Best posts made by DeTortor
posted in Necromunda: Underhive Wars read more

That would be cool, but it's not something they really get final say over. It's not just technology, consoles don't want to share customers with eachother. They want all your friends to own the same system you own, their system.

posted in Necromunda - General Discussion read more

@deyjarl said in Things I hope they don't bring from their Mordheim:

@detortor said in Things I hope they don't bring from their Mordheim:

Well the video game market is larger than the table top for one

My stating the table top industry for Bloodbowl, Mordheim, and Necromunda are bigger than the video game markets is just as valid by your own dishonest logic.

Your statement only applies to the general video game industry not these individual titles. You have absolutely ZERO support to claim that the video game market for these specific titles is bigger. And especially given the number of years these Table Top games have been around and their world wide player base.

So put up or shut up and admit you have no leg to stand on for your claim. You can look at Steam data and see easily that Blood Bowl and Mordheim were niche fanbases compared to the wider game industry and only drew a tiny, tiny portion.

When you are able to show your data to prove your claim on these specific titles not the wider gaming playerbase. Then I'll be willing to show bring the steam data up. But I know you won't, because you don't have or know it, and never did.

So if you continue to want to be that dishonest, go right ahead, but most people are going to see your dishonesty pretty clearly.

The only one being sensitive is the fact YOU can't admit you are wrong.

I thought the other guy was dishonest in his refusal admit he was wrong on the rules. You are no better in your dishonesty.

Disagreement isn't dishonesty, trying to make your's the moral argument for video game mechanics is ridiculous to the point of childishness. I really doubt others think I'm being dishonest, it just looks like you're getting upset that someone has a different opinion than yours. I don't know what you're expecting, an in-depth study for an internet debate? I mean come on dude. You don't need to have data on these specific games to compare numbers and speculate.

It's self evident that the video game market is bigger than tabletop, it's a multibillion dollar industry. Tabletop is a niche market, and Necromunda/Blood Bowl/Mordheim are niche markets of a niche market. Therefore by nature targeting specifically the those table top and video game fans is going to be a tiny market. And I did evidence this, the comparison between both Mordheim and Blood Bowl to XCom, all Turn Based Strategy games, shows that it has ten times the numbers as judged by peak simultaneous playing, somewhere around 70,000 players at once compared to less than 7,000. If you don't like my example that's not me being dishonest, that's you questioning the validity. You looking at my evidence and accusing me of a liar doesn't make me think you're right, it makes me think you have no argument.

Now seeing as I can see you failed to grasp my point, here it is. I say that we can safely assume that a Table Top conversion video game would be a small market, therefore mechanics that appeal to the wider video game market is preferable. My opinion is that too much reliance on randomness is frustrating in a video game, making one think it's rigged because programmed randomness doesn't feel as legitimate as a dice roll. I believe this is shared by a wide base. Secondly, it's a fact that the devs already created a system that matches the video game format, therefore it is an easier task to remake and improve those mechanics, rather than design an entirely new system, one I don't think has a high appeal.

posted in Necromunda - General Discussion read more

There's Watchmen to consider. In the expanded rules of the original game they made it possible to turn your gang into the "Law", so they could possibly have it to where the Gang Leader is an Arbite and maybe have Enforcers for Elite options, then have the rest be some underhivers they use as a meatshields(Watchmen). It wouldn't have to be OP if they did it right. Arbites have a limited armory even if they have better guns standard. Something that would make sense to nerf them is that Watchmen and/or Arbites would be more limited in their options. Like Exotic or Xeno Weapons wouldn't be allowed, since Xeno weapons are illegal, so it would make sense that the Enforcer wouldn't allow their Watchmen to own or operate something like a Splinter Rifle, and weapon modifications are Heresy against the Mechanicus, so while Gangers can modify their weapons, Watchmen/Arbites would have to stick with Standard Issue. No extended magazines, no special scopes, just unmodified STC Weaponry. They're lawmen, not Inquisitors, they don't really get to change the rules.

This model can be used elsewhere. Like I'm a big Chaos fan and really want Chaos Cults to get added. They could use this model there too, with 1 Sorcerer or Chaos Space Marine leading a gang of cultists. They'd of course be able to modify their weapons, so to counterbalance they'd have to do stuff like make their weapons less reliable and harder to get to model Outlaw rules.

posted in Necromunda - General Discussion read more

Or if they didn't use Watchmen they can limit the "gang" population of Arbites by doing something like only allowing for Elite/Hero slots to be used and not even allow Arbites to have standard infantry. So it'd be kinda like if in Mordheim you only get your Leader and maybe get an extra Hero slot to offset not having any Henchmen available.

posted in Necromunda - General Discussion read more

I don't think a lot of people share your view of true randomness being desirable. To me, TT isn't something that should be faithfully translated into game mechanics, the system is too different. One thing is that when you play TT you can see the dice, you know that it really is random, and the reason I don't like to play say Poker on a game is I don't actually trust the program to be truly random. Even if it is, the perception that it's rigged will frustrate more people than it will please.

So no, I highly doubt they'll be going to do what you're looking for, and without collecting survey data, I think it's because gamers generally prefer more along the lines of Mordheim than what you're looking for, stats for damage and defense profiles creating a consistent ability to judge strengths and create tactics based on these. Randomized just seems like mash them together and see what happens. Personally I don't think the more randomized version would be the better game.

Now there will probably be differences, how the focus on guns is going to effect the game is unknown, if there will be Critical Hits and how much it will hurt. But if you're expecting them to abandon HP and damage in favor of single hit randomized I believe you'll be disappointed as I think the majority prefer it the way they did it in Mordheim. I'd be disappointed if they did it your way frankly, can't please everyone.