Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > Mongoose Traveller

Mongoose Traveller Discussion forums for the Traveller rules from Mongoose Publishing.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 6th, 2008, 01:09 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default Timing/Effect and Initiative Finalized

From Mongoose regarding what items have been finalized:

Quote:
...The basic time/effect mechanic isn't going to be changing any more (although it's been slightly tweaked from 3.2 to have open-ended results instead of capped; we're currently adjusting the other figures, such as weapon damage, to reflect this). Mechanics based on this, such as the skills and combat sections, are also pretty much finalised with a few exceptions - movement in combat being one of those. If you still want to look at these sections, concentrate on amendments to the basic systems and picking up missing stuff rather than sweeping changes.
So two of the worst RPG mechanics that I've seen are gonna be combined in the new Mongoose Traveller. Great.

And the numerous valiant attempts to beat the timing/effect system into something resembling a workable system were in vain. I am unsurprised; clearly, the designer is in love with his mechanics and will brook no significant change to them. Personally, I think he should have been honest about this with the playtesters.

Just what we've been waiting for...another crappy version of Traveller with defective mechanics...<sigh>

I also note that Mongoose has declined to release the final draft of the timing/effect system to playtesters. I don't blame them; if previous versions are any indication, they will be defective and will attract some negativity. Can't have that, you know.

Last edited by tbeard1999; February 6th, 2008 at 01:25 PM..
  #2  
Old February 6th, 2008, 02:47 PM
Able Baker Able Baker is offline
Citizen: SOC-10
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 64
Gallery : 0
Able Baker Citizen
Default

That´s a bummer.

Have you ever seen a positive playtest report online?
Like an actual play example?

I´ve only seen negative ones, but there are people who still like it. They haven´t posted public replays though.
  #3  
Old February 6th, 2008, 03:13 PM
robject's Avatar
robject robject is offline
Marquis
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,789
Gallery : 9
Visit robject's Blog
robject has disabled reputation
Default

It's a shame, because it seems like such a clever mechanic. I should try it out and see what happens.

It probably is a preferred mechanic for the designer.

'Course, I've been indirectly on the receiving end of criticism for Traveller, and what seems to happen is that a core group dislike one or two key things, voice their concerns, but then get angry when nothing changes. Meanwhile, others who don't mind it so much don't speak up. So the net result is negative on the boards.

I'm not saying tbeard is fuming -- I'd be surprised if he was, he seems pretty calm -- but I think others may be. Apparently the mechanic seems to break up the flow of play, in a way that other mechanics don't (perhaps because of the turn phases created). The phases themselves seem reminiscent of CT starship combat.
__________________
Imperiallines magazine
My Helpful Stuff for Traveller5
IMTU tc+ t5++ 3i(+) au ls+ / OTU 44% an+ dt+ ge- j- jf+ n- pi+ pp+ tr+ tv- uwp+ xb+
Tools Link

Last edited by robject; February 6th, 2008 at 03:19 PM..
  #4  
Old February 6th, 2008, 04:20 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robject View Post
It's a shame, because it seems like such a clever mechanic. I should try it out and see what happens.
Yeah, that's the problem. It is a clever mechanic. It simply yields lousy results. Worse, there are a number of alternative approaches that can produce the same information without the lousy results.

And at the end of the day, cleverness is no substitute for reasonable results. IMHO of course.

Quote:
It probably is a preferred mechanic for the designer.
Seems safe to assume that, given his reluctance to make any significant changes to it.

Quote:
I'm not saying tbeard is fuming -- I'd be surprised if he was, he seems pretty calm -- but I think others may be.
Thanks for the compliment, but I have probably fumed at times. I see a priceless opportunity being wasted here and that bums me out.

Quote:
Apparently the mechanic seems to break up the flow of play, in a way that other mechanics don't (perhaps because of the turn phases created). The phases themselves seem reminiscent of CT starship combat.
The description that I think sums up both the timing/effect and initiative systems is "needlessly fussy".
  #5  
Old February 6th, 2008, 06:20 PM
Supplement Four's Avatar
Supplement Four Supplement Four is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 9,052
Gallery : 0
Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
I see a priceless opportunity being wasted here and that bums me out.
I'm fuming. On the inside. I'm just not that vocal about it aside from a post here and there. I learned with the ACT playtest (if you change the names of ACT and Mongoose, you're talking about the same type of playtest) that nothing will change.

I'm not sure what the playtest is all about? Maybe, it's marketing and typos.

Anyway, I'm completely disappointed in Mongoose. I was excited they were going to take on Traveller. Heck, I would have voted for them to do so, predicting the results would be G-R-E-A-T.

Sadly, they're not.

Whelp, I'll just stick with my first love, Classic Traveller.

(And, another old grognard doesn't buy MGT...)
  #6  
Old February 6th, 2008, 06:46 PM
robject's Avatar
robject robject is offline
Marquis
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,789
Gallery : 9
Visit robject's Blog
robject has disabled reputation
Default

OK. Well, I'll tell you then, the mechanic was an early preference, and it was known to be a calculated risk to put in the rules. In other words, the authors are out to make something they like, and some of us aren't going to be happy about that, and they knew it.

Perhaps everyone fortunate enough to see a game develop sees this happen, again and again.

I've seen Marc called names on this forum, mainly for his immobility regarding what he wants. I'm starting to suspect that that's just the way game development goes, and no matter how badly your game is going awry, if you're not catching crap from someone, then you've got no chance at all, and noone ever cared about stuff you do.
__________________
Imperiallines magazine
My Helpful Stuff for Traveller5
IMTU tc+ t5++ 3i(+) au ls+ / OTU 44% an+ dt+ ge- j- jf+ n- pi+ pp+ tr+ tv- uwp+ xb+
Tools Link

Last edited by robject; February 6th, 2008 at 06:55 PM..
  #7  
Old February 6th, 2008, 06:54 PM
robject's Avatar
robject robject is offline
Marquis
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,789
Gallery : 9
Visit robject's Blog
robject has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supplement Four View Post
I'm fuming. On the inside. I'm just not that vocal about it aside from a post here and there. I learned with the ACT playtest (if you change the names of ACT and Mongoose, you're talking about the same type of playtest) that nothing will change.
I don't think I've seen you be rude on this forum, ever, either. So you must keep it all bottled up, or take it out on NPC corsairs in the outsystem. "This one's name is TBeard! Blamblamblamblam!!!"

So, I want to hear mooore about nothing changing in re: ACT playtest. I've heard naught but kudos about ACT, nary a snivel indeed. So what gives?
__________________
Imperiallines magazine
My Helpful Stuff for Traveller5
IMTU tc+ t5++ 3i(+) au ls+ / OTU 44% an+ dt+ ge- j- jf+ n- pi+ pp+ tr+ tv- uwp+ xb+
Tools Link
  #8  
Old February 6th, 2008, 07:20 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robject View Post
OK. Well, I'll tell you then, the mechanic was an early preference, and it was known to be a calculated risk to put in the rules. In other words, the authors are out to make something they like, and some of us aren't going to be happy about that, and they knew it.
You mean they actually knew about the flaws and absurdities in that system and then went ahead anyway? Huh. I don't know whether I find their arrogance or their idiocy to be most offensive, if what you say is true.

"Hey Bob, got a great idea. Let's talk our boss into paying serious money for a Traveller license, then produce a version with mechanics that we know are defective and that will probably annoy most fans. That'll score us promotions for sure!"

I don't whether to despise them or pity them...
  #9  
Old February 6th, 2008, 07:31 PM
Gallowglacht's Avatar
Gallowglacht Gallowglacht is offline
Citizen: SOC-12
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 491
Gallery : 0
Gallowglacht Citizen
Default

Yeah, they were singing its praises long before the playtest files came out. In the SST section they said watch this space, something awesome coming. Yay I thought the Fleet and Skinnies books. No even better they said. We're killing off SST and remaking Traveller, it'll be awesome and we never liked SST anyway.

MGT just leaves me cold. A playtest left me bored and disapointed and I see the logic of all the flaws your analysis pointed out.
  #10  
Old February 6th, 2008, 07:37 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallowglacht View Post
Yeah, they were singing its praises long before the playtest files came out.
Well, it appears I had them all wrong. I thought that they were just negligent and sloppy. I had no idea that someone could actually *play* that system for an extended amount of time without recognizing its defects...

The good news is that any residual guilt I might have had for criticizing this kludge has evaporated. Whilt I do feel loyalty to MWM and Traveller, I feel no obligation to spend money supporting an incompetent game design team's ego trip.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Timing/Effect System Broken on Failures As Well tbeard1999 Mongoose Traveller 59 January 31st, 2008 12:26 AM
Mass effect shmass effect. I wanna traveller PC game! The Thing Random Static 12 December 8th, 2007 01:11 AM
Timing for T5 Swordy Pre-Release Discussion 3 March 22nd, 2003 11:12 PM
Avery: A question of timing Gatsby The Lone Star 1 May 27th, 2001 07:01 PM

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010-2013 Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.