its population decline heavily, his view confirms what myself and a lot of players are already thinking. 
Also his comment about the MW games being broken applied only to the first game, Mechwarrior, not its many sequels- though again its worth noting his inaccuracy since he mentioned the Atlas which is not actually in the game. The Battlemaster, also mentioned, certainly is though. 

All that said, despite kickstarting the game I haven't gotten too far in the game myself- when the opening mission took 90-120 minutes of real time, I decided to put it on hold while playing one of my other backlogged PC games instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this