Recap of Issue With MGT

[tbeard1999]

I'm currently involved in a furball with some True Believers on the Mongoose forum. I've been accused, inter alia, of thoughtcrime and unorthodoxy by the faithful. If you're interested, here's the link. http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=478813#478813

However, in the course of trying to reason with one fender-head, I did re-state my objections in a fairly concise manner. Every one of these objections is fleshed out and usually supported by statistical analyses (where applicable) in other posts. But I thought it might be helpful to recap them:

1. I believe that the timing/effect (T/E) system yields the statistical results I showed in my previous posts.

2. a. I believe that these results are dubious and will result in a crappy game.

b. For instance, I am unable to reconcile the fact that the harder the task, the less amount of time a successful task will tend to take.

c. I am also very uncomfortable with the fact that the autofire system seems to radically move from "virtually no chance of hitting" to "virtually automatic hits".

d. I do not care for the fact that in cases where a negative net modifier applies, it is better to fire fewer shots than more.

e. I am also skeptical of the fact that poorly trained troops do better firing single shots while better trained troops do better with Autofire. This is the reverse of what we've observed in modern conflicts with automatic weapons.

f. I am uncomfortable with the fact that the T/E system skews strongly towards excellent results on effects -- and in cases where the effect is important, the player can usually virtually guarantee an excellent result.

g. I am unhappy with the fact that the damage system will tend to produce highly predictable damage amounts. No flesh wounds in that system. This is, in my opinion, unrealistic and uncinematic.

h. I am unhappy with the fact that the combat sequence is fussy and unable to replicate common skirmish tactics. As a Traveller GM who runs lots of mercenary type adventures, this is a very bad sign to me. I believe that there are alternative systems available that would be faster, less fussy, and do a better job of modelling combat. Oh and more fun, as I define that term.

i. I am unimpressed with the fact that the effect system skews significantly towards abject failures in the case of failed tasks. A character making a roll with no net modifiers has a 52% chance of rolling an abject failure. If the net modifier is -1, the chance of an abject failure is 72%.

3. The fixes that have been offered do not, in my opinion, address the problem; or they introduce equally bad problems. In addition, they make a mockery of the notion of a universal mechanic. (I note that this does not bother me, since I'm not a fan of universal mechanics. But all these fixes would render any such characterization of the mechanic false).

4. I believe that if Mongoose releases this game in its current form, it will be a dud. And that will be a shame, since Mongoose has the marketing power to produce the definitive version of Traveller. In addition, if Mongoose then releases a Second Edition in six months, which ditches the T/E system, I will have no choice but to conclude that they knowingly released a defective game. This will not, in my opinion, bode well for Traveller (or Mongoose).

EDIT: Well, I've just been threatened with being "reported to the adminstrators" for my thoughtcrime. A victory, of sorts. Being the conciliatory, even-tempered man I am, I immediately apologized and made a plea for more understanding...

Well, maybe not. I might have quoted Clint Eastwood instead...

 

[Supplement Four]

I'm currently involved in a furball with some True Believers on the Mongoose forum. I've been accused, inter alia, of thoughtcrime and unorthodoxy by the faithful. If you're interested, here's the link. http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=478813#478813

However, in the course of trying to reason with one fender-head, I did re-state my objections in a fairly concise manner.

Told ya.

I had a well-thought out and documented criticism of MGT as well, and they the 2-3 "Faithful" on the MGT forum crucified me too.

 

[tbeard1999]

Told ya.

I had a well-thought out and documented criticism of MGT as well, and they the 2-3 "Faithful" on the MGT forum crucified me too.

Well, these idiots aren't quite up to the task of crucifying anyone.

At this point, I'm just pointing and snickering at them. I had one (the fenderhead I mentioned earlier) actually object to me stating that in my opinion that the timing and effect system was broken. And he keeps repeating the devastating revelation that I don't like the timing and effect system.

Funny, I thought I was pretty clear from the get-go that I thought the system is utter crap. Hard to see how anyone with the intelligence of a bucket of minerally-deficient dirt could fail to get that...

I must say, I'm impressed with the marketing strategy of being abusive to old school Traveller folks. I wonder who they think their target market is? Somehow, I don't see World of Darkness players flocking to MGT...

 

[hunter]

Ok lets avoid the cross-forum personal attacks please

 

[tbeard1999]

Ok lets avoid the cross-forum personal attacks please

Aw, you never let us have any fun...

 

[Spinward Scout]

4. I believe that if Mongoose releases this game in its current form, it will be a dud. And that will be a shame, since Mongoose has the marketing power to produce the definitive version of Traveller. In addition, if Mongoose then releases a Second Edition in six months, which ditches the T/E system, I will have no choice but to conclude that they knowingly released a defective game. This will not, in my opinion, bode well for Traveller (or Mongoose).

Sigh... I had high hopes for this version of Traveller. Can I assume that these 'bugs' will be in T5 as well?

:nonono:

 

[far-trader]

...Can I assume that these 'bugs' will be in T5 as well?

Of course not Spinward Scout

...wait for it...

T5 will have it's very own all new bugs! New AND Improved BUGS!



I kid. I really hope Marc is gonna have a bug free and errata free release of his ultimate Traveller*

The realist in me though knows that no such thing is possible. Errata happens (is that how the saying goes?). And one man's feature is another man's bug. And some true bugs may still creep in despite the best of intentions and exhaustive expert playtesting.

* hmm, maybe that'd be better than calling it T5 (since it's not really the fifth, and T5 is a bit uninspired). How's Ultimate Traveller grab ya, UT for short... oh yeah, there's that Unreal Tournament game, and some might think it's a game about Utah I guess, yeah, OK, T5 works. It IS Marc's fifth edition I guess, just rambling now, you can stop reading about nine words back, eleven, er, twelve, no fifteen? Just stop reading already. I'm not typing anymore, this is just your imagination making stuff appear on the screen, right, I've totally lost it now...

...are you still reading this?! WHY!?

:rofl:

 

[jrmapes]

This is why after reading, rolling the dice, reading again, and rolling more dice on the playtest; I am convinced that the rules set just isn't going to cut it.

Sure it's no secret i prefer CT as my Traveller flavor. But 30+ years of gaming all sorts of systems from very slick to utterly broken has given me at least a little idea of what works and how well. Thus far MGT is falling on the side of the spectrum where it just has too many problems that I am going to have to house rule or re-write to make it work - and that is not what I am looking for in a new product.

At this point the best I am looking for is that the supplements and adventures will be good sources to glean from. Of course with MJD writing and his group (hoepfully) being involved with a lot of that material I am sure there will be lots of great things to latch onto. But the Core Rules... I am not holding my breath.

Jerry

 

[tbeard1999]

Sigh... I had high hopes for this version of Traveller. Can I assume that these 'bugs' will be in T5 as well?

:nonono:

They're not bugs, they're features.

Actually, I think that the timing/effect mechanic--which undergirds most of my complaints--is all Mongoose's. I don't know about the combat system, but I really can't imagine MWM coming up with something that obtuse.

 

[tbeard1999]

Well, my Autofire thread on the Mongoose board has been locked by the administrators. So maybe quoting Clint Eastwood wasn't my optimum response to a threat of being reported to the principal...

I'm disappointed in Mongoose for squelching debate like this. Seems to me this allows unscrupulous folks to shut down comments they don't like by simply threadcrapping, then whining to the administrators when they're ridiculed (very moderately) for doing so. Seems to me that a more reasonable approach would be to issue a warning first. <shrug>

Unfortunately, I have yet to receive an answer to the question that started the thread --

How do "to hit" modifiers apply to autofire attacks, if they apply at all.

The continuing silence from Mongoose folks on this issue, combined with completely different interpretations from several fans implies that Mongoose has no answer to the question.

Given that autofire is a pretty important part of Traveller, this is a pretty big omission (if I'm correct). If this question has gone unanswered for this long, then the blindtesting of MGT must not be very thorough.

 

[tbeard1999]

This is why after reading, rolling the dice, reading again, and rolling more dice on the playtest; I am convinced that the rules set just isn't going to cut it.

Sure it's no secret i prefer CT as my Traveller flavor. But 30+ years of gaming all sorts of systems from very slick to utterly broken has given me at least a little idea of what works and how well. Thus far MGT is falling on the side of the spectrum where it just has too many problems that I am going to have to house rule or re-write to make it work - and that is not what I am looking for in a new product.

You're probably right about that. The most common response to issues that I raise is "well, you can fix the problem by <insert fix that fails to fix the problem or introduces new problems>." I find this frustrating because (a) the fixes don't usually work; and (b) I think it's incumbent on the designer to create a decent system out of the box. (Yes, I have house-ruled Classic Traveller to death. But that's a 30 year old game design. I expect better from a modern company.)

At this point the best I am looking for is that the supplements and adventures will be good sources to glean from. Of course with MJD writing and his group (hoepfully) being involved with a lot of that material I am sure there will be lots of great things to latch onto. But the Core Rules... I am not holding my breath.

Good choice.

I am dubious that the line will be around long enough to produce many decent adventures. I mean, who are they gonna sell it to?

GURPS and the D20 system has cornered the market on crunchy systems (and T20 is about as good as they come, given the qualities of the D20 system). I see nothing in MGT that would lure players away from those systems.

As an old school Traveller referee, I can't see much value at all in MGT (and I don't think I'm unusual in this). The defensive attitude of some defenders of MGT hasn't put me in an overly generous frame of mind.

And I don't see new players flocking to the game; most non-D20/non-GURPS RPGs tend to be rules lite. I think MGT is way too fussy for folks who gravitate towards rules lite RPGs.

So my prediction is that the core rules will sell well initially due to nostalgia. But as folks try to actually play the game, they will become dissatisfied. And the dubious statistical qualities of the core mechanics will be heavily criticized. At that point, sales of followup books will wane. Then Mongoose will either can the line or they will release a Second Edition that tries to clean the mess up. Even if it succeeds in cleaning up the problems, I think it will be too little too late.

Of course, this is just my opinion. I could be completely wrong...

 

[sablewyvern]

Well, my Autofire thread on the Mongoose board has been locked by the administrators. I'm disappointed in Mongoose for squelching debate like this. Seems to me that a willingness to do this would allow unscrupulous folks to shut down comments they don't like by simply threadcrapping, then whining to the administrators when they're ridiculed for doing so. Seems to me that a more reasonable approach would be to issue a warning first.

The worthwhile debate had long gone out of that thread, and all we were left with was a personal argument between several parties, with insults being flung around with abandon.

That the thread was locked had nothing to do with the topic at hand, or any attempt to squash debate, and it is disingenous of you to suggest otherwise.

 

[tbeard1999]

Told ya.

I had a well-thought out and documented criticism of MGT as well, and they the 2-3 "Faithful" on the MGT forum crucified me too.

Yeah, but I got my thread locked by the administrator. Match that...

 

[sablewyvern]

Unfortunately, I have yet to receive an answer to the question that started the thread --

How do "to hit" modifiers apply to autofire attacks, if they apply at all.

The continuing silence from Mongoose folks on this issue, combined with completely different interpretations from several fans implies that Mongoose has no answer to the question.

There's a Q&A thread for rule clarifications, although I'm not sure Gar has dropped by recently. Rule questions in other threads often go unanswered.

 

[tbeard1999]

The worthwhile debate had long gone out of that thread, and all we were left with was a personal argument between several parties, with insults being flung around with abandon.

That the thread was locked had nothing to do with the topic at hand, or any attempt to squash debate, and it is disingenous of you to suggest otherwise.

Anyone who cares can simply review the thread and make up their own mind. I'll just say that I strongly disagree with your statements about the thread.

And if you really do think that insults were "flung around with abandon" in that thread, well, you must not get out much. I've seen worse flamewars on my Sunday School prayer list...

I assume that you'll agree that my initial question has yet to be answered by Mongoose (despite being also posted in the Q&A thread)?

And to be clear, I am not accusing Mongoose of censorship. I don't think they'd be stupid enough to obviously squelch criticism of their product. The internet is just not the place for censorship.

I simply think that their willingness to completely shut debate down when someone whines to them can be exploited by individuals who want to silence comments they don't like (and who lack the ability to silence the offending comments with facts and logic).

On the other hand, I can understand that a business would have a strong interest in keeping things as civil as possible in their public forums. So I have no problem with business decisions like that.

 

[tbeard1999]

There's a Q&A thread for rule clarifications, although I'm not sure Gar has dropped by recently. Rule questions in other threads often go unanswered.

Yeah, but what's disturbing is that the autofire rule has been around since v2.0 of the playtest rules. I didn't keep v1.0, so I can't be sure if it was there (my early testing concentrated on the horrible burst fire mechanic). It seems odd that it would go unanswered for this long, especially since several fans of the system have given different "interpretations" of how the rule should work.

 

[sablewyvern]

And if you really do think that insults were "flung around with abandon" in that thread, well, you must not get out much. I've seen worse flamewars on my Sunday School prayer list...

True, but it is equally true that the discussion was far less than civil.

I assume that you'll agree that my initial question has yet to be answered by Mongoose (despite being also posted in the Q&A thread)?

Yes. It seems implicit to me that the exact same modifiers as applied to regular shots also apply to autofire, but there has been no official clarification to that effect.

And to be clear, I am not accusing Mongoose of censorship. I don't think they'd be stupid enough to obviously squelch criticism of their product. The internet is just not the place for censorship.

Fair enough. Thanks for making that explicit.

I simply think that their willingness to completely shut debate down when someone whines to them can be exploited by individuals who want to silence comments they don't like (and who lack the ability to silence the offending comments with facts and logic).

Personally, I consider it unlikely that the conversation could be resumed to any useful purpose. No one is going to come up with a fix for T/E that you're happy with, and clearly you're not going to convince the fans of T/E that's it should be dropped. Your point has been raised, objections to that point raised, both sides defended and the rest is just going around in circles. In a situation like that, further conversation is unlikely to achieve anything but frustration on both sides, as each fails to see the other's point.

 

[jrmapes]

Argghhhhhhh. stupid thing timed out and I lost my post.

summation though not as good as original is bottom line

the only points not being seen at this time in the process is the critical remarks by those that are bringing up issues that are still in the system that needs ironing out before publication. Those issues are being drowned out by a rabid handfull of MG Fanboys who have decided it seems that any comments perceived as negative should be bashed and smashed as much and as often as necessary until those that have the contra position to MG can do no wrong and even if it is broke it's still all good since it's MG.

If mongoose is done taking advice and they are satisfied with the product then they need to come out and say so - This would be the most stupid thing they could do at this point but nonetheless it is their choice.

I am sure it is uber flattering to have a vocal contingent (albeit pretty darn small) of fanboys beating their chests and defending the faith but that does not make a good game mechanic. It also doesn't put money in the bank when the game comes out and no one (but said few defenders of the faith) is buying it after the initial hoopla. It's called "flash in the pan" and that is exactly what NO ONE (except maybe for a few diehard anti-fanboys) wants to see happen.

Those few that are crying and whining that "you and your points are invalid because they are negative" can only be described as being dunderheaded (the kind version -- Actually they are flat out morons.) Yet if these are the people that MG choses to listen to at this point and has their back so to speak, then I have lost all faith that MG will put out a product in this case that can be considered even marginal.

Do they really think that by alienating the obvious target audience that this is a good thing? MG has been good thus far about possible problem areas that could cause major rifts and alienate large groups of people (i.e. the free use / fan site issue). But if you base your game on wonky mechanics you are not alienating this niche or that niche - you are blowing off the majority of the market. Contrary to popular opinion amongst a handful of fanboys of every ilk or system, how good your game mechanic is - how solid it is - how unbreakable it is - is just as important to RPG consumers as is the quality of setting, fluff, presentation, and editing.

All one has to do is look into our collective Traveller past to see this plainly in action. Do we really want a repeat of the past? Do we really want a solid built product or "just another broke edition of Traveller?"

 

[tbeard1999]

Argghhhhhhh. stupid thing timed out and I lost my post.

summation though not as good as original is bottom line

...Contrary to popular opinion amongst a handful of fanboys of every ilk or system, how good your game mechanic is - how solid it is - how unbreakable it is - is just as important to RPG consumers as is the quality of setting, fluff, presentation, and editing.

I couldn't agree more. I'll take boring, solid, reliable game mechanics over "innovative" crap that yields flaky results and requires different house rules for every specific application.

The designer of MGT apparently disagrees.

 

[Allensh]

is it possible that some of these things are being addressed but because there isn't going to be a 4.0 manuscript and they clearly said that the only thing that had been changed in the 3.2 was the addition of new stuff and that this was because of a time issue, we just haven't seen it yet?

I don't think they "owe" anyone anything. Buy it, don't buy it...your call.

THE only people I have seen seriously complaining about the T/E problem are a handful of people from here. My group likes it, others I have talked to like it, so I dunno...since the modifiers that apply to the roll apply to the timing die as well I don't see how difficult tasks can be done "faster", but whatever..we've been over this before.

I am turning my attention to the Doctor Who RPG playtest now...this debate is getting very old and tired.

Allen