Difficult from that template.

I doubt it was about the game BatleTech but about the new game based on a same IP, real time single player. And once more turn based will lost by failing find a public but one never satisfied of anything. Myself I'll never buy the action crap coming, I see already the boredom of combats with a single mech, facepalm.

And I can't believe fans of the board game wanted this, I remind many complain on that, probably from another game of past based on mech, not BattleTech ip. Humanity incoherency at its full amplitude, sigh.

And you want I help? No way! :-)

I didn't exploit anything, this is a basic tactic that works for the whole game.

It is not my job to make the game challenging for me, it is the game designers job.

Xcom never let you use one tactic that wins all encounters (at least not for the whole game). If you go all defensive in Xcom, enemy suddenly has flying hard to hit enemies that flank you. Ok you modify your tactics to include more explosives but now you get Psi enemies that ignore your cover and need to killed asap and explosives do less damage. In late game you get snipers ruling the game but what about maps with buildings/UFOs that have lots of things that break line of sight and fire!?

In Xcom2 you had chrysalids that waited for you buried in the ground, you could not just blindly charge forward. Your stealth people would also get discovered and it would ruin the concealment. In some situations any civilian could be a faceless. Archangels were super hard to hit and kill in one round and they would destroy all your cover.
Codex would kill all the ammo in your weapons in huge range and if you could not one shot them, you would just create more that could easily teleport to flank you.

Battletech has nothing like these. Nothing. It only has enemies that have 100 health instead of 50 and whose weapon does 50 damage instead of 25. They all still play the same. Only difference in gameplay was if your mech tonnage could not keep up with enemy so that forced you to change tactics, but that was not part of design but your quality as a player.

And again, I'm surprised it's that simple. Firstly if you played the campaign, then it's plain wrong.

Secondly if you played a lot of mercenary missions, again in many your long range focus will screw you up.

As you don't lie, you found a trick, if not, show me a let's play of someone showing this, and not for 2/3 missions, a play is a lot more than that.

Otherwise as I have never been that good at that game, it makes the arguing harder as you refuse consider get out of some OP hole.

Did you opened the topic at game forum? Everybody agreed with you? If not, why not? If yes, what's the link.

Also your comment is like it requires no adaptation, no matter the enemy, no matter the mission, you place mechs and bam mission finished, I just can't believe it at all.

The problem I have with your arguing, is that no matter the combat game, even XCOM, there's players complaining on that, one tactic for all combats. I remind have lost hours on that with a player and DOS combats. My experience is the games are never as bad than that and it's always a matter of OP hole.

EDIT: I'm even more hurt, because for me very few games match this squad/party turn based combats depth and tactical diversity. Ok XCOM2, perhaps even XCOM1, even if quite inferior to XCOM2. Eventually Final Fantasy Tactics too. Certainly not Dos, WL2, no RTwP is half close, ToEE, Blackguards 1&2, and so on, none are half close.

I think you are confusing the complexity and depth of the rule system and the AI and level design of the game. Battletech as Dasale says has a ton of factors which determine success and failure that far outnumber X-Com 2, which you mention.

My experience more mirrors Dasale's then yours, and while I can see your tactic worked well in the sandbox missions, which often require you destroy X enemies with no time limit, I'm surprised they worked well in all the story missions, as these often have enemies trying to destroy targets other than your mechs or require you to destroy enemies in a specific time period so that plinking at enemies with long range missles isn't fast enough, unless you are running 3 griffons or 3 catapults or other long range specialists, and maybe not even then. Anyways I had fun in most of the battles in the game, which you obviously did not. There are some problems with the AI. Enemy mechs too rarely go after your mechs which are not in LOS, even if they are more suitable targets. They also too often go after bulwarked targets. Enemy mechs which are heavily damaged also sometimes take evasive actions for one round instead of firing and then act normally the next round. This is also IMO an AI problem, but it has nothing to do with the rule set.

There was no plinking involved. I had two mechs that were 75% missile platforms and 25% medium lasers (for when missiles run out). I had two with bullwark that had more armor and mostly medium lasers (as they are most efficient tonnage to damage) and a bit longer range weapons like AC or larger lasers.
While some longer missions got a bit scary because of running out of missiles, I had little problems in 90% of side or main missions.

And as I said, I don't care how the tabletop rules work or are complex.
What was implemented into Battletech the computer game does not even have half the complexity of Xcom or Pathfinder the computer game.
I could actually finish Battletech on Ironman (self imposed one) with only one mech lost in whole game in my first attempt.
I could not do that in any Xcom game or Pathfinder.

In Xcom soldier abilities change throughout the game and so do enemy's abilities. Your and your enemy's weapons change throughout the game. You are forced to change tactics to win. In Battletech, nothing forced me to change anything.
Even that one mission that said to bring faster mechs I didn't change anything lol (but I did finish it in last turn).

Firstly this mainly highlights the boredom that was the meta level in your play.

This is rather bizarre because you argued previously that it was the only fun aspect. But one refit for all missions is pure meta boredom, ok not one refit but always the same type of refits, that is anyway pure boredom for the meta level.

Secondly, again, you have a trick, what you describe is impossible without an OP hole trick.

Thirdly, you describe no tactic here, I quote you gave up argue it was the single main basic tactic all along the game, good we are progressing.

I don't agree that Battletech is more complex than XCOM2 or even XCOM1, but your comment on Battletech are rather mysterious and impossible to explain.

I agree that Battletech rules and mechanisms are quite more complex than those of XCOM1&2, but where Fireaxis fills the hole it's:
- The difficulty tuning at max difficulty is much more on the rope.
- And the 3D gameplay is a lot more complex with a 3D terrain a lot more complex and adding a complexity level that Battletech doesn't have at this level for this aspect.

Where Battletech compensate it's on the other mechanisms than related to 3D terrains, and in my opinion where it lost, it's because it doesn't benefit of the same difficulty tuning level, and lost some flexibility from trying be more faithful to original IP which isn't a computer game base, and which is pure pvp not single player.

EDIT: My comment Battletech/XCOM are just the combats perspective. Despite a wide research tree, many equipment and many special abilities, XCOM is kid play compared to Battletech for the party design aspect.

Meta level fun came from getting new mechs and trying to fit as many new weapons, armor while still keeping same tactic working. When I could not, I even kept the same mech while waiting to get some other than what I got.
I enjoy playing with little numbers, that is why tweaking mechs in the bay was fun for me.

As for this tactic, I do consider this a basic tactic. It is first one that came to me in start of the game as soon as I read mech pilot abilities and got to try them on the battlefield and I just kept using it. I consider that basic.

Ok
I gave up, I'll just ask, could you list turn based combats good enough for you not at meta level? I mean from the pure perspective of combats, for a RPG that would be out of any fun from story, quests, choices, party building.

Let me guess, XCOM1&2, JA2 with mod only, X-Com, FFT, that's it? :-P Sorry but I couldn't resist. My question is serious, and I have serious doubts you enjoy squad/party turn based combats.

I enjoy quality turn based combat.
I loved both old and new Xcom (for different reasons), JA2 (I never tried the mods), Temple of Elemental Evil, Knights of the Chalice, Underrail and quasi turn based like Pathfinder Kingmaker or BG2 (spell duels were fun there).
Also Blackguards 1.

Ok at least it's not just those very classic.

I don't understand the problem you had with Battletech but it's clearly pointless to argue more about the topic.

For me, and for those games:
- XCOM1&2 ok I'm not hyper fan with the design focus on gambling/gambling temptation, but still agree it's among tops.
- JA2 even without mod is certainly rather deep too, but the AI can be very weird, and the gameplay is too hectic for my taste (awful UI, many overwatch is just too hectic)
- Temple of Elemental Evil, I only remember I really enjoyed the combats, it's too long ago to remind the details.

For single character turn based, you certainly quote 2 good achievement but it's repetitive and simple in comparison of any well designed party turn based combats. And no way I can understand you prefer those combats to those of Battletech, for me they are far on any point of view, diversity, depth, tactical possibilities. For me it's even what is killing Underrail last parts.

For the RTwP, for me BG2 magic duel is right what I found tedious, it's typical combats solved the few first seconds of the combats. Overall BG2 is good stuff, now no way with the same depth and tactical diversity than party turn based. For PK I even find it a bit average and limited, good only at meta level, acceptable after.

Hey to each their own.

Myself I'd quote:

• King's Bounty The Legend
• Final Fantasy Tactics
• XCOM 1&2
• Battletech
• Ultimate Space Commando
• Storm Guard Darkness is Coming
• Templar Battleforce
• Super Dungeon Tactics
• Phantom Doctrine combats (not the stealth aspect, alas it's more a spies game)
• Massive Chalice
• Age of Wonders 3 but not play all battles along a campaign

Not one RPG, a few are borderline Tactic RPG.

Thank you for another great review, @forgottenlor. Keep'em coming :)

Just sharing this.:biggrin:

Three Page BattleTech Review - Gamebanshee

When I reached half the campaign, I started to stop enjoying it.
However I am having a huge blast of fun in Roguetech.