v4 Rules & Mechanics Discussion

[Spartan-117]

Kinda seems like we will need one for New Coke as well.

[Olefin]

Well Spartan is being his usual self - course what I am talking about probably went over his head.

Hmm so lets see Raellus who is going to be the judge of what is a complaint and what is constructive criticism Since apparently most of those who have constructive criticism are getting called insults for giving such criticism. And yes saying they could easily add the other nationalities and armies and not having them there is dumb is constructive - ie how it should be improved.

And we arent grieving - we are trying to head off a train wreck that we can see coming. Great artwork doesnt equate to great RPG games. And we dont want to see the flame we kept going for 25 years snuffed out by an inferior product.

[Rainbow Six]

How would y'all feel about separate threads about v4- one dedicated to complaining (where folks that so choose can trash it all they like) and another for only constructive discussion re rules, setting, etc.

-

If people just want to moan and complain can we set that up on a separate area of the forum so that those of us who are fed up reading the same complaints / accusations / baseless allegations of political bias over and over again dont have to be bothered by them

Thanks

[mpipes]

Oh for Pete's sake.

Is it really so overwrought to ask a company, on a forum devoted to its "product" with hundreds of fans wanting to spend money on said "product", to actually produce and sell what was promised on that forum.

In effect, what we have here is a company that bought the right to sell "pears" and went to the "pears" fan base and supporters promising they were going to sell "pears." Company solicited money, which fans invested. Company solicited talent, which responded by donating hours of time to grow "pears." When the time came, and the company rolled out the product - IT WAS NOT PEARS. Instead, it was "spinach." Now I don't know about most people, but when I am all excited about the bushel of "pears" promised and instead get a bale of "spinach," I have a right to get upset and point out that this is not the "pears" as promised, but instead is "spinach." Furthermore, I should be allowed to point exactly why the bale of "spinach" is in fact not
"pears" and log my complaints among my fellow "pear" lovers, who like me, really don't like the "spinach" that was offered up.

In a somewhat different analogy, don't go promising a Harley and instead produce a Vespa. That will get people upset. Some perhaps violently so if they were induced to invest in a Harley and instead received a Vespa (depending of course on the MC they belong to).

In short, FL DID NOT deliver what it promised to forum members. And lets be honest, forum members were induced to help on this project and were sold a bill of goods. There is no 4th addition here. It is a game FL came up with and slapped a "Twilight 2000" moniker on. NDAs are in effect, so effectively many are muzzled, but you can be sure many forum members feel DUPED. And they are not happy. And they are letting it been known what the problems are as they see them. AND most important, they have every right to do so under the circumstances and even, dare I utter the word, BE UPSET.

All that said, the game looks professional and uses mechanics popular with many (though I believe GDWs are much better). The artwork and graphics are a selling point! Very good. The background is atrociously badly written in my opinion, but at least gives a player a background setting forth where they are and their predicament. FL at least succeeds on these points, so at least they may be able to attract some fans despite the flaws being aired out. However, older players with more than a cursory knowledge of history, NATO, Russia, and the PACT, are going to have a decidedly different view of the background. and for that reason it will suffer. Virtually anyone with even a minimal degree of knowledge as to the doctrines and abilities of the belligerents will laugh themselves silly and likely move on; its that bad. Does FL really want that Or are they willing to listen, AND FOR GAWD'S SAKE, hire consultants that really understand military matters and listen to them.

[Olefin]

Well said Mpipes!

[Rainbow Six]

If anyone feels duped maybe they should just ask for their money back (presuming they backed it in the first place).

I believe at least one person has already said they got a refund.

Seems pretty simple to me.

[Olefin]

And people need to be honest on here if they are working with FL on releases or have a business relationship with them. That kind of information needs to be taken into account as part of their responses. That is directly applicable to how this discussion is being framed. Thats like having a discussion on fossil fuels and not telling people you work for the oil companies.

[Olefin]

I have had my say and I asked for my money back. So will see what the future holds.

[Tegyrius]

If some of you need to continue to vent, go ahead. I hope that you can do so with the intent of moving through the denial, anger, bargaining, and depression stages to get to a place of peace.

(Snipped most of the post for brevity.)

Your point is well-taken, Rae, but I'm not sure it's entirely applicable. Or, rather, I feel grief is somewhat misplaced. T2k isn't dead. Free League isn't sending edition police to anyone's house to seize their first, second, or (for the three people who liked it) 2013 materials. The old books still work just fine.

See previous points, made by various correspondents and quickly forgotten or ignored, regarding the potential for 4th edition to draw unsatisfied new players to the earlier editions and thereby to this forum. I don't think it's entirely unlikely. It's happened with a few 2013 players over the years since the demise of the 93GS forums, and I understand that Cyberpunk Red has been bringing new players to the CP2020 community over the last few months. There's a similar return to older Shadowrun editions occurring thanks to the fan backlash over SR6, too.

I don't want to be accused (again) of trying to stifle free speech, but this thread is kind of a dumpster fire now, and the discussion has drifted miles from the thread's original, stated purpose.

If people want a forum with active and alert moderators, they should be prepared for those mods to, on occasion, take action that looks like "stifling free speech" from a certain perspective. That is the role of the moderator, after all.

Our American correspondents would also do well to remember that the First Amendment applies only government suppression of free speech. Private entities such as social media platforms, Free League, and even Kato and his mods are well within their rights to censor, delete, admonish, and exile according to the community standards they set. Once again, something about the value of words for which no money has been exchanged...

How would y'all feel about separate threads about v4- one dedicated to complaining (where folks that so choose can trash it all they like) and another for only constructive discussion re rules, setting, etc. -

It's not a democracy, Rae, it's a dictatorship with Kato at the top and you as his Chief Injustice (or perhaps Secretary of Offense, or pimp hand). If you deem it necessary, you don't have to ask permission or get consensus before taking enforcement action. That's what the little "Administrator" label means, last I checked.

- C.

[unipus]

I would certainly be in favor of some mod clean up action and/or a "separate but equal" bitch-about-FL-over-here thread.

I came here to respond to an actual discussion of the actual rules, but then found that, as usual, it's been drowned under 20+ posts since then of continued hysteria all the way up to and including "free speech" and "fraud" complaints. LOL. It's equal parts funny and sad, but it definitely has done the job of preventing an actual productive conversation about the game.

[mpipes]

No one is being stopped from posting positive or negative discussion on the rules. Many have already shared their thoughts on the Year Zero rules, including moi. Most forum members do not care for them.

To me, the rules are wildly non-intuitive, clunky, limited in flexibility to some degree, and use special dice that I absolutely loathe. The game would be much improved by going to a D20 system or percentile based system. D6 systems.....to me they are lazy and aimed at a younger audience more in tune with rolling a handful of "cool" dice than getting a easily qualitative result to simulate a reality quickly. From my understanding, the system encourages a mind numbing number of rolls to resolve anything, but that may be a perception at odds with how the game play flows. Weapon ratings are too coarse and rather limited. There have been a number of comments regarding the limited selection of nationalities and militaries. At a minimum, you need all NATO, Russia, Poland, Czech, Ukraine, Slovakia, and Sweden.

Very succinctly, i am not a big fan of Year Zero. Others may like it and feel it moves along more briskly. I don't know. Maybe if I played a game with an experienced group, my feeling on the matter would be somewhat different.

For the record, I do plan to get the Aliens game at some point, but I STRONGLY doubt I will use the Year Zero mechanics for character generation, general play, or even combat. I am buying the background in effect, and that is why I believe that FL's success or failure with this game is directly intertwined with the background and world it creates. Now. if FL wants to continue with its unique and strange views of how NATO works and how a NATO-Russian war might develop, then be my guests. There is ample feedback here as to opinions on what has so far been written. As can be seen, none of it is particularity complimentative. That in and of itself is feedback; and constructive feedback if you are willing to listen to what is being said.

[Rockwolf66]

For the record, I do plan to get the Aliens game at some point, but I STRONGLY doubt I will use the Year Zero mechanics for character generation, general play, or even combat. I am buying the background in effect, and that is why I believe that FL's success or failure with this game is directly intertwined with the background and world it creates. Now. if FL wants to continue with its unique and strange views of how NATO works and how a NATO-Russian war might develop, then be my guests. There is ample feedback here as to opinions on what has so far been written. As can be seen, none of it is particularity complimentative. That in and of itself is feedback; and constructive feedback if you are willing to listen to what is being said.

Alas the people at FL are not listening to what is said. I have seen multiple versions of the timeline and have complained about them.
In V2 we never knew who the US president was when the war went hot. Milgov had some very good constitutional reasons not to obey Civgov. Mostly because some of Civgov was not legitimately elected. Once there was a legitimate Civilian Government again then they would have stood down.

West has so far been portrayed as a warmongering idiot with the worst aspects of Strawmen Bush and Trump. He's a petty little would be dictator who orders troops to do idiotic things that gets them killed. Milgov is being portrayed as a group of power hungry people ignoring their legit government.

Lets just not get into NATO being idiots and doing things that a Boot private POG should know better. As for the Soviets the bias in their favor is so thick that you need a chainsaw to cut it.

Frankly I'm tired of looking at a plot that makes no sense and is actively insulting to me. The replies of those who work for FL makes things worse.

As far as the rules goes I have not seen them all but so far they look bad. The foraging rules are garbage as a PC would never get enough supplies to avoid starvation using them. The ammunition expenditure rules are horrible as they seem to assume that the PCs are just spraying and praying that they will hit something. All in all the game is coming across as a very bad game.

[Adm.Lee]

the discussion has drifted miles from the thread's original, stated purpose.

How would y'all feel about separate threads about v4- one dedicated to complaining (where folks that so choose can trash it all they like) and another for only constructive discussion re rules, setting, etc.

-

I'm in favor of this plan. Rename this thread "Opinions about FL's upcoming edition" and start another for "v4 Rules & Mechanics (new)". Setting appears to be the hottest topic, another thread for that one may be needed.

So far, this forum has been more civil than some others I've been on, and I'd like to keep it that way. It's been said that some of us need to blow off steam about the new setting, and this can be a place for it. Let's not blast someone unsuspecting with that steam.

There will be new players coming to the game from FL's new game, and I'd rather we didn't run them off with stereotypical gatekeeping. Confining the negativity to one clearly-marked place (where forum rules still apply) might limit that kind of damage. We've been welcoming to new players all along, let's please keep it that way.

[mpipes]

Although I most definitely am in the negative camp, I DO WANT to hear from someones that have tried it out. Having someone that has actually tried some play time to chime in would be helpful. We all know that play testers are here on the Forum, so PLEASE SHARE.

I have heard that more than a few of said play testers are not happy with the overall experience and due to NDA concerns are not chiming in. Fair enough. But there should be at least a few that can provide commentary perhaps in a more constructive manner going through some of the nuts and bolts of the mechanics. I've made my opinions clear on them, BUT perhaps someone that has been involved in actual playtime has a different take. If the NDA is a problem, then contact FL and ask them if it is ok and even offer to run anything you post by them first.

[sellanraa]

There's a fair amount of chatter on the 4e Discord and some folks actively playing that aren't under NDA. They're just playing with the rules as released as enthusiastic Kickstarter backers.