Quote:
If you say so...given that we have seen more Jihad related products then anything reallys says other wise,
If you stretch the definition of "Jihad related product," then you could say that correctly, but it's really just self-punishment if you dislike the Jihad. Technically, any Battletech product back to BattleDroids is a Jihad-related product, but that's just getting silly.
Realistically, even the latest BT products hardly mention the Jihad. Like TR:VA. It doesn't mention the Jihad once and mentions the Word of Blake in 5 of its many vehicles. Total War drops a few words on the Jihad in the intro, then spends the rest of the book on rules. The Historicals and House Handbooks (all of them - the published and unpublished) technically are "related" to the Jihad in the sense they share the same timeline, but don't mention the Jihad.
Now, the Merc Supplements, Hotspots, and recent Tech Readout-Upgrades certainly spend time on the Jihad, but they don't constitute a majority of recent products or writing time.
Quote:
all of the books currently out lead up to the Jihad
Spurious point. All Roman and Neolithic histories lead up to World War 2. That doesn't mean all Roman and Neolithic histories are focused on World War 2. Similarly, the Historicals and House Handbooks do lead up to the Jihad, but they do not focus on the Jihad.
Quote:
, and gvien that just about every book currently out makes mention of the Jihad and events of it, really doesn't do well on your statement above, but hey this is just my opinion.
No, it's not your opinion. "and gvien that just about every book currently out makes mention of the Jihad and events of it" meets the definition of a statement of fact, and it's a false fact. My prior post was about the amount of writing effort spent on the Jihad. The fact that books mention the Jihad, or indirectly lead up to the Jihad by sharing the same timeline, does nothing to show that most of current writing focuses on the Jihad.
What you need to prove your point is a thorough analysis of emails and writer forum traffic on the writing of new books to see how often the Jihad comes up. With access to that data, I can tell you this: the Jihad occupies very little writing time except on the one intensely Jihad-related product, Hotspots: 3072.
There's something that baffles me about you, Karagin. You don't like the Jihad but you seem to like to punish yourself by twisting the facts into the worse possible light: all new BT books are entirely focused on the Jihad (false), most effort goes into forwarding the Jihad storyline (false), and all new books are all about the Jihad (false).
You could sit back and sigh in relief that the new House Handbooks don't address the Jihad at all. You could relax and enjoy the Jihad-free Historicals and TRVA. You could be happy that the new rulebooks burp a mention of the Jihad in their intro then hurry on to 300 pages of rules without mentioning the Jihad again - 14 sentences in Total War on 7 pages mention the Jihad, while 307 other pages do not. And you could be thoroughly pleased that the upcoming Historicals and Handbooks will continue to ignore the Jihad. There'd just be handful of books to avoid if you really wanted to avoid the Jihad.
But, no, you indulge in disasterbation about how the Jihad is dominating everything and ruin your own Battletech fun. That's bizarre. I mean, worse yet, your recent statements on CBT.com were just a picture of self-punishment. You thought that it was sad that a feature of Battletech (artillery recoil on rail cars of all things) needed mathematical explanation, but you play a game where the core of the game, giant humanoid brawling robots, need elaborate mathematical justification to explain why 'mechs don't get stuck in the mud due to high ground pressure, or why mechs don't topple from weapons recoil, or why their weapons have such short ranges. It's like you're a glutton for punishment out to ruin your own gaming experience.
Don't do that. Learn to look at the glass as half full and stuff. The Jihad is far from dominating recent publications. It gets mentioned here and there, but it's not a big part of most publications.
Quote:
And if the core rules are the main focus then we should see them sooner not later...
You are seeing them faster than would've happened otherwise. Had they continued at the originally planned rate of writer effort allocation, other books like TR:VA and House Davion Handbook would've slowed all the rule books into 2007.