this was a very nice balance to play with. in fact if you created a melee oriented mech, you would want a mech that had a very high amount of engine power but weighted very light as possible while still being able to handle itself. as any excess power would be a factor to how much damage a mech's melee attack would do. in Front mission, you had Power, the torso of the mech would house the engine and this would determine the amount of weight the mech could support, but you werent always expected to max this out. Mech's limitations (weight) - so in battle tech, one of the limitations a mech has is weight, each mech can only handle x amount of weight that it can carry you want to max this out without going over as much as possible. though I do understand why that was not an option. but I feel being able to customize the mech itself was one of the funnest parts of the game, and this was one of the disappointments I had with battletech. though this process is extremely expensive and thus unless you were willing to spend a lot of time grinding in the simulators to get money to buy all these parts, you would have to compromise a lot of the times. you can mix and match different arms, legs, torsos and what not to your hearts content, thus allowing you to create your own perfect killing machine. in front mission, the mechs are fully customizable. the mechs themselves are not really customizable outside of the weapons and equipment you can put on them, and the amount of armor each part can have. in Battle tech, you are given a set number of different mechs. Mech design - so this one is going to be pretty big so i'll break it down to parts. for instance instead of saying a mech can move 150m, I'd rather it say it can move 10 spaces. though I do wish it also kept the movement values a more simplistic design of just integer values instead of actual distance as it makes it a bit confusing to non table top players to understand exactly how far a mech can go. I find the hexagonal movement is a much more intuitive design and works much better in terms of angles and such. but in Battletech, it is more life like and in a hexagonal pattern. Movement - so in front mission, they just used the XYZ graph style movement, where it is a simple grid of squares and you move accordingly. where as front mission was made first as a video game and all it's mechanics are designed well with each other. but because of this, there are some aspects that just doesnt really translate well to the video game. Battle tech was a table top game first and its clear that the dev team wanted to try to create a game that wanted to keep to it's roots as much as possible. So first off, I wanted to talk about how each game was developed or at least my understanding of it. maybe some developers down the road will see this and create a new IP that takes the best of both worlds and create an amazing game for us. my intention for this post is simply to show how front mission handles some aspects and how battle tech handles it. so I apologize if I offend any hardcore battle tech fans. but sadly this game feels like a whole different beast all together. I know there are a few games down the road that will be more similar to it, and to be honest I was hoping this game would fill in that void for me. I personally come from a front mission background and miss that franchise deeply. So I just wanted to make a post about how these 2 franchises are both great in their own worlds and all the features each one has and how they differ.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |