Talk:BattleTech
How come BattleTech is so rarely mentioned in the wiki? I mean, it's about GIANT ROBOTS and it isn't some doublplusnomanly animu.--Gufu 05:29, 19 April 2012 (BST)
- Because everybody is too busy writing articles for each individual bolter shell type in 40k. If you want to add more content it would be warmly received, we've been struggling to get other parts of the wiki up to speed. --Petro 05:39, 19 April 2012 (BST)
Added some stuff and hopefully I'll add some more later on. A bit of help would be nice, as always. --Gufu 02:57, 28 April 2012 (BST)
Added a few details about the mechs and a few of the factions. The page was lacking an overview of the mechs themselves. --Obird 165.234.250.1 16:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hey you guys do realize that endlessly freaking out at any sign of anything not a cishet white guy, makes you gamers look like a bunch of reactionaries who hate everything not cantering to you right?
Like you're everything the "sjws" claim you are also "force deversity" in the great houses?! Lol do you even play this game? There's been a ton of poc and women since day one of battletechs, there's a black samurai on the cover of one of the earliest lore book!!
Its a bit hilarious that you people still ignore the fact that, as I've already mentioned in the past, this wouldn't be an issue, if the devs didn't ban people for having a different opinion on this. Tactical Mehren (talk) 09:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
You clearly weren't giving an opinion you were annoying everyone else and told to fuck off. I've seen the comments you guys were making, nothing but "eew teh gays" and the whole "force diversity" that shit isn't working anymore, we know you just mean anyone that isn't a cishet white man, everything else is "sjw trash"
if "Wolves on the Border" would have come out today you would have thrown a massive hissy fit (btw you would do the same for Samus and all the others you like use as prove you don't hate female characters)
- If you're capable of holding a nuanced opinion, then you're capable of following the common convention in comment posting. Not doing so doesn't make you edgy, or an outlier, it just makes your collective arguments harder to understand by fucking up the flow of replies. TLDR: FFS, LEARN TO INDENT and SIGN YOUR POSTS.-2001:56A:F107:D500:DCD0:6AEF:A364:F9EF 15:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- It originally started me giving an opinion, saying that it was embroiled in controversy due to SJW-moves by the developers (and that was it), while praising the rest of the game as pretty decent if you can ignore the cosmetic garbage the devs shat in, until you all went in and sperged all over the place because OMG CRITICIZING THE ARBITRATORS OF ALL THAT IS RIGHT AND FAIR? REEEEEEEEE. Tactical Mehren (talk) 01:16, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
No one has to listen to your racist bullshit just because its an "opinion" your opinion is shit and clearly has zero place in it. That fact everyone else has moved on because they/them pronouns is a non issue you throw a massive fit over. Oh what "garbage" the "black people should be in video games"?
- Can you name one time I've even brought up race or sexual orientation in this article? Because you know what, I'll spill an opinion piece: I have no problem with another race apart from whites being in a setting (and I'm not even white to begin with), if it fits the setting. I have no problem of fags being in a game, if they don't go furry-tier asinine by being up in everyone's face in it, I really didn't have a problem with HBS including this genderwhatever bullshit because atleast I can ignore it if I choose and didn't get in the way. The only beef I ever presented, was them banning people over having a contrary opinion. I have no idea why you couldn't respect that part. Tactical Mehren (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Ignoring the diversity stuff I've played the game and it's pretty good not a single crash and the developers are working to fix some of the complaints so purely as a game I'd agree with the previous anon poster and say it's pretty good and worth a try as well. Not rushing to get in an edit war, but do feel the review of the game (especially as it is now rather than at launch is harsher than it needs to be).--Because (talk) 20:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC) Yeah so far the worst issue is a difficulty spike
Just wanting clarification[edit]
Is the tabletop version talked about in the mechanics section this one https://bg.battletech.com/books/introductory-products/ or one of the older ones.
- Err, both? Catalyst is running an updated version of the old FASA game, and for the most part, they're interchangeable at the base rules concept level. IIRC, Catalyst's version is a bit more newbie friendly as they actually have a beginner mode (skips things like critical hits and internal structure), which the original FASA version kicked you into the deep end of the pool with their boxed set (I miss that set...) and threw lead-weight belts at you if you decided to pick up the Battletechnology magazines as well. -2001:569:FC70:6E00:D931:13E8:336B:2FB8 21:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Connection to Traveller?[edit]
Internet rumor has it that Battletech/"Battledroids" started as Jordan K. Weisman's homebrew house rules to put humongous mecha in Traveller. The "Inner Sphere" was his Traveller setting. At first thought this sounds weird to me, but Trav and BT both used 2d6 for task resolution. Both were in settings with FTL travel and starships that could jump from star to star with a long cooldown between jumps. Both had FTL travel but no FTL communication. It seems to add up. I have no idea whether it's true but it's kind of amusing.
