![]() ![]() Of course, if he thinks B can't do the job, or is willing to shell out a little more money to increase the odds of success, he'll hire A instead. So of course he'll hire Company B over Company A, resulting B getting paid and A. The employer in contrast wants a job to be done and wants to spend the least amount of C-Bills for it, so they'll want to hire the cheapest mercenary outfit they think can do the job. Merc Company A can't demand less than X amount of C-Bills for a job or else he won't even break even, while Merc Company B can take that same job for less than X payment because they have fewer or cheaper units. Unlike in a computer game, an in-universe mercenary is competing against other mercenaries for these contracts and they have expenses that need to be met which is based on what they have in their TOE. Why on earth were the contract rules worked up this way? Does this just not make sense to me because of a right brain vs left brain thinking sort of thing or have any of you also seen this but just accepted it as a sort of 'pass go, collect $200' kind of thing?īecause mercenary contracts are all about supply and demand. I dislike arbitrary rules and prefer to base events on what one might intuitively expect to happen in reality, modified to allow for the fantasy elements of the game. It's kind of like getting $200 dollars because you pass "Go." Why? Because that's the rules. I think it ruins the immersion I usually go for in my games. It all seems very arbitrary and goes against common sense. They want it done for a certain price and may be willing to pay a little more for a very reputable contractor, but they certainly aren't going to pay the contractor based on how many people he has working for him! That's ridiculous! It indicates that the game revolves around the player, rather than involving the player in a living world. It seems completely counter to the way things are handled in real life. This seemed completely backwards and I admit I still don't understand it. When I finally got my hands on the mercenary field manuals, I was astounded that contracts seemed to revolve around the player, rather than what a prospective employer wanted to pay for a given task. I made up sheets of possible contract types, quirks for the different employers (I even remembered that FRR didn't like or trust mercs much, same with DC), basic prices for different sorts of contracts, modified them by travel time, danger expected, and then influenced prices by the player unit's reputation and a little role playing to work out the final price. I had to make up my own rules for running a mercenary unit (not having that book at the time) and drew upon my memories from MW2:Mercenaries to handle that. I first GMed a game for some friends during the weeks we were out of power after hurricane Katrina. ![]() ![]() You didn't want to pick a dangerous, lengthy, combat heavy contract if you only owned a single Commando, and you also didn't want to pick little short recon raids if you had a mech company's worth of resources you had to worry about maintaining (not that that occurred in the game, but that's the impression the contract system gave). :)Īs a teen, I remember playing MW2:Mercenaries and seeing that contracts were put out sort of like want ads, with employers offering their terms and the player picking the ones that worked for him. I hope you'll humor a battletech fan who's seldom had the chance to talk to other fans. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |