>>95920192This is a response I saw elsewhere, btw, wanted to post it here.
>>95919968If the argument becomes 'well we actually wanted to lean towards 'real robot' not 'super robot' then it failed even harder because these are not how real robots work, the genre, mechanically.
The way Lancer works is that you have a mech with their inherent powers, and then as the mech 'levels up' you can pick from a list of powers to add on to customize it. There is no economy system for buying parts or selling battlefield salvage. There is no tracking of ammo or missiles remaining. There is no system for needing to repair and rearm your machine afterwards. You can't even determine enemy strength at a glance because none of the mechs have any consistency in what they are and are not capable of- especially not the NPC mechs.
There's nothing that grounds the mechs in the world. No longer term consequences of a battle that forces characters to stop and consider if a fight is even worth doing. There's no pilot-mechanics to let the pilots bluff or taunt the enemy pilots. There's no 'talking it out' rules. There's no 'my mech is damaged, can we still win?'. There's no moment in which the realities of the situation is going to force the characters to reconsider their beliefs and objectives.
And without any of that- you no longer have a real robot, because consequences disappear as soon as the fight is over.
So it doesn't feel like a Super Robot game because there's nothing that relates to the characters of the pilots. It doesn't feel like a Real Robot game because there's nothing that grounds any of the mechs in the world.
So what does it feel like? With the 'mechs' and the 'inherent powers' and the 'upgrade tree' and the 'area combat without longer term consequences'?
It's a Hero-Shooter. It's Overwatch.
And that annoys me.
(2/3, bigger than I thought)