Anyone playing the BattleTech/MechWarrior RPG here?

[Winterwind]

So, having been interested in the Classic BattleTech universe for years now, and having played the table-top strategy game, too, I have recently picked up the aforementioned roleplaying game. It looks quite well, I like most of the mechanics, and the character creation system is rather unique.

However, I have a few questions now...

1. The table explaining the various meanings of Social Standing claims that for Clan characters, a Social Standing of 8 or 9 means a more prestigious bloodline. The attribute maximums for a trueborn phenotype list 8(9) as maximums for Social Standing, too. But how can one reconcile this with the rule that Social Standing maximums for Clan characters are always equal to their minimum in that attribute, too - which would be 7, no matter the Life Path?
1b. What exactly does bloodline mean in that context, anyway? Does it refer to the bloodname the character is eligible for, or to the direct line of ancestors for this particular warrior? I mean, does it mean that, to be eligible for the bloodname of Kerensky, one needs Social Standing 9, or could there be a warrior from the house of Kerensky with Social Standing 7, whose direct "parents" were not that very famous warriors as opposed to another warrior from the house of Kerensky with a higher Social Standing?)

2. Could it be that the game is extremely lethal, and characters lose limbs/get crippled on a regular basis? I am used to playing in rather lethal and gritty systems (ShadowRun, Call of Cthulhu and others), but this was the first time I went through the rules and wondered how I was supposed to make my poor players survive a single fight without scarring them for life! Any hints concerning that?

[JellyPooga]

I've owned the rules for MW 3rd ed. for quite some time now, but so far have only started one somewhat abortive game (exams and essay deadlines equals no time for RP).

However, we did play through a couple of test-runs of the rules, including several scenarios of combat. It is indeed, very brutal and often over very quickly, but I don't think you have to worry about players being permanently crippled on a regular basis (at least as much as you seem to indicate they will). Taking a lot of damage can cause permanent damage, but the rules allow for players to patch themselves up with liberal application of 1st Aid (which prevents death from bleeding) and MedTech (which prevents permanent damage)...it's only if you get neither of these and let wounds heal "naturally" that the permanent damage really comes into play.

Tips on avoiding the situation of permanent damage:
1)Don't have a lot of combat.
2)Have ready access to MedTech (NPC 'heal-bot' character, hospital access, large quantities of Stim patches/medical equipment, etc.)
3)Don't use the rules for permanent damage (I believe that they under the "optional rules" section anyway).

I don't own the Clan supplemental rules, so I can't help you on the bloodline thing, but I suspect that to 'claim' a Bloodname, a character must have the required SOC. A character could, technically, be a direct decendant of X person and no-one know about it, meaning his SOC be lower, but as soon as it were proved, then his SOC should go up...I could never get that quirky Clan honour stuff stright in my head...

Out of curiosity, what sort of game are you intending to run? How involved with actual Battlemechs are you having it (i.e. will the characters be stomping around in 20-100 tons of walking death "in game" a lot, or is that sort of stuff going to be more background to the actual action)? One of the problems I'm having with thinking up games to run is that my players don't know an awful lot about the setting and given that it's a setting built solely to accomodate Battlemechs, they will probably expect a certain amount of 'Mech combat...however, I don't particularly want to run an RP version of the Battletech table-top game. I'd rather run something more akin to what you'd find playing Cyberpunk 2020 or Shadowrun, but in the Battletech setting (so the 'mechs are there and play significant role in politics/war, but not so much the game itself). I was just wondering what sort of game you'd run and (if you're facing it) how you deal with this problem.

[Winterwind]

Permanent damage could also occur if a character suffered Critical (or worse) Wounds... but I guess in that case they'd probably have a high probability of dying either way, and armour should prevent this in most cases, I suppose.

As for not including too much combat - well, I generally don't do that, unless there are some sort of warriors amongst the player characters. Because I assume that, when a player chooses to play a warrior and selects the character's abilities accordingly, the player wants that abilities to come to use, too.

I don't even know whether the Clan stuff will be needed - it was just a rule I noticed which I didn't understand. And I still don't, actually - so how could a character get a higher SOC value, if the maximum for that attribute is generally limited to 7, according to the "SOC minimum = SOC maximum" rule?
Though I admit, personally, I like the Clans. I mean, I know they are an evil, fascist society, but I find their understanding of honour and their reverence for the Star League, their Founders and the Remembrance kinda romantic. Plus, my first contact with BattleTech was via MechWarrior 2 (the computer game), which is all about the Refusal War (so Clan only).

As for the style of the campaign, I don't know that yet, either. I'll have to discuss with the players first what kind of campaign they would prefer. But it's definitely not going to be the strategy game with a few roleplaying elements added - the focus will surely lie on social encounters. The question is, rather, whether we will include the strategy game at all, or not.
One player has already hinted he might be interested in playing an Elemental, which leaves me entirely unsure what to make out of that. After all, survivability is not exactly high amongst Elementals in the strategy game...

Oh, and, thank you for answering. I already thought I was all alone here. :smallsmile:

[alchahest]

I would humbly suggest not having any elementals in the game - there are a bunch of reasons. The number one reason is that it limits you to either playing a clan game, or using him as a bondsman. And a lone elemental is not going to survive in mech combat for long. If you are playing a clan game, remember that the cast system can create friction between members of different "lines of business", and you do not want to be in a circle of equals with an elemental.

Other reasons are related more to the rest of the game. if you're playing inner sphere, remember, elementals are 7 foot+ giants, making the steroid abusers in the WWE look like little kids. they don't "fit in" in regular places.

Clanners also have a far different mindset than innersphere..ians. Honour and Virtue, the greater good of the group. Personal combat as a way to resolve differences.

Jellypooga:
I've played in a long-running mechwarrior game (back in 2nd edition) where our characters didn't own or step foot into battlemechs. it's definitely doable, it just requires players and a game runner that are all on the same page - and setting knowledge helps immensely.

[Winterwind]

The player in question has ultimately decided to play a Draconis Combine DEST-agent, specialised in Armoured Infantery. So, Elemental problems averted, while still possessing powered armour.
(Said player wouldn't have wanted to play a Clan character either way, disliking the Clans greatly. That stravag :smalltongue: . Kinda ironic he took a Draconis soldier, though, considering they are the closest thing to Clan mentality the Inner Sphere has to offer)
Which brings me to my next question - any chance somebody could tell me the protection values of a Kage-battle armour (the light BA used by the Draconis Combine) in context of the RPG? I know what it is capable of in the strategy game, but that won't help me much here...

Now I just have to wait and see what the other player(s) will want to play.
Knowing my luck, it's going to be something nigh incompatible. :smallbiggrin:

[JellyPooga]

Whilst you could use the rules for 'basic' IS Battle Armour that are presented in the core rulebook, there is supposed (or was supposed?) to be released stats for specific armours...I suppose you'd find them in the various supplemental rules....otherwise your stuck with using/modifying the 'basic' one...mind you, there is a certain amount of customisation allowed in the 'basic' package, in that you can choose what weapons you have mounted...

...if you just needed help finding the rules for them, look under the "Equipment" section of the rulebook....notably under "Armour" :smallbiggrin: :smalltongue: :smallwink:

[Winterwind]

...if you just needed help finding the rules for them, look under the "Equipment" section of the rulebook....notably under "Armour" :smallbiggrin: :smalltongue: :smallwink:Oh, no, I managed that part quite easily. But thanks anyway. :smallbiggrin:

Whilst you could use the rules for 'basic' IS Battle Armour that are presented in the core rulebook, there is supposed (or was supposed?) to be released stats for specific armours...I suppose you'd find them in the various supplemental rules....otherwise your stuck with using/modifying the 'basic' one...mind you, there is a certain amount of customisation allowed in the 'basic' package, in that you can choose what weapons you have mounted...Only trouble is that the IS Standard is a medium armour, whereas that armour is light (and, as you say, light and heavy battle armour was supposed to be released in supplementary books - which I neither have nor have an idea which books to look for).
I suppose I could always use that switch to the strategy game which is used when 'Mechs are involved, but that'd be awkward.
Guess I'll just estimate it at about one armour point less for all damage types than the standard issue and call it a day.

Say, is there any Successor State with which the Draconis Combine has any sort of conflict in the 3050-58 era? I can't really think of one - there are the ronin in the first few years and raids against worlds occupied by the Clans, but little beyond that. Or is there something bigger going on, too?

[Swordguy]

The rules for Kage Battle Armor are in Field Manual: Draconis Combine, Combat Equipment, and MAY be in the MechWarrior Companion. Really, if you ask this question over that the CBT boards, you may get a better response.

The CBT:RPG Board (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/board,21.0.html)

Or if you want me to post the rules for KBA, let me know.

After the Clan invasion stops, conflicts in the DC during that period are internal, as various reactionary elements act against Teddy K's reforms after the Battle of Tukkayid. I'm retty sure they annex the Lyons thumb of the Lyran Alliance for "safekeeping" while Operation Guererro was going on. These internal conflicts culminate in the attempted assassination of Teddy K during his birthday celebration in 3058 (detailed in Black Dragon in the ROC novel line).

Oh, 1 more thing: the main users of Kage Armor during this period are ISF, DEST Teams, and (probably) nekokami. That means two things: 1) He has the "In for Life" trait. Abuse it. 2) He should ALSO be a BattleMech pilot. Special Ops teams in the fluff tend to be Mech-qualified, and it'll make it easier to blend him in with the rest of the group.

[JellyPooga]

Say, is there any Successor State with which the Draconis Combine has any sort of conflict in the 3050-58 era? I can't really think of one - there are the ronin in the first few years and raids against worlds occupied by the Clans, but little beyond that. Or is there something bigger going on, too?

I'm not big on my Battletech history, especially concerning the DC, but isn't that period around about the time of the Clan invasion? The biggest opposition before the Clans came along would have been the Fed Com (Federated Suns / Lyran Commonwealth alliance), but for a few years after the invasion started, I believe the conflicts within the IS were put on standby somewhat, as major warfare became IS vs. Clan rather than House vs. House.

Then again, I may have got my dates completely wrong...

Ignoring dates and just looking at the maps, the DC is bordered by the Lyrans, Fed Suns and the FRR (I think)...if you're looking for a specific conflict or battle, then you can just make up a (relatively) minor border dispute or somesuch with one of those...why do you need to know? I might be able to help more if you tell me :smallsmile:.

In the meantime, I'll go dig out the history books and see what I can find...

[Winterwind]

The rules for Kage Battle Armor are in Field Manual: Draconis Combine, Combat Equipment, and MAY be in the MechWarrior Companion. Really, if you ask this question over that the CBT boards, you may get a better response.

The CBT:RPG Board (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/board,21.0.html)Probably so, but then, these forums here are home... :smallwink:


Or if you want me to post the rules for KBA, let me know.That would be appreciated. Only if it's not too much of a bother, of course. :smallwink:


After the Clan invasion stops, conflicts in the DC during that period are internal, as various reactionary elements act against Teddy K's reforms after the Battle of Tukkayid. I'm retty sure they annex the Lyons thumb of the Lyran Alliance for "safekeeping" while Operation Guererro was going on. These internal conflicts culminate in the attempted assassination of Teddy K during his birthday celebration in 3058 (detailed in Black Dragon in the ROC novel line).Oh, this conflict lasted this long? Good to know. :smallsmile:


Oh, 1 more thing: the main users of Kage Armor during this period are ISF, DEST Teams, and (probably) nekokami. That means two things: 1) He has the "In for Life" trait. Abuse it. He does (if I remember the Life Paths right, it was twice Farm, then Edge used to switch to the Sun Zhang Academy, OCS (yeah, he got lucky on that roll), AIT and DEST training, plus Covert Ops once). I'm pretty sure the character will be loyal to the Dragon, though, so In For Life shouldn't come up this much (except for the fact he's going to receive orders from somebody, of course).

2) He should ALSO be a BattleMech pilot. Special Ops teams in the fluff tend to be Mech-qualified, and it'll make it easier to blend him in with the rest of the group.He does have that, too (Gunnery-wise, the skills synergise with the Battle Armour anyway; he got Piloting/'Mech as one of the three additional skills with overflow skill points, albeit at +0 only). Not exactly an elite pilot, but at least it will prevent these 4d10 Checks, if it comes up. Plus, I strongly presume I will get some MechWarriors with the other players, too.

I wonder how I will reconcile this, though - a MechWarrior player will definitely want to fight in his 'Mech sometime, too, on which occassion the BA-wearer would probably prefer to get into his armour - Kage armour is destroyed by even an IS Medium Laser, however, so that would be extremely deadly.
That rule that if there are player characters in an infantry team they are always hit last only refers to non-armoured infantry, right? Because with BAs one can determine precisely which trooper was hit?


I'm not big on my Battletech history, especially concerning the DC, but isn't that period around about the time of the Clan invasion? The biggest opposition before the Clans came along would have been the Fed Com (Federated Suns / Lyran Commonwealth alliance), but for a few years after the invasion started, I believe the conflicts within the IS were put on standby somewhat, as major warfare became IS vs. Clan rather than House vs. House.That's right after the Clan invasion.
Personally, I would have preferred to play either right before the Clan invasion or even further in the past, somewhere in the 20ies, before the rediscovery of Lostech began to change everything, but there were no battle armour back then, and if a player's preference was to have one of those, well...


Ignoring dates and just looking at the maps, the DC is bordered by the Lyrans, Fed Suns and the FRR (I think)...if you're looking for a specific conflict or battle, then you can just make up a (relatively) minor border dispute or somesuch with one of those...why do you need to know? I might be able to help more if you tell me :smallsmile:.I'm asking primarily to see against whom this Covert Ops/DEST player would be, most probably, sent, plus a conflict would provide for better/easier plot than being used against some state with which the Combine has peace.
Before the Invasion, that would have been the Federated Commonwealth, but after Hanse Davion helped save Luthien that doesn't seem quite likely anymore.
Though, as you say, there are always minor border disputes in the Inner Sphere, plus, who says the player's immediate superiors don't have their own agenda, which runs contrary to all of the Coordinator's attempts for peace. Thank you for that inspiration. :smallsmile:


In the meantime, I'll go dig out the history books and see what I can find...Only if it's not too much a bother. :smallsmile:

[Swordguy]

Okay, detailed history:

3049-3052: Clan Invasion. Everyone stops fighting each other and pays attention to the Clans. DC is up against Nova Cat, Smoke Jags, and the occasional Ghost Bear. The Battle of Luthien happens in 3051.

3054: Takashi Kurita dies. Theodore Kurita takes over, with Subhash Indrahar (director of the ISF) trying to purge reactionary elements. This starts a shadow war between Indrahar's personnel and several underground organizations, notably the Black Dragon Society. This war lasts for several years, culminating in Indrahar's death in the early 3058. Low-level military operations against the Nova Cats and (especially) the Smoke Jaguars start up, based primarily on Wolcott, a Combine-controlled world in the midst of Clan-occupied space.

3057: Federated Commonwealth forms. Joshua Marik dies. Victor Davion puts a double in his place to ensure continued military support to his troops on the Clan Front from the FWL. Joshua Marik is discovered to be a double.

3058: Capellan Confederation and Free Worlds League invade the FC (now just the Davion half after Katrina Steiner seceeds the Lyran Alliance from the FC). During this period, there are some minor conflicts between the Draconis March in the Federated Suns and the Draconis Combine. The DC also invades the Lyons Thumb (about 8 worlds jutting into DC space in a salient from the LA very near the Terran Corridor). The Black Dragon Society attempts to assiassinate Teddy K at his birthday celebration - they are stopped by one of the Yakuza-based Ghost Regiments and the mercenary regiment Camachero's Callebros. A whole new round of DC purges start under the new director of the ISF - Subhash Indrahar was killed in the fighting. The Whitting Conference results in a Second Star League, with the sole purpose of wiping out a Clan (the Smoke Jags).

3059: Task Force Serpent (the mission to the Clan Homeworlds to wipe out the SJ's there) launches under command of Morgan Hasek-Davion. The sole Draconis contribution are some DEST troopers and a Nekokami team, because the bulk of DC troops are involved in wiping out the SJ's in Draconis space. The surviving SJ troops flee the occupation zone late in this year to their homeworlds.

3060: The Nova Cats (who surrendered wholesale to the Star League forces) are Abjured and flee Clan space to the DC. Task Force Serpent and Vic Steiner-Davions forces catch up to Serpent, finish off the Jags on their homeworld of Huntress, and preceed to Strana Mechty, where the Great Refusal that ends the Clan Invasion for all time occurs.


Kage Battle Armor:
I can't find the MW3:RPG rules for it. The FM:DC only has the MW:2nd Ed (it came out the year before 3rd ed.). But here's the CBT rules; you can reverse engineer the MW3 stats from these by using the Battletech Companion Battle-armor constuction rules.

KBA:
Movement: 4 MP (jump)
Armor Value: 5+1 (trooper)
Weapons (BattleMech-scale, may carry 1):
-small laser
-flamer
-machine gun
-Compact TAG (medium laser range)
Special:
Uses Stealth Armor (see Total Warfare or TechManual for rules)
Armored Gauntlets (may use standard-scale weapons)


Is it bad this was all off the top of my head?

[Winterwind]

*history*Wow, thank you very much for that! That's going to help me a lot with devising some plot! :smallsmile:



Kage Battle Armor:
I can't find the MW3:RPG rules for it. The FM:DC only has the MW:2nd Ed (it came out the year before 3rd ed.). But here's the CBT rules; you can reverse engineer the MW3 stats from these by using the Battletech Companion Battle-armor constuction rules.

KBA:
Movement: 4 MP (jump)
Armor Value: 5+1 (trooper)
Weapons (BattleMech-scale, may carry 1):
-small laser
-flamer
-machine gun
-Compact TAG (medium laser range)
Special:
Uses Stealth Armor (see Total Warfare or TechManual for rules)
Armored Gauntlets (may use standard-scale weapons)My CBT rule book claims the KBA has only 4+1 armour value (which would be infinitely worse than 5+1, obviously, since that one point makes the difference whether the trooper can survive some of the most popular 'Mech weapons like the M-Laser). Curiously, MegaMek (the open-source video game which simulates CBT) has the Kage statted with 5+1, just as you say. Up until now I was assuming MegaMek got it wrong, or was outdated (I purchased my book only two years ago, right when the new edition came out), but now with you saying it's 5+1, too, I'm left wondering which one is true...
Anyway, I'll see whether I can find the BattleTech Companion somewhere, in that case. Thanks for the info. :smallsmile:


Is it bad this was all off the top of my head?Nah, I consider that level of knowledge normal for a beloved hobby. :smallsmile:

[Swordguy]

I wonder how I will reconcile this, though - a MechWarrior player will definitely want to fight in his 'Mech sometime, too, on which occassion the BA-wearer would probably prefer to get into his armour - Kage armour is destroyed by even an IS Medium Laser, however, so that would be extremely deadly.
That rule that if there are player characters in an infantry team they are always hit last only refers to non-armoured infantry, right? Because with BAs one can determine precisely which trooper was hit?


Missed answering this somehow.

Kage Armor is not a "battlefield" suit. It's a special ops suit. You sneak into things wearing it. You perform recon with it. You do sabotage or wetwork with it. When the time comes go go out and whomp on somebody else in an open-field battle, you use a Mech. Right tool for the right job.

And yes, that rule about PCs being hit last is only for unarmored infantry.


EDIT: Which rulebook are you refering to when you give it 4+1? That's a Gray Death Scout Suit...

[Winterwind]

Missed answering this somehow.

Kage Armor is not a "battlefield" suit. It's a special ops suit. You sneak into things wearing it. You perform recon with it. You do sabotage or wetwork with it. When the time comes go go out and whomp on somebody else in an open-field battle, you use a Mech. Right tool for the right job.
(EDIT: Ah, crap, hit Post too early.)
Makes sense.
This leaves me with another question, though - what would you do with a group where part of the players are MechWarriors, and part of them are not? It might get somewhat frustrating for the Non-MechWarriors to not be able to accomplish much in such an extended battle.
...Actually, scratch that. Exactly the same as in any RPG with non-combat characters, obviously - just give them enough time and opportunity to balance it out, as well.


EDIT: Which rulebook are you refering to when you give it 4+1? That's a Gray Death Scout Suit...The Classic BattleTech core rule book, from the (German) starting set of the game.
I'm not sure, but if I interprete the Credits correctly, the original name of the book before translation would have been CBT Master Rules (revised Edition). The Gray Death Scout Suit has 4+1, accoring to it, too, but so does the Kage BA...

[Swordguy]

(EDIT: Ah, crap, hit Post too early.)
Makes sense.
This leaves me with another question, though - what would you do with a group where part of the players are MechWarriors, and part of them are not? It might get somewhat frustrating for the Non-MechWarriors to not be able to accomplish much in such an extended battle.
...Actually, scratch that. Exactly the same as in any RPG with non-combat characters, obviously - just give them enough time and opportunity to balance it out, as well.


It'll help if you mandate that everyone has to have MW training. Trust me. Mechwarrior, like shadowrun, is one of those games that really needs a degree of GM control over the PC generation process. Tell them what kind of games you plan to run and tell them to plan accordingly.



The Classic BattleTech core rule book, from the (German) starting set of the game.
I'm not sure, but if I interprete the Credits correctly, the original name of the book before translation would have been CBT Master Rules (revised Edition). The Gray Death Scout Suit has 4+1, accoring to it, too, but so does the Kage BA...

That's a misprint. Every source I've got (incl. BMR and BMR(r))) listes them as 5+1. At the time the Battletech Master Rules was published, the only suit with 4+1 was Gray Death Light Scout Armor. Enjoy!


EDIT: Quick point: BA under RPG rules are MUCH more fragile than in the CBT game. It's to give PC's a chance against armored foes. Just a heads-up.

[Winterwind]

It'll help if you mandate that everyone has to have MW training. Trust me. Mechwarrior, like shadowrun, is one of those games that really needs a degree of GM control over the PC generation process. Tell them what kind of games you plan to run and tell them to plan accordingly.Everyone, or noone. Yes, that's a way to do it, too. Generally, I tend to give the players as much freedom in devising their characters as they wish to, and just devise the story/plot/challenges in such a way that everybody gets roughly equal time and equal spotlight, but what you suggest might be superior in this case.


That's a misprint. Every source I've got (incl. BMR and BMR(r))) listes them as 5+1. At the time the Battletech Master Rules was published, the only suit with 4+1 was Gray Death Light Scout Armor. Enjoy!Ah. Good to know. That makes the KBA a lot better, too.


EDIT: Quick point: BA under RPG rules are MUCH more fragile than in the CBT game. It's to give PC's a chance against armored foes. Just a heads-up.More fragile? With 9/8/7/7 armour? :smalleek:
Is it due to armour degradation? *re-reads the specific rules to that* Ah. So it is due to armour degradation.

I was actually wondering whether I shouldn't house-rule armour degradation away, since I think that might be somewhat costly to the characters, though on the other hand, BAs would be completely broken then, right?
Hmm... maybe keeping the armour degradation rule, but having the BA replaced/repaired by the organisation after combat at no cost would be a solution...

[Swordguy]

More fragile? With 9/8/7/7 armour? :smalleek:
Is it due to armour degradation? *re-reads the specific rules to that* Ah. So it is due to armour degradation.

I was actually wondering whether I shouldn't house-rule armour degradation away, since I think that might be somewhat costly to the characters, though on the other hand, BAs would be completely broken then, right?
Hmm... maybe keeping the armour degradation rule, but having the BA replaced/repaired by the organisation after combat at no cost would be a solution...

That and, IIRC, Mech-scale weapons have an easier time wiping out BA when using the RPG rules. I'd have to re-read them, though, and...well...I'm lazy.

About armor degradation: I'd drop it. It's a pain in the butt and, frankly, PCs should be using heavy weapons to deal with BA anyway. I don't like the idea of PCs able to wear down an elemental with a pistol and a lot of time. The rule should be, "If you're faced with BA, get a bigger gun. Preferrably one mounted in a shared torso/arm mount." Game balance be dammed.

[Winterwind]

That and, IIRC, Mech-scale weapons have an easier time wiping out BA when using the RPG rules. I'd have to re-read them, though, and...well...I'm lazy.While I haven't played the game, yet, that's the impression I got as well. A Clan ER-M-Laser completely bypasses the armour-protection of an IS Standard BA (with its 7 AP) and deals 21D6 damage, so it would deal a Fatal Wound on average. Usually, the trooper could shrug off that hit without consequences.


About armor degradation: I'd drop it. It's a pain in the butt and, frankly, PCs should be using heavy weapons to deal with BA anyway. I don't like the idea of PCs able to wear down an elemental with a pistol and a lot of time. The rule should be, "If you're faced with BA, get a bigger gun. Preferrably one mounted in a shared torso/arm mount." Game balance be dammed.Well, since armour degradation only occurs when the damage is sufficient to deal a Grazing Wound, and an Elemental has 8 armour points against any pistol, it would have to be an incredibly lucky shot to deal enough damage to make armour degradation occur. But I think I'll go with what you say, or rather, discuss it with my group (mentioning your recommendations, of course).

[Swordguy]

Cool. I'd love to hear how it goes. There aren't enough people in America that are willing to play what they STILL perceive to be a "dead game".

[Winterwind]

It could take a while, before we get to play, and the group's likely to be small (I know quite a lot roleplayers, but they are scattered all over Germany, so we tend to play in very small numbers at a time), but I'm sure it will be fun. :smallsmile:
And, yes, BattleTech does not get nearly as much attention as it deserves.

By the way, I've found an CBT armour point -> RPG armour point conversion table.
The 5 points of the Kage armour translate to 7/7/6/6 according to it.

[Winterwind]

A few more questions.

Is my understanding correct that, unless a character want to have a high Edge-Attribute, all the Life Path switching and Event Roll improvement is pretty much for free, since it costs only Edge Treshold points, but not Edge itself?

Do Traits like Vehicle, Custom Vehicle and Well Equipped refer to the character's starting equipment only, or are they, rather, some kind of privilege the character enjoys as long as (s)he stays with the respective organisation? I mean, if a character belonged to an organisation like the DEST commandos, and lost their equipment, would they be re-equipped for free by their organisation, or not?

And my question from my first post, which might be relevant if I ever wanted to play myself, instead of GMing - is my understanding correct that, if a Clan Trueborn character wanted to ever apply for a prestigeous bloodname (like, say, Kerensky) that character would have to begin the game with a Social Standing of 9 (which means, would have to take Exceptional Attribute for SOC)? Or could one improve SOC in game (which would seem kinda weird, given that one can hardly change from which bloodline one comes from)? Or doesn't SOC limit the available bloodnames at all, and indicates merely whether the characters immediate "parents" were renowned warriors or looked down upon?
Also, how does this work with the rule Clan characters have an SOC maximum equal to their minimum (which would be 7, which makes me wonder why their maximum is higher according to the table with the phenotypes)?

[Swordguy]

A few more questions.

Is my understanding correct that, unless a character want to have a high Edge-Attribute, all the Life Path switching and Event Roll improvement is pretty much for free, since it costs only Edge Treshold points, but not Edge itself?


Most characters are recommended to have a starting Edge in the 4-5 region, as it's tough to regain Edge (GM miliage may vary). That provides a safe zone, and PCs really do need it, since combat of all sorts tends to result in maimed or dead PCs unless they've got Edge in reserve.

Within that limit, however, yes. A starting threshold of 8 means you can safely spend 3-4 points of edge during Character creation. Assume 2 points to counter bad rolls or to add +1 (usually to get a maximum result so a result can be simply chosen) and 1 point to get into a blocked Life Path. I've been known to spend 5-6 points during creation...but I use Periphery characters a lot, which results in having extra Edge to start with.




Do Traits like Vehicle, Custom Vehicle and Well Equipped refer to the character's starting equipment only, or are they, rather, some kind of privilege the character enjoys as long as (s)he stays with the respective organisation? I mean, if a character belonged to an organisation like the DEST commandos, and lost their equipment, would they be re-equipped for free by their organisation, or not?


It "technically" only affects the starting equipment...but it's generally understood that it's "bad form" for a GM to take away stuff a PC has spent points for without a really good reason. If a PC gets shot out of a Mech, and has 6 points in the "Vehicle" Attribute, he should get a new Heavy Mech fairly rapidly in the game. If he lost the Mech while gambling, he shouldn't get a new one (unless he's got "Owns Vehicle", which provides a buffer against this happening at a further 4-point cost).



And my question from my first post, which might be relevant if I ever wanted to play myself, instead of GMing - is my understanding correct that, if a Clan Trueborn character wanted to ever apply for a prestigeous bloodname (like, say, Kerensky) that character would have to begin the game with a Social Standing of 9 (which means, would have to take Exceptional Attribute for SOC)? Or could one improve SOC in game (which would seem kinda weird, given that one can hardly change from which bloodline one comes from)? Or doesn't SOC limit the available bloodnames at all, and indicates merely whether the characters immediate "parents" were renowned warriors or looked down upon?
Also, how does this work with the rule Clan characters have an SOC maximum equal to their minimum (which would be 7, which makes me wonder why their maximum is higher according to the table with the phenotypes)?

This very question is undergoing a vigorous debate on the CBT boards. As a result, nobody knows really how it works right now. At best, I can give you the generally accepted breakdown.

Your SOC score as a Trueborn Warrior is equal to 7 unless you've spent points to increase it at Character Creation. If you wish to increase your SOC in-game, XP spent towards this represents the Clans hearing about your exploits (and thus raising the stock of your bloodline specifically, and possibly bloodname as a whole - see also: Vlad Ward, who took a tarnished Bloodline in his Bloodname of Ward and rehabilitated it).

SOC7: Minimum for a Trueborn Warrior. "Average" bloodname or bloodline within the name.
SOC8: You have a slightly more prestigious bloodname. You may also be from a really nice bloodname (Kerensky) with your particular bloodline being on the downswing for a variety of reasons. (Ulric Kerensky's bloodline right after his death)
SOC9: You've got a nice bloodname AND a nice bloodline (think heir to Natasha Kerensy here).

Really, right now, the whole SOC/bloodname relationship is F'd-up.

[Winterwind]

Your SOC score as a Trueborn Warrior is equal to 7 unless you've spent points to increase it at Character Creation. If you wish to increase your SOC in-game, XP spent towards this represents the Clans hearing about your exploits (and thus raising the stock of your bloodline specifically, and possibly bloodname as a whole - see also: Vlad Ward, who took a tarnished Bloodline in his Bloodname of Ward and rehabilitated it). So basically, you completely ignore this weird maximum=minimum thing?


SOC7: Minimum for a Trueborn Warrior. "Average" bloodname or bloodline within the name.
SOC8: You have a slightly more prestigious bloodname. You may also be from a really nice bloodname (Kerensky) with your particular bloodline being on the downswing for a variety of reasons. (Ulric Kerensky's bloodline right after his death)
SOC9: You've got a nice bloodname AND a nice bloodline (think heir to Natasha Kerensy here).Wait... maybe I'm getting confused on my Clan terminology there, but don't you choose your bloodline only when you acquire your bloodname? Take Vlad Ward, for instance, who applied for a highly valued bloodline (Cyrilla's), failed, and obtained a less valuable bloodline in his next attempt (the very same bloodline, actually, but "tarnished" now by having been possessed by the abjured Phelan). So what would stop a SOC8 character from applying when a "SOC9" bloodline from the same house became available?

Or am I making a conceptual mistake there?

And, thank you for your valuable answers. :smallsmile:

[Swordguy]

So basically, you completely ignore this weird maximum=minimum thing?


Well...no. A trueborn warrior is always at a 7, so it's his minimum AND his maximum. The only way that changes is if he pays CP to increase the value of his SOC attribute. (Assuming he never leaves the Clans.) This is as opposed to the Inner Sphere, where I can have a maximum value of 10(?), and a minimum value determined by my paths.



Wait... maybe I'm getting confused on my Clan terminology there, but don't you choose your bloodline only when you acquire your bloodname? Take Vlad Ward, for instance, who applied for a highly valued bloodline (Cyrilla's), failed, and obtained a less valuable bloodline in his next attempt (the very same bloodline, actually, but "tarnished" now by having been possessed by the abjured Phelan). So what would stop a SOC8 character from applying when a "SOC9" bloodline from the same house became available?

Or am I making a conceptual mistake there?

And, thank you for your valuable answers. :smallsmile:

Backwards. You choose to compete for a particular bloodline of the only bloodname you're eligible for. You can't do anything about the bloodname - it's the one you're spawned from. You CAN choose to go after a particular bloodline of that bloodname, though most will go for the first one they're nominated for, due to the speed of Clan Warrior lives (go for it before you're dead or too old).

Unfortunately, the SOC attribute is a mix of both bloodline and bloodname, which requires some balancing. Let me go check MechWarrior's Guide to the Clans for more info...I don't often run Clanners, so the mechanics aren't 2nd-nature.

[Winterwind]

Well...no. A trueborn warrior is always at a 7, so it's his minimum AND his maximum. The only way that changes is if he pays CP to increase the value of his SOC attribute. (Assuming he never leaves the Clans.) This is as opposed to the Inner Sphere, where I can have a maximum value of 10(?), and a minimum value determined by my paths.Uh? I think you are not allowed to pay CP to increase Attributes beyond the maximum - isn't that pretty much what "maximum" means?


Backwards. You choose to compete for a particular bloodline of the only bloodname you're eligible for. You can't do anything about the bloodname - it's the one you're spawned from. You CAN choose to go after a particular bloodline of that bloodname, though most will go for the first one they're nominated for, due to the speed of Clan Warrior lives (go for it before you're dead or too old). Sure, but what does "comes from a tarnished bloodline of a highly respected bloodname"/"comes from a highly valued bloodline" mean then for a not (yet) blood-named warrior?

[Swordguy]

And...there we go. I KNEW I forgot about something.

Okay, here's the deal. (I'll use Wolves as the examples)

SOC5-7: General, can-be-found-in-any-Clan Bloodname
SOC8: General, but Exclusive to-a-Clan Bloodname (ex. Fetladral)
SOC9: Prestigious, Exclusive to-a-Clan Bloodname (ex. Ward, Kerensky)

This only means you have access to that Bloodname. This value "never" changes (unless the Bloodname is disgraced or particuraly honored somehow, but it's very rare).

Example: Ranna during the 3050's, has SOC9. That is, she is of the Kerensky Bloodname.

If you want a PC to actually HAVE a Bloodname, they must take the Title Attribute to a nearly equal value of their SOC attribute.

Example: Ranna wins Natasha Kerensky's Bloodline. That's a massively prestigious bloodline, ergot she takes Title at Rank 9 (because her SOC value is at 9). Had she instead won a disgraced line of the Kerensky Bloodname, she would take Title at Rank 8 (but no lower).

There is a LOT of GM's fiat inherent in these rules, and the book mentions that specifically.

My apologies, btw, for misleading you earlier. I should have checked the books instead of answering offhand.

[Swordguy]

As to what a General, can-be-found-in-any-Clan Bloodname may be:

There are 660 Bloodnames. MechWarriors Guide to the Clans lists 192 Bloodnames. These are ALL of the bloodnames that fall under SOC8 and 9. Therefore, there are 468 Bloodnames that fall under the lowest SOC category. These are undefined for GM's usage.

[Winterwind]

Ah. Now this makes sense perfectly. :smallsmile:

At least, if one forgoes the maximum, which would limit one to 7, meaning PCs could never obtain the better Bloodnames.

Thank you very much! :smallsmile:

(And, I hope I am not annoying you with all my questions. I'm sure more will come up yet. :smallwink: )

[Swordguy]

Ah. Now this makes sense perfectly. :smallsmile:

At least, if one forgoes the maximum, which would limit one to 7, meaning PCs could never obtain the better Bloodnames.


Correct. In essence, your SOC attribute is set when you gestate as a trueborn. It has nothing to do with you, and everything to do with the people who held the bloodname before you. You can't switch a genetic lineage, so yes, if a player starts with a 7, he will always be a 7, excepting perhaps some VERY exceptional in-game circumstances that increase the Bloodname's prestige.




Thank you very much! :smallsmile:

(And, I hope I am not annoying you with all my questions. I'm sure more will come up yet. :smallwink: )

No problem at all. If it's not obvious by now, I do enjoy talking about this game a little bit.

[Winterwind]

Correct. In essence, your SOC attribute is set when you gestate as a trueborn. It has nothing to do with you, and everything to do with the people who held the bloodname before you. You can't switch a genetic lineage, so yes, if a player starts with a 7, he will always be a 7, excepting perhaps some VERY exceptional in-game circumstances that increase the Bloodname's prestige.Got it.
Ironically, this means that characters from prestigeous blood-houses are going to be inferior mechanically as compared to those from less prestigeous ones (due to less CP left).


No problem at all. If it's not obvious by now, I do enjoy talking about this game a little bit.So do I. Thanks anyway. :smallsmile:

Something one of the players asked me: Is it possible to split Vehicle Trait points in order to get several (albeit weaker) Vehicles?

And from me: Is it possible to trade off excessive Vehicle points obtained from Life Paths in order to get more CP? (I got 8, but 6 will suffice - yes, I am one of those Timber Wolf fanboys :smalltongue: )
I suppose it's not, but wanted to be sure.

[Swordguy]

Got it.
Ironically, this means that characters from prestigeous blood-houses are going to be inferior mechanically as compared to those from less prestigeous ones (due to less CP left).


Yes. Quite true, and something I really dislike about the CP system. However, it's also partially up to the GM to enforce the fact that people with a higher SOC catch more breaks due to their august rank than others might.



Something one of the players asked me: Is it possible to split Vehicle Trait points in order to get several (albeit weaker) Vehicles?

And from me: Is it possible to trade off excessive Vehicle points obtained from Life Paths in order to get more CP? (I got 8, but 6 will suffice - yes, I am one of those Timber Wolf fanboys :smalltongue: )
I suppose it's not, but wanted to be sure.

It's GM's call on both of those. My gut instinct is to say no to the first, and a Hell Yes to the second. In fact, I'd insist on the second as both a player and a GM. I've ended up with 17 points of Vehicle before...but it was practically ALL I got from my event rolls. If I envisioned a Medium Mech pilot, I'd be pretty ticked to basically waste 13 points worth of character.

I also don't count points "traded in" from granted Advantages to count against the Disadvantage limit for getting full points from the Disadvantage - with the understanding that "most" of the points you gain from doing these go towards other Advantages, or can buy free Skill Points (to go into your Skill Pool) at a rate of 1CP:3SP.

[Winterwind]

It's GM's call on both of those. My gut instinct is to say no to the first, and a Hell Yes to the second. In fact, I'd insist on the second as both a player and a GM. I've ended up with 17 points of Vehicle before...but it was practically ALL I got from my event rolls. If I envisioned a Medium Mech pilot, I'd be pretty ticked to basically waste 13 points worth of character. 17? Wow, that's... a lot.
If splitting Vehicle points was allowed you could have gotten yourself an entire Medium Lance! :smallbiggrin:


I also don't count points "traded in" from granted Advantages to count against the Disadvantage limit for getting full points from the Disadvantage - with the understanding that "most" of the points you gain from doing these go towards other Advantages, or can buy free Skill Points (to go into your Skill Pool) at a rate of 1CP:3SP.So you allow to trade off any Advantages? Yes, makes sense; I think we'll do it the same way.
Does this mean that if somebody rolls up an Event or chooses a Life Path which gives a Trait the character already has (and cannot have several times, like Pain Tolerance), you increase the Character Points accordingly instead?

[Swordguy]

So you allow to trade off any Advantages? Yes, makes sense; I think we'll do it the same way.
Does this mean that if somebody rolls up an Event or chooses a Life Path which gives a Trait the character already has (and cannot have several times, like Pain Tolerance), you increase the Character Points accordingly instead?

I'd do it at the end, because you can always lose levels in an Advantage. Example: I gain Wealth 9. I only want Wealth 3. During my last event roll, I get hit with Poverty, which knocks off 1 level of Wealth, for a final score of 8. I then "cash in" 5 levels of Wealth, gaining 5 CP, and end with Wealth 3.

If you gain a trait multiple times that you cannot take multiple levels in, then yes, I think you get the value in CP. Again, doing it at the end is helpful. If I've gotten Pain Tolerance twice, and get Glass Jaw once, then I should end up with Pain Tolerance...

[Winterwind]

It's not exactly following the rules as written, I think, but it does sound more fair that way (even though strictly speaking it can never be fair, because of random Events).

I like how the system pretty much forces Clan characters to be young at the beginning, true to the nature of the Clans - there are no other choices than to go through Tour of Duty over and over again, so a Clan character who'd start older would have to risk bad Events (besides, Tour of Duty: Clan is not exactly the most awesome Life Path to begin with).

[Swordguy]

It's not exactly following the rules as written, I think, but it does sound more fair that way (even though strictly speaking it can never be fair, because of random Events).

I like how the system pretty much forces Clan characters to be young at the beginning, true to the nature of the Clans - there are no other choices than to go through Tour of Duty over and over again, so a Clan character who'd start older would have to risk bad Events (besides, Tour of Duty: Clan is not exactly the most awesome Life Path to begin with).

The problem is that the rules don't specify what to do if a player wants to get rid of advantages that don't fit the character, or are simply more than they want/need. There's a bunch of minor holes in the system like that that aren't apparent on only a relatively superficial once-over of the game.

The old 2d6 Event Paths generally suck. There needs to be a revision of them to the later, 2d10 standard. There need a revision very, very badly.

Don't forget about the cumulative -1 to event rolls when paths are repeated. Sucks for characters that only have access to one basic path. And yes, it means that you can only roll a 12 on your first two passes through that path. Clan PCs shouldn't be older than about 20-22 at game start anyway (with a starting age of about 24-26 for Inner Sphere PCs).

[Winterwind]

The problem is that the rules don't specify what to do if a player wants to get rid of advantages that don't fit the character, or are simply more than they want/need. There's a bunch of minor holes in the system like that that aren't apparent on only a relatively superficial once-over of the game.I see...


The old 2d6 Event Paths generally suck. There needs to be a revision of them to the later, 2d10 standard. There need a revision very, very badly.Why, what's wrong with them?
Of course, a truly bad roll can mess a character concept up badly, but in that case I would allow re-rolling the character from the beginning as GM.


Don't forget about the cumulative -1 to event rolls when paths are repeated. Sucks for characters that only have access to one basic path. And yes, it means that you can only roll a 12 on your first two passes through that path. Clan PCs shouldn't be older than about 20-22 at game start anyway (with a starting age of about 24-26 for Inner Sphere PCs).Well, in the case of Clan characters, the cumulative -1 leads to generally younger Clan characters, so one might also argue that here the system enforces the background, which seems like a good thing to me.
...Of course, I can easily think of other character concepts where this would strictly be a bad thing.

[Swordguy]

Why, what's wrong with them?
Of course, a truly bad roll can mess a character concept up badly, but in that case I would allow re-rolling the character from the beginning as GM.


Couple things. Since the distribution is smaller, there's a greater chance of getting the extreme results (2, 12). Mainly, though, the 2d10 paths are just nicer in comparison. They give you more stuff, and, again, have less odds of hurting you. Repeating paths doesn't hurt so much, because you're getting a -1 to a range of 19 results rather than 11.

And those truly bad rolls? That's what Edge is for... The only time I've ever allowed a reroll is a guy who rolled 7 straight results of 4 or less, on both 2d6 and 2d10.

[Winterwind]

Couple things. Since the distribution is smaller, there's a greater chance of getting the extreme results (2, 12). Mainly, though, the 2d10 paths are just nicer in comparison. They give you more stuff, and, again, have less odds of hurting you. Repeating paths doesn't hurt so much, because you're getting a -1 to a range of 19 results rather than 11.I see.
Well, while I don't think the extreme results are this bad generally, I can certainly see why 2d10 might be better.


And those truly bad rolls? That's what Edge is for... The only time I've ever allowed a reroll is a guy who rolled 7 straight results of 4 or less, on both 2d6 and 2d10.For IS characters, that's no big deal (a 2 is often devastating, a 3 is usually acceptable). However, Clan characters are usually kicked out of the Clans on a roll between 2-4, so unless I'm mistaken and Edge can be used several times to improve an Event roll by more than 1, a roll of less than 4 could mess up a character concept royally.
I wouldn't tie the permission to re-rolling to any specific numbers; however, I would allow to re-roll if the Event rolls made it completely impossible to create the character the player envisions.

I noticed that on the CBT RPG forum there is a quite vocal group which seems to disdain the third edition greatly; what is this about? All I could gather is that they consider it to be too complex and character creation to take too much time?

[Swordguy]

I noticed that on the CBT RPG forum there is a quite vocal group which seems to disdain the third edition greatly; what is this about? All I could gather is that they consider it to be too complex and character creation to take too much time?

First off, ignore any posts by Jedibear and PerkinsC. They're incredibly hostile over ANYTHING that they feel doesn't fit into their own, personal vision of CBT. They're great guys, but they get...overenthusiastic. That'll narrow the hostile posts down by about 80% right there.

3rd Edition Mechwarrior has a little identity crisis going on. The first two editions were very clearly "you have a Mechwarrior, here's what he does when he's not in a Mech and you aren't playing CBT". MW3rd is much more of a "you can play whomever or whatever you want in the CBT universe". They're entirely different game concepts, and a lot of people preferred the basic concept of the previous 2 editions. That's the root of the problem - character creation is pretty much the proxy for people really not liking the entire concept of the game but not wanting to say it as such.

Complexity-wise, MW3 is not really any worse than Shadowrun 3rd or D&D 3.x (and can be much easier), and you get some guaranteed backstory to boot. What people fail to realize is that A) Life Paths are optional and can be modified in conjunction with the GM (this is encouraged in the ruleset, btw), and B) you have edge, which can rescue you from potentially character-breaking events. It's incredibly rare for a character to be unplayable from Life Path rolls, and it's usually due to unusually bad luck with dice rolls - exactly the type of thing that it's reasonable for a GM to allow a re-do from.

Oh, and Life Paths make it more difficult to munch out a character, because you can't control the result you get all that well (save for avoiding bad stuff). People miss the days of 2nd ed, where you can have a 1/1 MechWarrior fresh out of the Academy. So some of the complaints about the Life Paths are coming from min-maxers mad that they can't have the perfect killing machine.

I post as "Darrian Wolffe" over there, by the way.

[Swordguy]

This thread on CBT is due to close soon, so if you have any input on a next edition of the mechwarrior RPG, post there quick. Here's the link. (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,24329.0.html)

It's the CBT line developer (Herb Beas/HABEAS2) asking for the input.

[Winterwind]

First off, ignore any posts by Jedibear and PerkinsC. They're incredibly hostile over ANYTHING that they feel doesn't fit into their own, personal vision of CBT. They're great guys, but they get...overenthusiastic. That'll narrow the hostile posts down by about 80% right there.Heh, yeah, I noticed that. :smallbiggrin:


3rd Edition Mechwarrior has a little identity crisis going on. The first two editions were very clearly "you have a Mechwarrior, here's what he does when he's not in a Mech and you aren't playing CBT". MW3rd is much more of a "you can play whomever or whatever you want in the CBT universe". They're entirely different game concepts, and a lot of people preferred the basic concept of the previous 2 editions. That's the root of the problem - character creation is pretty much the proxy for people really not liking the entire concept of the game but not wanting to say it as such.Ah, I see. Well, personally, I greatly prefer the system to support a multitude of characters; if I wanted to limit myself to MechWarriors, I would stick to the strategy game and roleplay the moments in between battles via freeform.


Complexity-wise, MW3 is not really any worse than Shadowrun 3rd or D&D 3.x (and can be much easier), and you get some guaranteed backstory to boot. What people fail to realize is that A) Life Paths are optional and can be modified in conjunction with the GM (this is encouraged in the ruleset, btw), and B) you have edge, which can rescue you from potentially character-breaking events. It's incredibly rare for a character to be unplayable from Life Path rolls, and it's usually due to unusually bad luck with dice rolls - exactly the type of thing that it's reasonable for a GM to allow a re-do from.That's the impression I got myself, too; I'm not familiar with D&D, but it's fairly obvious that MW3 had been made by the same people as SR, especially regarding the combat mechanics. And it does seem less complex than SR to me (which I consider a good thing, even though I like SR).


Oh, and Life Paths make it more difficult to munch out a character, because you can't control the result you get all that well (save for avoiding bad stuff). People miss the days of 2nd ed, where you can have a 1/1 MechWarrior fresh out of the Academy. So some of the complaints about the Life Paths are coming from min-maxers mad that they can't have the perfect killing machine.1/1? :smalleek:
That's pretty much a perfect killing machine, all right; while I am all for more possible character concepts, I can hardly devise a story where this would make sense, much less where it would make for a good ongoing character.


I post as "Darrian Wolffe" over there, by the way.Wow. Now that's eerie. I had been wondering who you might be, and that would have been my first guess. :smallbiggrin:


This thread on CBT is due to close soon, so if you have any input on a next edition of the mechwarrior RPG, post there quick. Here's the link. (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,24329.0.html)

It's the CBT line developer (Herb Beas/HABEAS2) asking for the input.Good to see the CBT franchise is getting even more attention. :smallsmile:
I think I'd need more experience with the system, though, to make valuable input. Though I know what my first wish would be - more atmosphere and background in the core book. My favourite RPG spends about three quarters of its pages for stories (including personal stories from people living within the universe), background and metaplot; it's pretty awesome for immersion into the world.

[Swordguy]

1/1? :smalleek:
That's pretty much a perfect killing machine, all right; while I am all for more possible character concepts, I can hardly devise a story where this would make sense, much less where it would make for a good ongoing character.


Yeah. Don't get me wrong, with good rolls, you can start with about a 2/2-ish PC in MW3, but you've got to consistently be getting REALLY good rolls, AND be in a "power" path, AND set up a loop where you can take the same path multiple times at no penalty. Oh,and you can't get it done straight out of the academy at age 18 anymore either - you'll be 30 at a minimum. It was just easier to do back then, and I think the changes ticked a lot of power-gaming, overly-compensating, munchkins off.



Wow. Now that's eerie. I had been wondering who you might be, and that would have been my first guess. :smallbiggrin:


Huh. Might I ask why? I don't think the respective accounts have any signature stuff in common or anything. Amusing, though.



Good to see the CBT franchise is getting even more attention. :smallsmile:
I think I'd need more experience with the system, though, to make valuable input. Though I know what my first wish would be - more atmosphere and background in the core book. My favourite RPG spends about three quarters of its pages for stories (including personal stories from people living within the universe), background and metaplot; it's pretty awesome for immersion into the world.

You'll be interested to know, then, that the Total Warfare relaunch of the CBT line is scheduled for 6 books (TW, TechManual, Strategic Ops (Warships and such), MechWarrior 4th Ed. RPG, something else, and...a dedicated universe book). This will allow them more page space in the actual RPG-specific book for rules and "crunch", since there's an entire book devoted to the fluff by itself.

[Winterwind]

Yeah. Don't get me wrong, with good rolls, you can start with about a 2/2-ish PC in MW3, but you've got to consistently be getting REALLY good rolls, AND be in a "power" path, AND set up a loop where you can take the same path multiple times at no penalty. Oh,and you can't get it done straight out of the academy at age 18 anymore either - you'll be 30 at a minimum. It was just easier to do back then, and I think the changes ticked a lot of power-gaming, overly-compensating, munchkins off.I'd say the changes were a good thing, then. :smallsmile:
2/2? That would require, even with Fast Learner and Natural Aptitude, at least 30 points in the respective gunnery skill (all of them, if it's going to be a real CBT Gunnery 2). Plus a ton of points in Piloting, too.
That's really feasible? Wow, wouldn't have thought that. So far, I have seen two character creations, and none of them had any skills above +3.
How can one take the same path multiple times without penalty? I thought you get the -1 modifier no matter what if you already had been on that path, unless you are taking a different subpath this time?


Huh. Might I ask why? I don't think the respective accounts have any signature stuff in common or anything. Amusing, though.Writing style. The way of expressing yourself (word selection, temper, and that sort of things).
Mostly, lucky guess, I suppose. :smallbiggrin:


You'll be interested to know, then, that the Total Warfare relaunch of the CBT line is scheduled for 6 books (TW, TechManual, Strategic Ops (Warships and such), MechWarrior 4th Ed. RPG, something else, and...a dedicated universe book). This will allow them more page space in the actual RPG-specific book for rules and "crunch", since there's an entire book devoted to the fluff by itself.Ah. Good to know. I generally prefer the fluff to appear in the main book itself, since it kinda sets the general expectations/the kind of roleplaying the system encourages, but that's fine, too, I guess.

[Swordguy]

I'd say the changes were a good thing, then. :smallsmile:
2/2? That would require, even with Fast Learner and Natural Aptitude, at least 30 points in the respective gunnery skill (all of them, if it's going to be a real CBT Gunnery 2). Plus a ton of points in Piloting, too.
That's really feasible? Wow, wouldn't have thought that. So far, I have seen two character creations, and none of them had any skills above +3.
How can one take the same path multiple times without penalty? I thought you get the -1 modifier no matter what if you already had been on that path, unless you are taking a different subpath this time?




There's some Periphery Path (Brotherhood of Randis or Black Warriors or something) that allows you to go roll on another path instead of the 1st one. That other path has a result that gives you a BUNCH of stuff and allows you to go back and roll on the first one. Repeat ad nauseum.

Example: (Made-up names, but the cycle's generally the same)

Stage 4: Black Warrior, time:0 years
Vehicle (1), +2 to any 4 skills
roll: 15: roll on the Stage 4 Path: Clan Doom Munchkin path instead of this one (at no penalty if you came from that path).

Stage 4: Clan Doom Munchkin, time 1 year
Bad Reputation, +3 to any 4 skills, +1 to any one skill
roll: 18: Gain +4 to all skills within any one of your military fields (plus the normal stuff granted by taking this path) and immediately take the Stage 4 Path: Black Warrior at no penalty.


Apply everything you get to "CBT-oriented" skills, and there you go. Age a year, gain like +9 to the 4 skills that are important in CBT (Piloting, and the 3 gunneries). If you can make the rolls, it's infinitely repeatable.

Granted, though, this is REALLY hard to pull off, because you don't have total control over your rolls. Which is an advantage of the Life Path System. I'll tell you some horror stories about MW1 and 2 sometime...

[Winterwind]

Apply everything you get to "CBT-oriented" skills, and there you go. Age a year, gain like +9 to the 4 skills that are important in CBT (Piloting, and the 3 gunneries). If you can make the rolls, it's infinitely repeatable.Wow. :smalleek:
Why doesn't this "Black Warrior" Path take any time?
Since this adds 9 skill points per year, it would seem as if 7-8 years would be sufficient to obtain G/P 1/1 even... now that's scary! :smalleek:
But fortunately, it is not going to happen - who could roll this high this often?
Plus, whoever does this will be despised throughout both the Inner Sphere and the Clan worlds.


Granted, though, this is REALLY hard to pull off, because you don't have total control over your rolls. Which is an advantage of the Life Path System. I'll tell you some horror stories about MW1 and 2 sometime...And I'd love to hear them. :smallbiggrin:

[horseboy]

1/1? :smalleek:

Pfft! Clan aerospace pilots started at -1/0 just too sick

When did this 3rd edition come out?

[Winterwind]

Pfft! Clan aerospace pilots started at -1/0 just too sickIs there even such a thing as negative Gunnery values? :smallconfused:
I mean, one could house-rule them in, if one wished to, but why would one want to? Lower Gunnery values are pretty broken in CBT anyway!

(The infamous Warhawk/Masakari C Variant, with Targeting Computer and Large Pulse Lasers, comes to mind)


When did this 3rd edition come out?I don't know, but I think it's been quite a while now.

Also, welcome on board. :smallsmile:

[horseboy]

Is there even such a thing as negative Gunnery values? :smallconfused:
I mean, one could house-rule them in, if one wished to, but why would one want to? Lower Gunnery values are pretty broken in CBT anyway!

(The infamous Warhawk/Masakari C Variant, with Targeting Computer and Large Pulse Lasers, comes to mind)

I don't know, but I think it's been quite a while now.

Also, welcome on board. :smallsmile:

Ty,

I was always partial to the Jengiz C. Strap 6 100 point bombs onto it's undercarriage. Fly in, dive bomb well, anything. If it survived strafe with the two ulra lbx-20's

Sad thing IIRC they could go up to -3 gunnery. That would just be wrong on so many levels.

[Winterwind]

I was always partial to the Jengiz C. Strap 6 100 point bombs onto it's undercarriage. Fly in, dive bomb well, anything. If it survived strafe with the two ulra lbx-20'sAlas, I'm not familiar with the rules for aerospace fighters; but from the sheer look of their armament, those things are sick.

One thing that always seemed odd to me is that apparently, either the Clans have an over-abundance of A/S fighters as compared to their 'Mech forces, or the IS is severly lacking in the A/S department: While in the IS an A/S fighter counts as equivalent to two BattleMechs (1 lance = 4 'Mechs or 2 fighters), it's the other way around for the Clans (1 point = 1 'Mech or 2 fighters).


Sad thing IIRC they could go up to -3 gunnery. That would just be wrong on so many levels.Put that into a 'Mech with Targeting Computer and Pulse Lasers, and you'll have a base To Hit of -6. So you would hit a target in heavy woods, which had moved up to 6 hexes, at medium range while running 100% of the time.
Uhhh... help? :smalleek:

[horseboy]

One thing that always seemed odd to me is that apparently, either the Clans have an over-abundance of A/S fighters as compared to their 'Mech forces, or the IS is severely lacking in the A/S department: While in the IS an A/S fighter counts as equivalent to two BattleMechs (1 lance = 4 'Mechs or 2 fighters), it's the other way around for the Clans (1 point = 1 'Mech or 2 fighters).
Well, I think they had roughly the same #, they just were organized differently. 1 star of Clan A/S was 10 pilots and 5 lances would be 10 pilots. There were just far more lances. It was kind of "You and your wing man" vs "The squadron". Either way, the A/S were the unsung role of the battlefield.


Put that into a 'Mech with Targeting Computer and Pulse Lasers, and you'll have a base To Hit of -6. So you would hit a target in heavy woods, which had moved up to 6 hexes, at medium range while running 100% of the time.
Uhhh... help? :smalleek:
Which was why their breed weren't allowed in mechs. They didn't want to have to admit that they were genetically superior to Mechwarriors. :smallamused:

edit: Though I did make a lot of jokes with him needing to find a LAM.

[Winterwind]

Well, I think they had roughly the same #, they just were organized differently. 1 star of Clan A/S was 10 pilots and 5 lances would be 10 pilots. There were just far more lances. It was kind of "You and your wing man" vs "The squadron". Either way, the A/S were the unsung role of the battlefield.Which means, of course, that either a 'Mech lance is vastly superior to an A/S lance, or an A/S star is vastly superior to a 'Mech star. If it's the latter, it would mess up the Bidding concept royally.
(Of course, Bidding is a messed up concept to begin with :smallbiggrin: )


Which was why their breed weren't allowed in mechs. They didn't want to have to admit that they were genetically superior to Mechwarriors. :smallamused:In MW3 that wouldn't work, though, since Gunnery/Laser/Humanoid is not the same skill as Gunnery/Laser/Aerospace Fighter.


edit: Though I did make a lot of jokes with him needing to find a LAM.LAM? Sorry, I'm not familiar with this acronym?

EDIT:

Wow. :smalleek:
Why doesn't this "Black Warrior" Path take any time?
Since this adds 9 skill points per year, it would seem as if 7-8 years would be sufficient to obtain G/P 1/1 even... now that's scary! :smalleek:
But fortunately, it is not going to happen - who could roll this high this often?
Plus, whoever does this will be despised throughout both the Inner Sphere and the Clan worlds.Just realised this doesn't work due to the limitation of Life Paths to a number of 6. Also, one would need to obtain the MechWarrior military field first somehow, which would take at least one further path. Still, with Natural Aptitude and Fast Learner it might yet be possible to get a 1 in Piloting and at least one of the Gunnery skills.
Phew... and there are people who are complaining the possibilities to abuse the system are insufficient? :smalleek:

[horseboy]

Which means, of course, that either a 'Mech lance is vastly superior to an A/S lance, or an A/S star is vastly superior to a 'Mech star. If it's the latter, it would mess up the Bidding concept royally.
(Of course, Bidding is a messed up concept to begin with :smallbiggrin: ) True, but you really didn't see A/S stars being bid very often. There might have been a reason for that.


In MW3 that wouldn't work, though, since Gunnery/Laser/Humanoid is not the same skill as Gunnery/Laser/Aerospace Fighter.The clan A/S pilot is a race. Kinda like how the Elemental is a race (or was in MW2). They had some pretty sick stat mods. IIRC their skill level in gunnery/Aerospace was 4, but their stat mods dropped it down to -1. If they learned gunnery/mech it would be a -1 as well, but do to sociological reasons, aren't allowed to.


LAM? Sorry, I'm not familiar with this acronym? Land Air Mech. The original mechs used in BT were ripped off of Robotech. Literally. I'm pretty sure that was why Palladium sued them. The Land Air Mechs were Veritechs. The last factory that still manufactured them was destroyed by Clan Smoke Jaguar, as they were considered an abomination that blurred the distinctions within the social hierarchy.


EDIT:
Just realised this doesn't work due to the limitation of Life Paths to a number of 6. Also, one would need to obtain the MechWarrior military field first somehow, which would take at least one further path. Still, with Natural Aptitude and Fast Learner it might yet be possible to get a 1 in Piloting and at least one of the Gunnery skills.
Phew... and there are people who are complaining the possibilities to abuse the system are insufficient? :smalleek:
Yeah, to pilot a LAM required both M/W and A/S skills. They may have left it in there for an old fogy to be able to pull it off, if he wanted to.

[Winterwind]

True, but you really didn't see A/S stars being bid very often. There might have been a reason for that.True, that might be it.

The clan A/S pilot is a race. Kinda like how the Elemental is a race (or was in MW2). They had some pretty sick stat mods. IIRC their skill level in gunnery/Aerospace was 4, but their stat mods dropped it down to -1. If they learned gunnery/mech it would be a -1 as well, but do to sociological reasons, aren't allowed to. While I know next to nothing about the earlier editions, I have read that the third edition is a complete rewrite and a completely different system from the older ones.
In MW3, being a Trueborn A/S pilot would merely shift your maximal attributes and how costly it is for you to obtain high values in said attributes (but it doesn't grant you high attributes on its own!), plus a Natural Aptitude for all relevant skills (meaning it is cheaper to obtain high skill values therein). It wouldn't grant you any stat mods, however.
As the system stands, it is rather difficult to have Gunnery/Piloting better than 3/4 at the beginning, and getting better than 0/0 ever is absolutely impossible.


Land Air Mech. The original mechs used in BT were ripped off of Robotech. Literally. I'm pretty sure that was why Palladium sued them. The Land Air Mechs were Veritechs. The last factory that still manufactured them was destroyed by Clan Smoke Jaguar, as they were considered an abomination that blurred the distinctions within the social hierarchy. Ah, I see. Yeah, I understand why your pilot would want one of these now. :smallbiggrin:


Yeah, to pilot a LAM required both M/W and A/S skills. They may have left it in there for an old fogy to be able to pull it off, if he wanted to.The thing is, it would require even more skills in MW3, since the Gunnery skill has been split into three (Gunnery/Laser, Gunnery/Missile, Gunnery/Ballistic). So to pilot a LAM it would likely require 8 skills (three Gunnery skills and one Piloting skill for each).

[horseboy]

Yeah, looks like they did a good job cutting out the cheese from you guy's conversations. Kinda wish they had a gaming store around here. :smallfrown:

[Swordguy]

EDIT:
Just realised this doesn't work due to the limitation of Life Paths to a number of 6. Also, one would need to obtain the MechWarrior military field first somehow, which would take at least one further path. Still, with Natural Aptitude and Fast Learner it might yet be possible to get a 1 in Piloting and at least one of the Gunnery skills.
Phew... and there are people who are complaining the possibilities to abuse the system are insufficient? :smalleek:


Ohhh! More people to talk to! Cool!

Bunch of stuff to reply to, but I'm going to his this and the LAM issue and go to bed.

The limitation is 6 STAGE 3&4 LIFEPATHS. You go to an academy - 5 left. You hit the Black Warrior path, and start the cycle. You're taking Clan Doom Munchkin instead of the Black Warrior path (not in addition to), so you can do this cycle 5 times. That's about 45 points into your MechWarrior-ing skills. Still broken.


Regarding LAMs...this'll be long. I'll try to sum up. Palladium never sued FASA.

Timeline: 1983 - FASA acquires the license to use the images from Dougram, Macross, and a few other animes in their games from an illustration company (forgotten the name). This illustration company had the rights to use the images in artwork only in the US. They DID NOT have the right to license the images themselves. FASA was unaware of this at the time.

1984: FASA publishes Battledroids, using the artwork mentioned above. This includes the following units: Wasp, Stinger, Locust, Ostscout, Phoenix Hawk, Scorpion, Wolverine, Shadow Hawk, Griffin, Rifleman, Crusader, Ostroc, Ostsol, Thunderbolt, Warhammer, Marauder, Goliath, Battlemaster, Longbow, Stinger LAM, Wasp LAM, Phoenix Hawk LAM, Leopard DropShip, Corsair Areospace Fighter, Samurai ASF, and Galleon Light Tank. All of these images are taken from other anime.

1984: FASA recieves a "cease & desist" letter from Harmony Gold Enterprises. HG has the license to distribute the majority of above images in the US in all forms other than artwork, and revoked the illustration company's license when they found out what had happened. What FASA did with the letter has not been revealed, but the issue lay fallow for another 10-ish years. FASA documents do indicate that FASA was unaware they had acquired what amounted to a "fake license".

1993: Playmates Toys wants to release a line of toys tied to the Exosquad cartoon. They seek and acquire the license for the Harmony Gold images for use as toys. The toys are released, and are perfect copies of several BattleMech designs, notably the Warhammer, Archer, and Rifleman. FASA sends a "cease & desist" letter to Playmates claiming infringement (as far as FASA was concerned, they had the license to use those images).

1994: The issue between Playmates and FASA goes to court over the planned release of a "heavy attack E-Frame" that is an almost perfect match for the Mad Cat/Timber Wolf OmniMech (NOT one of the original designs, and clearly FASA intellectual property). Harmony Gold gets involved on Playmate's behalf, and reveals that the original designs should never have been FASA's in the first place. The details of the resulting legal deal have never been revealed, but in the end, FASA lost the license to those images, Playmates had to stop producing the Exosquad toy line (it reverted in it's entirety to Harmony Gold), and some some changed hands. No one was ever found guilty of IP violations in any way - it was settled out of court, though the legal case has actually become a major IP infringement reference in lawbooks.

***for clarity: FASA brought suit against Playmates. Then Harmony Gold brought suit against FASA.***

1995: FASA decides that it is better to be safe than sorry. In TRO3055, several images were rendered (fully legally) by Victor Musical Industries. These images, including all of the original Clan 2nd-line Mechs, are considered to be Unseen as well as the original designs. A few Mechs from later supplements, notably the Grand Crusader, also become Unseen, because they were produced by non-FASA artists. FASA adopted the policy that only art produced by FASA artists could ever be used in their products, and freelancers were no longer be used. This policy continues to the present day.

Interestingly, some of those original images are still around. The Leopard DropShip, Corsair ASF, and Galleon Light Tank are all still around in their original incarnations, and no issue has ever been made of the artwork.

Finally, as a note, all designs no longer used in CBT are considered to be 100% legal, and still in existence in-universe. They simply cannot be depicted in the artwork. That is the ONLY restriction upon them. Anyone who tells you different is wrong, and in violation of FASA's guidelines, FanPro's guidelines, and Catalyst's guidelines. You can use them anywhere BattleTech is being played.

Side note: LAMs are not "tournament legal". You can't use them at GenCon in a canon game. However, the last published rules (pages 47-49) in the Tactical Handbook are considered to be official, and still in effect. The policy for CBT has always been once something is published, it is still legal until DIRECTLY contradicted by a new product. The TacHandbook rules need to be updated to be compatible with Areotech 2(r), but for Mech and AirMech modes they are still perfectly legit.

If it matters, I know this because I worked for Iron Wind Metals, and have seen and read through copies of the documents in question in the FanPro warehouse personally. Don't believe me? Go to the CBT board and ask.

[Winterwind]

The limitation is 6 STAGE 3&4 LIFEPATHS. You go to an academy - 5 left. You hit the Black Warrior path, and start the cycle. You're taking Clan Doom Munchkin instead of the Black Warrior path (not in addition to), so you can do this cycle 5 times. That's about 45 points into your MechWarrior-ing skills. Still broken.So, if I understand this correctly, you get the benefits from the Black Warrior Path in spite of never actually getting the Path added to your maximum number of Paths?
Well, no wonder it's broken. :smalleek:
That's not a Path from the core book though, is it?


Regarding LAMs...this'll be long. I'll try to sum up. *sum*I had heard the story, but never in this detail. Didn't they re-release the Unseens a few years ago, though?


If it matters, I know this because I worked for Iron Wind Metals, and have seen and read through copies of the documents in question in the FanPro warehouse personally. Cool! :smallsmile:

[Swordguy]

So, if I understand this correctly, you get the benefits from the Black Warrior Path in spite of never actually getting the Path added to your maximum number of Paths?
Well, no wonder it's broken. :smalleek:
That's not a Path from the core book though, is it?


No. Can't recall where from though.



I had heard the story, but never in this detail. Didn't they re-release the Unseens a few years ago, though?


What they did is took the old designs (Marauder, Warhammer, etc) and redid the artwork for them. They in general are clearly descended from the original designs, but look different enough to satisfy the lawyers.

Original, Unseen Battlemaster:
http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n294/wolffe42/tro-battlemaster.jpg

Updated, Reseen Battlemaster:
http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n294/wolffe42/40_foxbat2ndRoyalGuardsBattlemaster.jpg

Some Reseen designs are better at representing the original than others. The Reseen Marauder is specifically bad - and is an incredible PITA to put together. The Battlemaster is one of the best.

[Winterwind]

What they did is took the old designs (Marauder, Warhammer, etc) and redid the artwork for them. They in general are clearly descended from the original designs, but look different enough to satisfy the lawyers.

Original, Unseen Battlemaster:
*image*

Updated, Reseen Battlemaster:
*image*Funny - in MechWarrior 2 (the computer game) there were BattleMasters, and they looked pretty much exactly like the Unseen version. So that's one definite instance where the Unseens prevailed.


Some Reseen designs are better at representing the original than others. The Reseen Marauder is specifically bad - and is an incredible PITA to put together. The Battlemaster is one of the best.I have never figured out how to put BattleTech models together anyway, at least in a way that they hold together. The simpler ones, like an Awesome, are just feasible; but how to put a Timber Wolf together, I have no idea.
Over at the miniatures (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56416) thread they suggested pinning, so I guess I'll try that, even though I'm not sure whether BattleTech models are not too filigree for that.

[Swordguy]

Funny - in MechWarrior 2 (the computer game) there were BattleMasters, and they looked pretty much exactly like the Unseen version. So that's one definite instance where the Unseens prevailed.


That's because MechWarrior 2 development predates the legal case. You'll note it was the final game with Unseens in it.



I have never figured out how to put BattleTech models together anyway, at least in a way that they hold together. The simpler ones, like an Awesome, are just feasible; but how to put a Timber Wolf together, I have no idea.
Over at the miniatures (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56416) thread they suggested pinning, so I guess I'll try that, even though I'm not sure whether BattleTech models are not too filigree for that.

http://www.camospecs.com/Article.asp?FictionID=6

If you can put this together, you're gold. You also need a good glue. Zap-a-gap is the industry standard.

[Winterwind]

That's because MechWarrior 2 development predates the legal case. You'll note it was the final game with Unseens in it.They got lucky, then, for if I'm not mistaken MW2 was released in '94 - the very same year as the court suit.


http://www.camospecs.com/Article.asp?FictionID=6

If you can put this together, you're gold. You also need a good glue. Zap-a-gap is the industry standard.Ah, so that's how it's done! Thanks, this will help me greatly!
...Now I only have to find out what a good glue would be over here. The ones I tried so far should have been, theoretically, good for such a task, yet they disappointed me.

Back to the RPG.
Does the amount of experience per session proposed make sense? To me, it seems to be extremely low if compared to the cost of improving skills. Admittedly, I tend to hand out more experience than proposed in pretty much any RPG I play (7-10 in ShadowRun, instead of the proposed ~5, for instance), because we play rather rarely, but even with this consideration in mind the amount proposed in MW3 seems very low to me.

[Swordguy]

Back to the RPG.
Does the amount of experience per session proposed make sense? To me, it seems to be extremely low if compared to the cost of improving skills. Admittedly, I tend to hand out more experience than proposed in pretty much any RPG I play (7-10 in ShadowRun, instead of the proposed ~5, for instance), because we play rather rarely, but even with this consideration in mind the amount proposed in MW3 seems very low to me.

It is indeed very low. It's a backlash against earlier editions, where you could spend 2 sessions worth of XP and go from a 3/3 to a 2/2. Then 3 more, and you go from a 2/2 to a 1/1. Etc.

Honestly, I'd consider doubling the XP awards. While it's somewhat realistic not to increase skills all that fast, it does suck for players not to get to increase their abilities for month after month. You've got a good handle in SR - that's right about where I put it, and where every experienced GM who's run SR puts it. Mechwarrior XP costs are in the 50-200 range for most everything. The average completely successful mission gets you about 8-10 XP. Even increasing it to 16-20 (doubling it) means you're seeing 3-10 sessions to increase a single skill or attribute.

[Winterwind]

Honestly, I'd consider doubling the XP awards. While it's somewhat realistic not to increase skills all that fast, it does suck for players not to get to increase their abilities for month after month. You've got a good handle in SR - that's right about where I put it, and where every experienced GM who's run SR puts it. Mechwarrior XP costs are in the 50-200 range for most everything. The average completely successful mission gets you about 8-10 XP. Even increasing it to 16-20 (doubling it) means you're seeing 3-10 sessions to increase a single skill or attribute.I think I'll go with about tripling it, then. This still will require several sessions to improve higher skills or attributes; besides, my players do not usually concentrate on just a few particular skills alone and use a great amount of their experience on combat skills, social skills and hobbies all alike, so going with this little experience would hurt them even more.
In fact, even that might still be somewhat slow (though I admit it's more realistic that way).

EDIT:
And a fluff thing. It just occured to me that every Clan has, usually, about 1000 bloodnamed warriors (40 bloodnames à 25 bloodrights), a multiple of that for Clans which have absorbed other Clans before (so 2000 bloodnamed warriors for Clan Wolf, for instance).
Considering the size a typical Clan's Touman, that's extremely much! Most of those bloodnamed warriors will likely remain in front-class galaxies; with a large galaxy counting about 375 points, and assuming a large touman with 10 galaxies, that would still mean more than every fourth warrior possessed a bloodname! Even if we consider that a point is not exactly the same as one warrior, that not all bloodrights will be used all the time and that some of the bloodnamed warriors will be serving in second-class galaxies (are bloodnamed warriors ever forced into solahma units?), it still seems as if there would be quite a lot more bloodnamed warriors around than ever apparent in novels or other fluff.

[horseboy]

Side note: LAMs are not "tournament legal". You can't use them at GenCon in a canon game. However, the last published rules (pages 47-49) in the Tactical Handbook are considered to be official, and still in effect. The policy for CBT has always been once something is published, it is still legal until DIRECTLY contradicted by a new product. The TacHandbook rules need to be updated to be compatible with Areotech 2(r), but for Mech and AirMech modes they are still perfectly legit.Yeah, I miss playing LAM's, but I'm not about to compete with those cheese monkey MPW missiles to play it.


If it matters, I know this because I worked for Iron Wind Metals, and have seen and read through copies of the documents in question in the FanPro warehouse personally. Don't believe me? Go to the CBT board and ask.
I'd never really heard how it went down, I just remember Palladium was talking about having won a major law suit about the same the same time the Robotech mechs disappeared, I put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5. Oops. Hey, did exosquad make the toy elemental, or was that based off of the cartoon series, I can't remember anymore.

[Swordguy]

I'd never really heard how it went down, I just remember Palladium was talking about having won a major law suit about the same the same time the Robotech mechs disappeared, I put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5. Oops. Hey, did exosquad make the toy elemental, or was that based off of the cartoon series, I can't remember anymore.

The toy elemental was from the Battletech Cartoon. It was produced by Tyco.

The Palladium Lawsuit was something else entirely, and their name appears nowhere in the court documents I've had access to. As I recall, I think they were getting sued by HG over their Robotech game, which interfered with HG's deal with Playmates to produce the Robotech toys.

If we know anything about this, it's that the Robotech images are a copyright nightmare.

[Winterwind]

Yeah, I miss playing LAM's, but I'm not about to compete with those cheese monkey MPW missiles to play it.Why, what's so cheesy about LAMs?


The toy elemental was from the Battletech Cartoon. What do you mean by that? Surely Elementals appeared in the game (and with some illustrations presumably, too) before the cartoon?
*checks*
Huh... the cartoon came out in '94 (like MW2, which contained Elementals).
The TRO3050, where they are presented, is from...
...this can't be right. My TRO3050 claims it's from '96. Surely ressources for the Clans appeared much earlier than that? Must be an edition thing, I suppose...


If we know anything about this, it's that the Robotech images are a copyright nightmare.Definitely seems so. :smallbiggrin:

Any comments regarding my last post? Would tripling experience be too much in your opinion, and any comments as to this peculiarity in the fluff?

[Swordguy]

Why, what's so cheesy about LAMs?


There's "good" play with LAMs, and there's "Bad" play with LAMs.

In-universe, LAMs are stupidly rare (compiling the House Books puts them at about 1.4% of the total BattleMech population of the Inner Sphere). They're incredibly good raiding and recon units. "Good" play reflects that. Your first priority as a LAM pilot is not to get hit. Preserve your LAM, because, more so than other Mechs, you'll not get a replacement.

"Bad" play involves people using the LAMs incredible jump movement to make really, really long charge attacks. Since charge damage is based on how far you moved, you can do damage all out of proportion to the Mech's size. Now, the rules for LAMs were vaguely written, so it sounds like you can use Jumping MP to charge. This is incorrect, and it's bad roleplay besides. Remember, the charging Mech takes damage as well, and you want to PRESERVE your Mech, not get it killed (which it WILL be, btw).

It's like people using Savanah Master Hovercraft as leg-seeking cruise missiles. Ram it into their leg and you'll drop the Mech, and who cares if you lose a 5-ton hovertank in the bargain?

People claiming LAMs are "broke" usually point to the charging issue. However, they also discount the fact that, in modern play, there are Mechs that can move farther per turn (and do more charge damage) than a LAM can fly.



What do you mean by that? Surely Elementals appeared in the game (and with some illustrations presumably, too) before the cartoon?
*checks*
Huh... the cartoon came out in '94 (like MW2, which contained Elementals).
The TRO3050, where they are presented, is from...
...this can't be right. My TRO3050 claims it's from '96. Surely ressources for the Clans appeared much earlier than that? Must be an edition thing, I suppose...

Definitely seems so. :smallbiggrin:


I meant SPECIFICALLY the toy Elemental.

Elementals debuted in rules form in the original TRO3050. Date is...1990-ish. What YOU have is almost certainly the TRO3050(revised), with the Unseen Mechs images deleted out. There are 3 TRO3050's. 3050(unrevised). 3050(revised). 3050(upgrades). The last just came out in PDF about a month ago.



Any comments regarding my last post? Would tripling experience be too much in your opinion, and any comments as to this peculiarity in the fluff?

Triple XP should generally be OK.

As for the fluff thing, don't. Military sizes in CBT have NEVER matched up to what they should, due to a general shift in game philosophy not long after the Clan Invasion started. Before about 1992, it was very "Mad Max". Almost post-apocalyptic, in fact. After '92, it moved to a much more "modern day" feel for the militaries. The armies got bigger, a lance of Mechs wasn't enough to garrison a planet anymore, and Mechs and tech in general became MUCH more common, and populations jumped from around 100,000 people per planet on average to about 2 billion. However, the military sizes are previously set by the older books, and the writers have always had a policy of never invalidating previously-written fluff. Therefore, the militaries in CBT are MUCH smaller than they should be, by a factor of 100 or more.

JumpShips are even worse off. Just take the numbers of faith, because actually analyzing them makes everything fall apart.

[Winterwind]

There's "good" play with LAMs, and there's "Bad" play with LAMs. *explanation*Ah. I see.
The good way to play would be to use their jump capabilities to avoid enemy fire and move into a strategically benefitial position, or jump into the enemy's back, I presume.


I meant SPECIFICALLY the toy Elemental.Oh. Okay then.


Elementals debuted in rules form in the original TRO3050. Date is...1990-ish. What YOU have is almost certainly the TRO3050(revised), with the Unseen Mechs images deleted out. There are 3 TRO3050's. 3050(unrevised). 3050(revised). 3050(upgrades). The last just came out in PDF about a month ago.Yeah, it's the revised version.


Triple XP should generally be OK.Good. Guess we'll use that, then.


As for the fluff thing, don't. Military sizes in CBT have NEVER matched up to what they should, due to a general shift in game philosophy not long after the Clan Invasion started. Before about 1992, it was very "Mad Max". Almost post-apocalyptic, in fact. After '92, it moved to a much more "modern day" feel for the militaries. The armies got bigger, a lance of Mechs wasn't enough to garrison a planet anymore, and Mechs and tech in general became MUCH more common, and populations jumped from around 100,000 people per planet on average to about 2 billion. However, the military sizes are previously set by the older books, and the writers have always had a policy of never invalidating previously-written fluff. Therefore, the militaries in CBT are MUCH smaller than they should be, by a factor of 100 or more.

JumpShips are even worse off. Just take the numbers of faith, because actually analyzing them makes everything fall apart.Yes, I noticed that. In the novels, the armies suddenly became... well, just that, modern armies, instead of rag-tag groups of people piloting 'Mechs barely holding together.
I think I'll try to preserve the old feel. There may be new or rediscovered technologies, but they are by far not widely available. There may be huge training facilities, but most MechWarriors' machines are still just familiary heritage, possibly centuries old. And if you move a bit away from the few larger cities, you may find villages where the peasants use horse-driven ploughs on their fields.

[Swordguy]

Ah. I see.
The good way to play would be to use their jump capabilities to avoid enemy fire and move into a strategically benefitial position, or jump into the enemy's back, I presume.


Actually, jumping into the rear arc with a LAM is highly overrated. You just don't have the firepower to do anything useful. I direct your attention here:

LAM Usage in TW-era Games (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,14617.0.html)



Yes, I noticed that. In the novels, the armies suddenly became... well, just that, modern armies, instead of rag-tag groups of people piloting 'Mechs barely holding together.
I think I'll try to preserve the old feel. There may be new or rediscovered technologies, but they are by far not widely available. There may be huge training facilities, but most MechWarriors' machines are still just familiary heritage, possibly centuries old. And if you move a bit away from the few larger cities, you may find villages where the peasants use horse-driven ploughs on their fields.

Depending on the group, you may want to run a Periphery-centered game then. It allows you to use the setting information as written, and at the tech level you seem to prefer. The non-Clan Periphery areas have been left specifically undetailed so GM's can write their own stories there instead of being constrained by canon.

Or just run a 3025-era game. :smallbiggrin:

[Hawriel]

Could pick up stuff about Solaris 7. nice place to play a game, never have to worry about getting a ride on a jumpship. Best of all its the most detaled plannet in the RPG that I know of.

or you could just go merc and play pre clan invasion.

What ever did happen to the grey death legion? the last novel was not be Kieth and was kinda crappy with the death of every one that mattered. When the merc sorce book was reprinted the Legion was not even in it. So what gives? They are equil to the Kell hounds and the Dragoons in skill if not actual man power.

[Winterwind]

Actually, jumping into the rear arc with a LAM is highly overrated. You just don't have the firepower to do anything useful. I direct your attention here:

LAM Usage in TW-era Games (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,14617.0.html)Saved that thread to my disk. This might prove useful if the rules ever get sufficiently second nature to us that we complicate our games further with stuff like LAMs - at the moment, the games take long enough if we limit ourselves to 'Mechs (how does one play a game with 40 'Mechs on the field? If we play with as much as ten the game takes eight hours, or so!)


Depending on the group, you may want to run a Periphery-centered game then. It allows you to use the setting information as written, and at the tech level you seem to prefer. The non-Clan Periphery areas have been left specifically undetailed so GM's can write their own stories there instead of being constrained by canon.I might do that - or I'll just reinterprete the canon as a bit lower tech than usual. The intricate intrigues of the Inner Sphere Great Houses are too good an opportunity to pass. :smallwink:


Or just run a 3025-era game. :smallbiggrin:I would have preferred to, actually, but alas, the players did not.


Could pick up stuff about Solaris 7. nice place to play a game, never have to worry about getting a ride on a jumpship. Best of all its the most detaled plannet in the RPG that I know of. Nice place indeed, and one I will most definitely include, sooner or later.


or you could just go merc and play pre clan invasion.I actually prefer not everyone to be involved in BattleMechs (and I'd much rather have noone have something to do with them than everyone). It's my general philosophy in all roleplaying games that, while no character neccesitates a combat oriented game (and, in fact, none of our games is), the presence of warrior-characters indicates that their players want to be involved in fights sooner or later, and an all out MechWarrior group would make for a much more combat-oriented game than I could care for.
Anyway, the players preferred a post-invasion game, in order to have the Clans as part of the universe.

[Swordguy]

Saved that thread to my disk. This might prove useful if the rules ever get sufficiently second nature to us that we complicate our games further with stuff like LAMs - at the moment, the games take long enough if we limit ourselves to 'Mechs (how does one play a game with 40 'Mechs on the field? If we play with as much as ten the game takes eight hours, or so!)


There's a whole BUNCH of optional rules that can make a game move much faster than you might expect.

1) Egg timers for movement. You get 10 seconds per individual unit you control to move that unit. If you control a Lance, you get 40 seconds. This destroys people's ability to "count hexes" and take 5-10 minutes for their movement. If the timer runs out, you don't get to move whatever hasn't moved yet. Units prone to skidding don't use this, however, due to the number of Control Rolls that must be made during movement, but as a gentleman's agreement they are still required to move as fast as possible.

2) Card initiative. Each player is assigned a card. Each side is assigned a suit. So Davion Bob is 4 of hearts, and Kurita Joe is 4 of Clubs. Keep each suit seperate from each other, shuffle each stack, and draw from alternating piles, loser of initiative first. In addition, no matter how many players there are, the winner of initiative gets the last move (so if there's 5 cards in stack A, and 2 cards in stack B, and B wins initiative, the movement order would go: A, B, A, A, A, A, B).

3) Movement dice. Put a small (5mm) d6 next to each unit, with its Target Movement Modifier face-up. "6" means the unit has a +0 that turn. Since it's almost impossible to generate a 6 TMM in Battletech, this usually works. In you DO need a 6 TMM, use 2 dice, with a 5 and a 1.

4) Fire tokens. Print out fire tokens, with the name and affiliation (and a number, if there are more than 1 of the same Mech on the same side), with a note that says Primary or Secondary. So the Fire tokens from the second Davion Marauder might have a yellow circle on the far left (for Davion), then "MAD-3R - 2", and then "Primary" or "Secondary" next to that. During fire declaration, put the Primary or Secondary fire token next to your appropriate primary or secondary target. Once Fire declaration is complete, the target collects all the tokens pointing at his Mech, and everyone goes off on thier own to resolve fire. As each player resolves fire against that target, he gives them back their token. When everyone has their tokens back, the Fire Phase is over. This keeps people from claiming "I meant to shoot at that and forgot", and speeds up both the Fire Phase (because people are resolving fire on their own) and the Fire Declaration Phase, and prevents people forgetting what they're shooting at.

5) No Areospace Fighters. The rules for them are badly written, and scattered across several chapters in TW. They take too long to resolve.

6) Have a cardstock copy of the following tables all one 1 sheet: Combat Modifiers, Hit Location Table, Critical Hit Table. These are the most commonly used charts in the game, and having a "cheat sheet" for each player can help a lot, until you've memorized them (nobody has the right and left-arc hit location tables memorized, but knowing the front/back one really helps).

These are the general "House Rules" in effect at all CBT tournaments and official convention play (5 & 6 aren't always used). They speed up play a LOT. As an example, I was playing the Angel Requiem II event this year at GenCon. We had 20 players around the table, controlling 3-4 units EACH. We were getting 1 turn done every 30-45 minutes or so, depending on firing (things like SRM carriers, MML carriers, and LB-X AC carriers slow the game down, since each individual point of damage rolls to hit seperately).

[Winterwind]

There's a whole BUNCH of optional rules that can make a game move much faster than you might expect.

1) Egg timers for movement. You get 10 seconds per individual unit you control to move that unit. If you control a Lance, you get 40 seconds. This destroys people's ability to "count hexes" and take 5-10 minutes for their movement. If the timer runs out, you don't get to move whatever hasn't moved yet. Units prone to skidding don't use this, however, due to the number of Control Rolls that must be made during movement, but as a gentleman's agreement they are still required to move as fast as possible.While it would make the game a lot more stressful (after all, we still play it as a game, to have fun), it would most definitely speed things up, and is something we have pondered about already, too. So far, we tend to really take our time with that.


2) Card initiative. Each player is assigned a card. Each side is assigned a suit. So Davion Bob is 4 of hearts, and Kurita Joe is 4 of Clubs. Keep each suit seperate from each other, shuffle each stack, and draw from alternating piles, loser of initiative first. In addition, no matter how many players there are, the winner of initiative gets the last move (so if there's 5 cards in stack A, and 2 cards in stack B, and B wins initiative, the movement order would go: A, B, A, A, A, A, B).Shouldn't A go twice first, at least according to normal initiative rules? Anyway, I suppose this serves only to simplify initiative if there are more than two players present, right? Not a problem we have had so far, then.


3) Movement dice. Put a small (5mm) d6 next to each unit, with its Target Movement Modifier face-up. "6" means the unit has a +0 that turn. Since it's almost impossible to generate a 6 TMM in Battletech, this usually works. In you DO need a 6 TMM, use 2 dice, with a 5 and a 1.That's definitely helpful; we should give that a try.


4) Fire tokens. Print out fire tokens, with the name and affiliation (and a number, if there are more than 1 of the same Mech on the same side), with a note that says Primary or Secondary. So the Fire tokens from the second Davion Marauder might have a yellow circle on the far left (for Davion), then "MAD-3R - 2", and then "Primary" or "Secondary" next to that. During fire declaration, put the Primary or Secondary fire token next to your appropriate primary or secondary target. Once Fire declaration is complete, the target collects all the tokens pointing at his Mech, and everyone goes off on thier own to resolve fire. As each player resolves fire against that target, he gives them back their token. When everyone has their tokens back, the Fire Phase is over. This keeps people from claiming "I meant to shoot at that and forgot", and speeds up both the Fire Phase (because people are resolving fire on their own) and the Fire Declaration Phase, and prevents people forgetting what they're shooting at.What we usually do is just write up the list of all fired weapons for every 'Mech, complete with target, To Hit number and resulting heat development. However, so far, we do it in turns, so that the other player can check whether the calculations are right (not because we wouldn't trust each other, but so that no unintentional mistakes are made). If everyone just wrote the list down, all at once and without proclaiming everything aloud we could shorten that to a third of the time, I suppose.
After that, we just have the attacker roll the dice and the attacked one cross out the armour points as damage is inflicted; I don't think much would be gained if everyone rolled the damage they took themselves (if I got your proposal correctly), since that way everyone is doing something all the time as well (either rolling or taking account of the damage).
I guess it would also help if we declared the weapons and calculated the To Hit numbers only after that.


5) No Areospace Fighters. The rules for them are badly written, and scattered across several chapters in TW. They take too long to resolve. We haven't ever played with A/S fighters so far; in fact, we don't even have the rules for them.


6) Have a cardstock copy of the following tables all one 1 sheet: Combat Modifiers, Hit Location Table, Critical Hit Table. These are the most commonly used charts in the game, and having a "cheat sheet" for each player can help a lot, until you've memorized them (nobody has the right and left-arc hit location tables memorized, but knowing the front/back one really helps).We have those tables handy at all times, but we have memorised most of them by now (in fact, even most of the left/right hit location tables, though we check on those to be sure).


These are the general "House Rules" in effect at all CBT tournaments and official convention play (5 & 6 aren't always used). They speed up play a LOT. As an example, I was playing the Angel Requiem II event this year at GenCon. We had 20 players around the table, controlling 3-4 units EACH. We were getting 1 turn done every 30-45 minutes or so, depending on firing (things like SRM carriers, MML carriers, and LB-X AC carriers slow the game down, since each individual point of damage rolls to hit seperately).Wow. That's a huge scale, and done incredibly fast. How long was the complete game?


While we're at it, one more question regarding the strategy game - if playing with equal battle values, one side Inner Sphere, the other side Clan - should one use zellbrigen, or not? I mean, if the battle values are equal, the two sides are equally strong already without the Clan player limiting himself, so with zellbrigen he'd be at a huge disadvantage, right? Or does BV assume that zellbrigen is used?

[Swordguy]

Shouldn't A go twice first, at least according to normal initiative rules? Anyway, I suppose this serves only to simplify initiative if there are more than two players present, right? Not a problem we have had so far, then.


Yes, it's designed for 4+ players. Wasn't sure how big your games were.


What we usually do is just write up the list of all fired weapons for every 'Mech, complete with target, To Hit number and resulting heat development. However, so far, we do it in turns, so that the other player can check whether the calculations are right (not because we wouldn't trust each other, but so that no unintentional mistakes are made). If everyone just wrote the list down, all at once and without proclaiming everything aloud we could shorten that to a third of the time, I suppose.
After that, we just have the attacker roll the dice and the attacked one cross out the armour points as damage is inflicted; I don't think much would be gained if everyone rolled the damage they took themselves (if I got your proposal correctly), since that way everyone is doing something all the time as well (either rolling or taking account of the damage).
I guess it would also help if we declared the weapons and calculated the To Hit numbers only after that.


You misunderstand. Instead of one person at the table resolving all thier fire and everyone else waiting, everyone goes off and resolves fire simultaneously. It's more of an issue when there are multiple players. Example: Joe and Bob are firing at Mike's Mech. Mike is firing at Tim's Mech. Mike collects the fire tokens that Joe and Bob placed next to his mini, and goes and sits somewhere away from the table. Joe comes and finds him, and resolves his fire, once finished, Mike gives Joe his fire token back. Bob still has to shoot at him, but he's busy getting shot at by someone else, so Mike goes and finds Tim, resolves fire, and gets his token back. By the time that's done, Bob is ready to resolve fire against Mike.

It's kind of freeform.



Wow. That's a huge scale, and done incredibly fast. How long was the complete game?


Erm...2 straight days at GenCon. Day 1 was 12 hours, split into 4 hour blocks. Day 2 was 16 hours, 2 4 hour blocks and an extended 8-hour block. Two tables were in play, and about 200 Mechs and about half that many vehicles were cycled through the tables (so as Mechs were destroyed, new ones came on a turn or three later), with about 40-50 individual units on a table at any given time.



While we're at it, one more question regarding the strategy game - if playing with equal battle values, one side Inner Sphere, the other side Clan - should one use zellbrigen, or not? I mean, if the battle values are equal, the two sides are equally strong already without the Clan player limiting himself, so with zellbrigen he'd be at a huge disadvantage, right? Or does BV assume that zellbrigen is used?

BV never assumes playing styles. Zell in general is a huge sticking point in the CBT community, and with BV being as "broken" as it is, Zell can easily cost you the game. In general, though, the opponent shouldn't want to break Zell, because it guarantees that the Clanners will be playing on an even field. Remember, for Zell to be maintained, if 2 lances are fighting a Star (which is the general matchup), those extra 3 Inner Sphere Mechs must stay out of the fight until a "slot" opens up for them. Otherwise, they've broken Zell.

Really, it's a hideously long topic, and there isn't a good answer.

[Winterwind]

Yes, it's designed for 4+ players. Wasn't sure how big your games were.It varies, usually just 2, sometimes 4.


You misunderstand. Instead of one person at the table resolving all thier fire and everyone else waiting, everyone goes off and resolves fire simultaneously. It's more of an issue when there are multiple players. Example: Joe and Bob are firing at Mike's Mech. Mike is firing at Tim's Mech. Mike collects the fire tokens that Joe and Bob placed next to his mini, and goes and sits somewhere away from the table. Joe comes and finds him, and resolves his fire, once finished, Mike gives Joe his fire token back. Bob still has to shoot at him, but he's busy getting shot at by someone else, so Mike goes and finds Tim, resolves fire, and gets his token back. By the time that's done, Bob is ready to resolve fire against Mike.

It's kind of freeform.That's pretty much how I understood it worked, though thanks for clarifying it once again. I see how that's pretty much the only feasible way if there are many players involved.


Erm...2 straight days at GenCon. Day 1 was 12 hours, split into 4 hour blocks. Day 2 was 16 hours, 2 4 hour blocks and an extended 8-hour block. Two tables were in play, and about 200 Mechs and about half that many vehicles were cycled through the tables (so as Mechs were destroyed, new ones came on a turn or three later), with about 40-50 individual units on a table at any given time.Heh, cool. I'd like to attend something like this some time, too, but I'd be afraid the players there might be too elite for that being fun.


BV never assumes playing styles. Zell in general is a huge sticking point in the CBT community, and with BV being as "broken" as it is, Zell can easily cost you the game. In general, though, the opponent shouldn't want to break Zell, because it guarantees that the Clanners will be playing on an even field. Remember, for Zell to be maintained, if 2 lances are fighting a Star (which is the general matchup), those extra 3 Inner Sphere Mechs must stay out of the fight until a "slot" opens up for them. Otherwise, they've broken Zell.

Really, it's a hideously long topic, and there isn't a good answer.BV is broken? I had thought it was pretty good at measuring a BattleMech's usefulness? At least, I recall reading that in some BattleTech forum...
As for Zell, wouldn't the IS generally profit from being allowed to concentrate fire, though? I mean, as long as they adhere to Zell, in the scenario you have presented, the Clanners would use 100% of their firepower at every turn, whereas the IS would have 3 'Mechs just standing there, so judging by that alone it seems to me as if the IS would prefer Zell to be broken?
Plus, of course, there are Clans like the Jadefalcons, who adhere to Zellbrigen no matter what.
So generally, you would advise that for a fair match, equal BV assumed, either both or neither side should use Zell, right?

[Swordguy]

Heh, cool. I'd like to attend something like this some time, too, but I'd be afraid the players there might be too elite for that being fun.


Actually, we're pretty good about newer players. For big canon events like Angel Requiem, we do ask people to have SOME CBT experience, but if you'v got the hit location tables and the shooting modifiers memorized, you're good...



BV is broken? I had thought it was pretty good at measuring a BattleMech's usefulness? At least, I recall reading that in some BattleTech forum...

It's better than nothing, and it's particular brand of "brokeness" depends on whether you use BV 1 or 2. These are the big offenders: BV 1 overvalues jump jets and overheating, while BV 2 overvalues different unit sizes (if I have 33% more units than the OPFOR, I have 33% LESS BV to spend than them) - which just kills Clan/IS matchups. In general, I'd opt for scenario play, rather than BV games.



As for Zell, wouldn't the IS generally profit from being allowed to concentrate fire, though? I mean, as long as they adhere to Zell, in the scenario you have presented, the Clanners would use 100% of their firepower at every turn, whereas the IS would have 3 'Mechs just standing there, so judging by that alone it seems to me as if the IS would prefer Zell to be broken?
Plus, of course, there are Clans like the Jadefalcons, who adhere to Zellbrigen no matter what.
So generally, you would advise that for a fair match, equal BV assumed, either both or neither side should use Zell, right?

IS doesn't want Zell broken because it means that the Clanners can't concentrate fire. As a VERY simplified example: it takes 3-4 IS Mechs of a roughly equal tonnage to drop a Clan Mech in 1 turn. It takes 2 or so Clan Mechs of equal tonnage to drop an IS Mech in 1 turn. So unless you have at least TWICE as many units as the Clanners, you don't want to combine fire. It also means they don't get to make physicals, which is a nice bonus. It gets even scarier against Clan Tanks, which can combine fire just like IS tanks can, and can carry huge amounts of weaponry (in the 2003 Origins Hells Horses v Wolves game, "Canadian Andy" got 43 kills from 1 Mars Assault tank when the Wolves were trying to force a river crossing).

There are, somewhere, a list of Zell levels. They list the Clans that adhere to a particular level, along with how restrictive each level is, and what must be done at that level to break zell. Even CJF will break zell, if pressed far enough. Typically, a scenario will detail what has to happen to break zell, which is another reason why I favor scenario play.

In an "open" match, zell doesn't exist, unless the Clan Player wants a handicap. In tourney play, adhering to zell when the other guy doesn't can sometimes get you extra points.

[Winterwind]

Actually, we're pretty good about newer players. For big canon events like Angel Requiem, we do ask people to have SOME CBT experience, but if you'v got the hit location tables and the shooting modifiers memorized, you're good...I hope the German CBT players are just as nice, in that case. :smallsmile:
Though unfortunately, I won't come around to attending any cons any time soon anyway.


It's better than nothing, and it's particular brand of "brokeness" depends on whether you use BV 1 or 2. These are the big offenders: BV 1 overvalues jump jets and overheating, while BV 2 overvalues different unit sizes (if I have 33% more units than the OPFOR, I have 33% LESS BV to spend than them) - which just kills Clan/IS matchups. In general, I'd opt for scenario play, rather than BV games.BV1 / BV 2? I haven't ever heard of there being different kinds of Battle Value... huh, so how could I find out which kind of BV I am using?
Scenario play... maybe I should take up some scenario book next time I visit my favorite RPG store, in that case.
Though I must say that the scenarios as they are presented in MegaMek do not seem all that fair to me...


IS doesn't want Zell broken because it means that the Clanners can't concentrate fire. As a VERY simplified example: it takes 3-4 IS Mechs of a roughly equal tonnage to drop a Clan Mech in 1 turn. It takes 2 or so Clan Mechs of equal tonnage to drop an IS Mech in 1 turn. So unless you have at least TWICE as many units as the Clanners, you don't want to combine fire. It also means they don't get to make physicals, which is a nice bonus. It gets even scarier against Clan Tanks, which can combine fire just like IS tanks can, and can carry huge amounts of weaponry (in the 2003 Origins Hells Horses v Wolves game, "Canadian Andy" got 43 kills from 1 Mars Assault tank when the Wolves were trying to force a river crossing).And in spite of Clan 'Mechs having this much of an advantage, a two lance versus one star fight tends to be balanced?
...what kind of lances and what kind of star are we talking here anyway?
Or maybe I should rather ask, if the IS would lose when Zell is broken, does it really stand a chance if it is kept?


There are, somewhere, a list of Zell levels. They list the Clans that adhere to a particular level, along with how restrictive each level is, and what must be done at that level to break zell. Even CJF will break zell, if pressed far enough. Typically, a scenario will detail what has to happen to break zell, which is another reason why I favor scenario play.Do you mean this here (http://www.clanhall.com/tactics.php?lang=com&id=)?


In an "open" match, zell doesn't exist, unless the Clan Player wants a handicap. In tourney play, adhering to zell when the other guy doesn't can sometimes get you extra points.Ah. I see.

[horseboy]

BV never assumes playing styles. Zell in general is a huge sticking point in the CBT community, and with BV being as "broken" as it is, Zell can easily cost you the game. In general, though, the opponent shouldn't want to break Zell, because it guarantees that the Clanners will be playing on an even field. Remember, for Zell to be maintained, if 2 lances are fighting a Star (which is the general matchup), those extra 3 Inner Sphere Mechs must stay out of the fight until a "slot" opens up for them. Otherwise, they've broken Zell.

Really, it's a hideously long topic, and there isn't a good answer.

Makes you miss just counting heat sinks, huh?

Granted, it's been a while, but IIRC an especially "energetic" clan mechwarrior could challenge two IS mechs if there were enough to go around.

[Swordguy]

BV1 / BV 2? I haven't ever heard of there being different kinds of Battle Value... huh, so how could I find out which kind of BV I am using?
Scenario play... maybe I should take up some scenario book next time I visit my favorite RPG store, in that case.
Though I must say that the scenarios as they are presented in MegaMek do not seem all that fair to me...


BV2 came out with the TechManual. If you don't have that, then you're using BV1.

What I mean by scenario play is a game where both sides have objectives beyond just "kill the other guy". There are scenarios where you can lose all your units, but still win the game. Some of the most interesting games come from "mismatched" forces. Also, take a look at the Warchest campaign track from Dawn of the Jihad (it should be to Europe by now - it's like 2 years old). That's probably right up your alley.



And in spite of Clan 'Mechs having this much of an advantage, a two lance versus one star fight tends to be balanced?
...what kind of lances and what kind of star are we talking here anyway?
Or maybe I should rather ask, if the IS would lose when Zell is broken, does it really stand a chance if it is kept?


8 on 5 is generally OK, as long as the respective mechs are about the same mass. The trouble is, there are some SERIOUSLY bad configs out there for Clan Mechs, and some really good ones. You'll eventually get a feel for it, but the only way to do that is just to play...



Do you mean this here (http://www.clanhall.com/tactics.php?lang=com&id=)?

That's it.



Makes you miss just counting heat sinks, huh?


No kidding.

[horseboy]

BV2 came out with the TechManual. If you don't have that, then you're using BV1.

How does the BV2 differ from CV? Or was that the pre-bv. It's been too long.

[Swordguy]

How does the BV2 differ from CV? Or was that the pre-bv. It's been too long.

It's WAAAAAY different.

CV is way, way, outdated, and is no longer supported in any way. What's more, because it debuted in BattleTechnology, it's not legally allowed to be canon. BTnology falls under the "not invented here" syndrome like the Victor Musical Industries artwork in the original TRO3055.

[Hawriel]

My friends and I pritty much threw the games BV right out the window. We made a simple point system based off of tonage. 1 point per ton IS 1.2-1.5 points per ton Clan. I dont exaclty remember the number we used for clan. for tanks and other vehicls we had .5 IS .75 Clan. Gunnery and Piloting skills also had a value. I think the base pilot had a skill of 5/6 or 4/5 (IS standard) then spent points to improve. Usualy at the expence of tonage. We would then value a game, 200, 250, 300, tons ect ect.

It was alot easyer and with less than a week of play we found it was very reliable. Whims of Stock book mechs aside. as said above some mechs work out rather well some underwelmingly so. Banchee Im looking at you....95 tons and all the fire power of a vindicator. We never did use AS fighters. Are point or tonage system worked very well when we played with costome mechs, witch we alwased used. It's alot more fun building your own. I miss my Griffin.

I recomend playing on a table top with terrain used for trains. Or make your own with the blue foam board, great stuff to make things with. Also use a messuring tape with Hexes parked off to at least 25 hexes. Well unless of corse you already do. After playing on an eight by six foot terrain bord hex maps are boring.

I do have a question. How do you use costome mechs in the RPG? I asume by how you want to run your game that is not an option for your players. I just wanted to know ingeneral.

[Winterwind]

BV2 came out with the TechManual. If you don't have that, then you're using BV1. BV1 it is, then.


What I mean by scenario play is a game where both sides have objectives beyond just "kill the other guy". There are scenarios where you can lose all your units, but still win the game. Some of the most interesting games come from "mismatched" forces. Ah, I see.
Well, takes a lot of experience to determine what a fair scenario is nevertheless, I think.


Also, take a look at the Warchest campaign track from Dawn of the Jihad (it should be to Europe by now - it's like 2 years old). That's probably right up your alley.Will do.


8 on 5 is generally OK, as long as the respective mechs are about the same mass. The trouble is, there are some SERIOUSLY bad configs out there for Clan Mechs, and some really good ones. You'll eventually get a feel for it, but the only way to do that is just to play...Generally anything that uses a lot of energy weapons and is capable of dealing with the heat seems good, and anything that wastes too much tonnage on stuff like light autocannons seems poor, in my experiences until now. Oh yeah, and Clan pulse lasers and targeting computers are pure evil.


My friends and I pritty much threw the games BV right out the window. We made a simple point system based off of tonage. 1 point per ton IS 1.2-1.5 points per ton Clan. I dont exaclty remember the number we used for clan. for tanks and other vehicls we had .5 IS .75 Clan. Gunnery and Piloting skills also had a value. I think the base pilot had a skill of 5/6 or 4/5 (IS standard) then spent points to improve. Usualy at the expence of tonage. We would then value a game, 200, 250, 300, tons ect ect. Basically something similar to BV, except a lot simplier, isn't it?


It was alot easyer and with less than a week of play we found it was very reliable. Whims of Stock book mechs aside. as said above some mechs work out rather well some underwelmingly so. Banchee Im looking at you....95 tons and all the fire power of a vindicator. We never did use AS fighters. Are point or tonage system worked very well when we played with costome mechs, witch we alwased used. It's alot more fun building your own. I miss my Griffin. Oooh, but self-designed 'Mechs do so wipe the floor with most standard designs it's not even funny anymore.
Designing's fun though. :smallwink:


I do have a question. How do you use costome mechs in the RPG? I asume by how you want to run your game that is not an option for your players. I just wanted to know ingeneral.Was that question directed to me? Well, I would definitely allow them to use custom 'Mechs if they wanted to, why should I get in between them and their wishes? Anyway, I'm not sure what you mean - mechanically, there is a Trait in the RPG which specifically allows a character to use a custom 'Mech if taken on a sufficiently high level (the lower you have this Custom Vehicle Trait, the less control you have over which 'Mech you get assigned). As for roleplaying itself, I don't see how the abilities of a character's 'Mech would interfere with that.

[Hawriel]

Well to be honest I dont remember that mutch about BV. All I really recall is that two mechs of the same tonage would have a large gap between the point value. It seemed to care to mutch about what equipment was on the mech. Yeah equipment is important but there really shouldnt be that mutch of a difference between to mechs of the same weight.

by just counting tonage we just cut to the heart of the issue. Coming up with the ratio between IS and clan took some trial and error. Mostly we just wanted to find the simplistest solution. weight class. The number of mechs does not matter as long as the waight of the to sides are equil. taken to the extream my solution will have holes. Just as a realy bad desine will also. Or fickle dice. Im not saying Im a freakin geniose for coming up with just looking at weight im sure most peaple do. I just tend to look at a rule book and find the most complicated thing say its dumb and come up with an alternative, if Im smart or lucky enought to do so.

I must say the Best mod I ever put on a mech was not on paiper but on the mini itself. forest green paint and light black wash. it took me over an hour to find them all after the game was over. I had a company painted that way. I only used a lance at a time. even with four mechs I still managed to lose track of one on the board. oh we played on 6 by 8 foot terrane boards. Alot of space, shadows, trees and hills

when I asked about custome mechs in the RPG I was asking any one who wanted to answer. In the RPG I would have to think more realisticly. a griffin is not an omni mech whare you can just swap things in and out. If a player wanted two exchange an LRM for a PPC how would they go about it in a "realistic" maner? tons and crit lots not with standing I would emagine alot of work would be invaleved in the modifacation. What about repairing a mech. I lost the AC on my clint, there is no replasment AC can a PPC replace it? IF so how long how much mony? if no PPC is available can you stick in two med lazers. What if I wanted to put a weapon where there is no weapon mounted? I guess Im making it more complicated that need be but in an RPG this is what a character would think about.

[Winterwind]

I must say the Best mod I ever put on a mech was not on paiper but on the mini itself. forest green paint and light black wash. it took me over an hour to find them all after the game was over. I had a company painted that way. I only used a lance at a time. even with four mechs I still managed to lose track of one on the board. oh we played on 6 by 8 foot terrane boards. Alot of space, shadows, trees and hillsWow. That must have been one damn good camouflage. :smallbiggrin:


when I asked about custome mechs in the RPG I was asking any one who wanted to answer. In the RPG I would have to think more realisticly. a griffin is not an omni mech whare you can just swap things in and out. If a player wanted two exchange an LRM for a PPC how would they go about it in a "realistic" maner? tons and crit lots not with standing I would emagine alot of work would be invaleved in the modifacation. What about repairing a mech. I lost the AC on my clint, there is no replasment AC can a PPC replace it? IF so how long how much mony? if no PPC is available can you stick in two med lazers. What if I wanted to put a weapon where there is no weapon mounted? I guess Im making it more complicated that need be but in an RPG this is what a character would think about.There are rules for all of that (in the Master Rules of the strategy game). I haven't used them yet, so I can't say how good they are, but there are lists with the monetary costs for all weapons and eqipment parts of a 'Mechs and also for the repairs/re-equippments, including the time they will take. There are also rules that, for instance, if you replace a weapon with another which doesn't take up the same tonnage and number of critical slots the 'Mech can get unbalanced by that and start performing worse, unless the Tech performing the refit is good enough, and so on.
OmniMechs are easier to refit, obviously.

[Swordguy]

BV1 it is, then.

Ah, I see.
Well, takes a lot of experience to determine what a fair scenario is nevertheless, I think.


You may want to take a look here: Fan-created Scenarios (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,18512.0/all.html)

It all uses the Warchest system, but the stuff there is pretty good.




Generally anything that uses a lot of energy weapons and is capable of dealing with the heat seems good, and anything that wastes too much tonnage on stuff like light autocannons seems poor, in my experiences until now. Oh yeah, and Clan pulse lasers and targeting computers are pure evil.


Heh, that's not all, though. For example, many of the TRO3050 Omnis are awful. That list includes the Dragonfly, Koshi, Kit Fox, Nova, Loki, Thor, Gargoyle, and arguably the Warhawk in any config but C.

Why? They don't have the armor to take any fire at all. The Loki is the worst example.




Was that question directed to me? Well, I would definitely allow them to use custom 'Mechs if they wanted to, why should I get in between them and their wishes? Anyway, I'm not sure what you mean - mechanically, there is a Trait in the RPG which specifically allows a character to use a custom 'Mech if taken on a sufficiently high level (the lower you have this Custom Vehicle Trait, the less control you have over which 'Mech you get assigned). As for roleplaying itself, I don't see how the abilities of a character's 'Mech would interfere with that.

Exactly. Though I caution: once play starts, PCs are going to modify the living hell out of everything they've got. There's no way to stop it, and the system supports it.

[Winterwind]

You may want to take a look here: Fan-created Scenarios (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,18512.0/all.html)

It all uses the Warchest system, but the stuff there is pretty good.Oh, cool! I'll look into it right about instantly! (though I already see I'll have to get hold of this Warchest nevertheless) Thank you once again (for the I don't know how many time) :smallsmile:


Heh, that's not all, though. For example, many of the TRO3050 Omnis are awful. That list includes the Dragonfly, Koshi, Kit Fox, Nova, Loki, Thor, Gargoyle, and arguably the Warhawk in any config but C.

Why? They don't have the armor to take any fire at all. The Loki is the worst example. Hmm, but the Nova and the Warhawk could carry hardly more armour - the Nova has 160/169 (though it has a ton of other design flaws - not nearly enough heat sinks, all weapons in the arm modules, not enough armour on the arms), and the Warhawk 259/264. Especially with the Warhawk, what's wrong with him? Alternative C is obviously pure munchkinism, but I don't see any faults with the Primary (runs a bit hot, but packs an increible punch) or Alternatives A and B?

Speaking of the TRO3050, what would be a good close-range Omni? The next best thing I could find which seemed as if it was optimised for pure close-range combat was the Ice Ferret D (which I like very much, awesome 'Mech), but is there something more similar to, say, the Hunchback? I haven't seen such a thing...


Exactly. Though I caution: once play starts, PCs are going to modify the living hell out of everything they've got. There's no way to stop it, and the system supports it.Heh, I imagine they would. :smallbiggrin:
Fortunately, the group will likely consist of two players, one of whom has already decided (and is not playing a 'Mech pilot), and the other, who I suspect will, is much less knowledgeable about the BattleTech 'mechanics and will probably be too lazy to find out how rebuilding works and how it could benefit him. Knowing him, he'll want to pilot an Awesome - he loves that 'Mech, and fields it every single time against me, alas, to great success, too. So basically, it will be up to me whether he gets that thing upgraded to Clan ER PPCs with Double Heat Sinks as gift for some special performance, or not.

[Swordguy]

Oh, cool! I'll look into it right about instantly! (though I already see I'll have to get hold of this Warchest nevertheless) Thank you once again (for the I don't know how many time) :smallsmile:


Warchest system is found in Dawn of the Jihad.

You can get it in PDF here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1421)

It also comes in softback.



Hmm, but the Nova and the Warhawk could carry hardly more armour - the Nova has 160/169 (though it has a ton of other design flaws - not nearly enough heat sinks, all weapons in the arm modules, not enough armour on the arms), and the Warhawk 259/264. Especially with the Warhawk, what's wrong with him? Alternative C is obviously pure munchkinism, but I don't see any faults with the Primary (runs a bit hot, but packs an increible punch) or Alternatives A and B?


The Nova runs FAR to hot to be able to use even a significant fraction of its firepower, isn't fast enough for its size (so it's too easy to hit, negating it's decent armor) and, as mentioned, the arms fall off, taking all the guns with them.

The Warhawk LOOKS good, until you realize that it's an assault Mech with a REALLY high BV that only puts out 45 damage/round, and tends to get it's LRM ammo blown up on a regular basis (the LRM, by the way, is completely superfluous).

I will recommend another thread for you to read: Mech of the Week (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,12140.0.html)



Speaking of the TRO3050, what would be a good close-range Omni? The next best thing I could find which seemed as if it was optimised for pure close-range combat was the Ice Ferret D (which I like very much, awesome 'Mech), but is there something more similar to, say, the Hunchback? I haven't seen such a thing...


Summoner C. ER Lg+Streak6+UAC/20.
Fire Moth D. 6 ER Medium Lasers and a TarComp.
Executioner D. 2 SRM6's+a whole LOT of Pulse lasers
Gargoyle C. UAC/20+6 ER mediums
Mad Dog Prime: 4 pulse lasers and 2 LRM20's...but Clan LRMs have no minimum range.
Stormcrow B. UAC/20+6 ER mediums. Widely considered to be the best dueling Mech in the game.

This list gets even scarier if you start looking at other TROs, 3055upgrades especially. A taste:

Hunchback IIC: 50 tons. 4/6/4. 8.5 tons armor. 2 UAC/20's
Kodiak: 100 tons. 4/6/0. 18-ish tons armor. 8 ER Mediums, ER Lg la, UAC/20

[Winterwind]

Warchest system is found in Dawn of the Jihad.

You can get it in PDF here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1421)

It also comes in softback.I think I'll check whether they have that in my RPG shop of choice first (it's twenty-something kilometres away, the way always along the river, so it's a fairly nice bike trip, and I could use some movement :smallwink: )


The Nova runs FAR to hot to be able to use even a significant fraction of its firepower, isn't fast enough for its size (so it's too easy to hit, negating it's decent armor) and, as mentioned, the arms fall off, taking all the guns with them.That it is, definitely. The only use I can think of for this 'Mech is to wait and ambush a 'Mech which, for some reason, is easy to hit during some turn, firing all of its weapons in one blast, hoping to take the opponent out immediately (of course it will shut-down after that). Not exactly my choice, either.


The Warhawk LOOKS good, until you realize that it's an assault Mech with a REALLY high BV that only puts out 45 damage/round, and tends to get it's LRM ammo blown up on a regular basis (the LRM, by the way, is completely superfluous).It could get 60, but then it would blow its LRM ammo up.
The LRM is, I presume, to find the holes the PPCs have blasted into the enemy's armour, scoring crits. But that doesn't outweigh the risks of having ammo on board of a 'Mech prone to overheating, I agree.


I will recommend another thread for you to read: Mech of the Week (http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,12140.0.html):smalleek:
Wow, that's absolutely brilliant! Exactly what I need!
I dare say, good sir, you have won another thread. :smallcool:


Summoner C. ER Lg+Streak6+UAC/20.
Fire Moth D. 6 ER Medium Lasers and a TarComp.
Executioner D. 2 SRM6's+a whole LOT of Pulse lasers
Gargoyle C. UAC/20+6 ER mediums
Mad Dog Prime: 4 pulse lasers and 2 LRM20's...but Clan LRMs have no minimum range.
Stormcrow B. UAC/20+6 ER mediums. Widely considered to be the best dueling Mech in the game.:smallconfused:
Okay, now I feel stupid. How did I miss all of those?
...actually, I know how. The Mad Dog did not occur as close range 'Mech to me, the Stormcrow I saw, but I already had two on the field, so I didn't want to add another one (switching one of them from Primary to B configuration might have been a wise move, though), and the rest is outside the weight class I was looking at.
And that was not exactly my best day anyway. To be precise, my opponent and I cheated each other (unintentionally) so long until we got ourselves a fair match. :smallbiggrin:
First, we used some completely different point system for buying units - I think it was the Combat Value system. I was playing Clans, he was playing Inner Sphere.
...It turned out as one (medium) Star against one (heavy) Lance. I later recalculated the BVs of that matchup, and found out that I had 8000 on the field, and he only 5000. If I recall correctly, I got myself a Timber Wolf Primary, two Storm Crow Primaries and two Kit Foxes, not sure about the configuration, but I think Primary again (I knew even then they suck, but they were cheap, and I have a weakness for 'Mechs that appeared frequently in MechWarrior 2 - even though usually only to be blasted apart instantly). He had a Marauder MAD-5D, an Ostsol OTL-5M, an Archer (don't remember the type, it was one of the 3050 ones), and... some 'Mech I forgot, I think something slightly lighter.
We used two map sheets; he was allowed to deploy anywhere in one of them, I set my 'Mechs at the edge of the other (representing the attacker side). In retrospect this may have offset quite a bit of his BV disadvantage... but not nearly as much as the fact...
...that I forgot to include all of the additional heat sinks belonging to the Storm Crow Primary configuration. :smalltongue:
Effectively, this meant thay could not fire half of their armament without building up heat. Needless to say, they lost quite a bit of their power (especially after my heedless "I fire all of 'em." when one of his 'Mechs was an easy target once, without calculating how much heat this would actually build up (it shut the 'Mech down).
Ultimately, he won, but barely, with only the Marauder surviving, lacking an arm and with severly damaged armour.
We were quite amused when we found out about our mistakes - we had managed, somehow, to commit just enough mistakes to have a perfectly balanced match! :smallbiggrin:

One thing I have learned from that match, though, is that a 30 ton 'Mech must be faster than 6/9 - at least the way I play.
Though light 'Mechs generally seemed somewhat underwhelming in our games so far. Mediums performed very well, but Lights ultimately never accomplished much. Jenners and Panthers were quite nice for a while, but ultimately always were destroyed quickly.
What's the secret to using Light 'Mechs properly?


This list gets even scarier if you start looking at other TROs, 3055upgrades especially. A taste:

Hunchback IIC: 50 tons. 4/6/4. 8.5 tons armor. 2 UAC/20's
Kodiak: 100 tons. 4/6/0. 18-ish tons armor. 8 ER Mediums, ER Lg la, UAC/20Uah. That is scary. :smalleek:

[Swordguy]

One thing I have learned from that match, though, is that a 30 ton 'Mech must be faster than 6/9 - at least the way I play.
Though light 'Mechs generally seemed somewhat underwhelming in our games so far. Mediums performed very well, but Lights ultimately never accomplished much. Jenners and Panthers were quite nice for a while, but ultimately always were destroyed quickly.
What's the secret to using Light 'Mechs properly?


Welcome to another can of worms. There is a significant school of thought that believes Light Mechs are completely obsolete on the modern battlefield. The problem is that Medium Mechs can mount XL engines and other weight-saving devices which allow them to meet light mech speeds (7/11+) and still mount enough weapons to ensure a kill against any given Light mech they meet.

The other issue is technology: Light mechs survive by not being hit. Unfortunately, the modern (read: post-3050) battlefield is replete with tech that's able to knock down TMMs. Back in 3025, having a +3 to your tohit number was a significant thing, because the enemy gunner would probably be a 4, you'd be at medium range on average, and he'd be walking. That makes you a 10+ to hit. Nowadays, gunners are routinely 3 or better, and he can have equipment that makes it easier to hit you (TarComp, C3, Tagged SG-LRMs, Pulse Lasers, LB-X ACs etc.) Say the enemy has just pulse lasers and is a 3 gunner. With ALL the same modifiers, he's hitting you on a 7+. That's about a +25% difference in the number of shots that strike your Mech. When you combine that with the increased damage modern weapons do (and Light Mechs have practically no increase in protective value), there's a serious and pervasive argument that light Mechs have no place on the modern battlefield.

The worst part is that BV2.0 penalizes you HEAVILY for outnumbering your opponent. This was done to negate swarm tactics (see also: 18 savannah masters for the same BV as a 3025 Atlas). Unfortunately, this is the death knell of the Light Mech, which can only succeed when they heavily outnumber a heavier opponent.

What do they do? Scout. Rear-echelon security. Garrison. Riot Control. However, most of those are campaign-type missions, not stuff that'll be relevant in a game of CBT.

If you have light mechs on the battlefield, the proper response is to retreat when significantly heavier Mechs come on the field (50+ tons). If you can't retreat, move defensively. If you don't have initiative, retreat behind full cover. Break LOS completely and he'll have a real problem shooting at you. Play patient and very careful.

As you noted, Light Mechs that move less than 6/9 are pretty much useless. I'd extend that to say that any Light Mech that can't routinely generate a +3TMM is a "bad design" (6/9/6 at a minimum). +4 is preferred (8/12/8). One of the best "new" light Mechs is the new Locust: 12/18/0, 4 tons F/F armor, 2 ER Medium Lasers.

The 20 and 25-ton weight classes are almost completely useless.

*Note: this post is written to reflect modern CBT. Light Mechs can contribute, somewhat, at this tech level. It's also more flavorful to have them, and a lot of engagements will be only Lights and Mediums. This is a limitation of the setting though, and ceases to apply once the setting "opens up" post-3050.

[Winterwind]

I see.

Yes, that's completely in line with my experiences so far. Guess the next time I'll argue for a slightly higher BV and get myself Ice Ferrets instead of those Kit Foxes, or something to this effect.
And Elementals, maybe.
Does an Elemental point count like a 'Mech for Zellbrigen? I mean, must it not attack a target already in battle/are other units allowed to attack a 'Mech fighting against Elementals?

[Swordguy]

I see.

Yes, that's completely in line with my experiences so far. Guess the next time I'll argue for a slightly higher BV and get myself Ice Ferrets instead of those Kit Foxes, or something to this effect.
And Elementals, maybe.
Does an Elemental point count like a 'Mech for Zellbrigen? I mean, must it not attack a target already in battle/are other units allowed to attack a 'Mech fighting against Elementals?

Depending on the Clan, it's either "per point" or "per Star". Unfortunately, each point also counts as a separate unit for purposes of both initiative and "outnumbering your opponent" under BV2.

Ice Ferrets are good. Adders are mean if you know the OPFOR will be bringing a bunch of lights. They're the sole exception to the "6/9/0 or less is bad" category, solely because they carry a pair of CERPPCs.

[Winterwind]

Depending on the Clan, it's either "per point" or "per Star". Unfortunately, each point also counts as a separate unit for purposes of both initiative and "outnumbering your opponent" under BV2. Wow. This BV2 sounds quite a bit more complicated than BV1, and that's saying something!


Ice Ferrets are good. Adders are mean if you know the OPFOR will be bringing a bunch of lights. They're the sole exception to the "6/9/0 or less is bad" category, solely because they carry a pair of CERPPCs.Indeed. Such firepower on such a light 'Mech is quite impressive.

So far, our games seem always to have been won by whoever had the heaviest 'Mech on the field. I recall a bunch of 3025 games where we all took equal tonnage, instead of looking at BVs or stuff like that, and I usually had something like
Catapult, Enforcer, Jenner, Panther
against
Awesome, Hunchback, some other medium/low heavy (Trebuchet, I think)
and I just kept losing. Until once I decided to throw in an Atlas, out of spite - and won, which pretty much baffled me, since I don't think the 3025 Atlas is a very good 'Mech (assaults designed almost only for close-range combat don't seem a very good idea to me).

[Swordguy]

Wow. This BV2 sounds quite a bit more complicated than BV1, and that's saying something!


Well, BV1 was simply adding up all the accumulated BVs in your force.

BV2 lists new (and IMHO better-balanced) BVs for each unit, and then proceeds to crap all over it by destroying your ability to outnumber your enemy. How it works is as follows:

1) Add up the number of units in each Force. A unit is 1 Mech, ProtoMech point, Vehicle, or ASF. 1 unit equals 2 battlearmor points/squad. 1 unit equals 4 conventional infantry platoons.

2) Subtract the total number of units in the smaller force from the larger force. The resulting number is the Raw Force difference.

3) Divide the Raw Force Difference by the total number of units in the smaller force and multiply the result by 100. This is the Base Force Percentage Modifier.

4) Multiply the Raw Force difference by 10. This is the Raw Force Percentage Modifier.

5) Compare the Base Force Percentage Modifier and Raw Force Percentage Modifier. Add 100 to the LOWER of these two numbers to get the Final Percentage Modifier.

6) Multiply the Final Percentage Modifier by the larger force's BV to find the Modified Strength.

7) Divide th opposing Force's total strength by the player's force's total strength (use the Modified Strength for whichever force has the most elements). Multiply the quotient by 100.

8) The final number is the opposing force's Strength Percentage compared to the player's force.

Upshot: Both forces in a battle are worth 6,000 BV. The attacker has 5 units. The defender has only 4. After applying the above maths, the attacker effectively has a force worth 6,600 BV (+600 more than the defender). In this case, he must either cut 600 BV from his force, or the defender may add 600 BV to his force, but the numbers of units MAY NOT change.

This gets crazy when one side has a bunch of crappy APCs or something, that can't affect the course of the battle, but count towards initiative.




So far, our games seem always to have been won by whoever had the heaviest 'Mech on the field. I recall a bunch of 3025 games where we all took equal tonnage, instead of looking at BVs or stuff like that, and I usually had something like
Catapult, Enforcer, Jenner, Panther
against
Awesome, Hunchback, some other medium/low heavy (Trebuchet, I think)
and I just kept losing. Until once I decided to throw in an Atlas, out of spite - and won, which pretty much baffled me, since I don't think the 3025 Atlas is a very good 'Mech (assaults designed almost only for close-range combat don't seem a very good idea to me).

Tonnage games do that. Engine-rating-based games do that as well (an Awesome is the same as a Spider!). The best thing to do is to use BV, and agree to have the same number of units. If you have more units than the enemy, you ought to move multiple units at the same time.

[Winterwind]

Upshot: Both forces in a battle are worth 6,000 BV. The attacker has 5 units. The defender has only 4. After applying the above maths, the attacker effectively has a force worth 6,600 BV (+600 more than the defender). In this case, he must either cut 600 BV from his force, or the defender may add 600 BV to his force, but the numbers of units MAY NOT change.What's the point of that? What is the huge advantage of merely having more units on the field, no matter what these units are?


Tonnage games do that. Engine-rating-based games do that as well (an Awesome is the same as a Spider!). The best thing to do is to use BV, and agree to have the same number of units. Yeah, we have learned that the hard way. We're using BV now.


If you have more units than the enemy, you ought to move multiple units at the same time.You're saying that as if it wasn't the standard rule? "When you have twice as many 'Mechs left to move as your opponent, move two", and such?