Interstellar Operations Final PDF Released, Lets Talk ACS and ISW

[ScrapYardArmory]

  Weakening industrialization accomplishes nothing.  Banking RP is still viable, and the game says the basic interest rate for banking RP is 5%.  It offers an alternative savings vehicle (Minor -> Major Industrialization) that provides 1.7%.  No-one will use that alternative investment vehicle, because its returns are poor.  It might as well not exist.

I feel that the benefits of improved garrisons and increased flexibility in where new Combat Commands may be placed more than makes up the difference in RP investment.  It certainly has a reason to exist.

[Vandervecken]

I feel that the benefits of improved garrisons and increased flexibility in where new Combat Commands may be placed more than makes up the difference in RP investment.  It certainly has a reason to exist.

I would agree with that when it comes to placing Minor Industrial worlds.  My understanding is that covers the Combat Command placement flexibility.  But it doesn't hold up on the Minor -> Major upgrade step.
Consider:
I have 960RP.  I upgrade a Minor world to a Major.  I gain 16RP every turn.  I have an improved garrison for that world, sure but if:
a) the Major world is deep in my territory, the Garrison bonus is irrelevant, or
b) if the Major world is on the border, I've offered my opponent an opportunity to destroy my banked 960RP investment by force.

If on the other hand, I take my 960RP, and just simply carry it over as a balance, I gain 48RP every turn, and my banked RPs cannot be attacked by force of arms directly.

Why would I ever choose to put those 960RP into a Minor->Major upgrade?

[ScrapYardArmory]

I would agree with that when it comes to placing Minor Industrial worlds.  My understanding is that covers the Combat Command placement flexibility.  But it doesn't hold up on the Minor -> Major upgrade step.
Consider:
I have 960RP.  I upgrade a Minor world to a Major.  I gain 16RP every turn.  I have an improved garrison for that world, sure but if:
a) the Major world is deep in my territory, the Garrison bonus is irrelevant, or
b) if the Major world is on the border, I've offered my opponent an opportunity to destroy my banked 960RP investment by force.

If on the other hand, I take my 960RP, and just simply carry it over as a balance, I gain 48RP every turn, and my banked RPs cannot be attacked by force of arms directly.

Why would I ever choose to put those 960RP into a Minor->Major upgrade?

Well, you got me.  You make a very good point.  Let me keep reading and get back to you.  Maybe they get a bonus to defense or count as a structure on the ACS PCM or perhaps are just more resilient to damage.  Something has to make up the difference.

I actually have another problem with the rules that may share a solution to what you are having heartburn over.  I want to finish up my full read through before I poke that particular issue.

Good discussion!

[Alexander Knight]

Originally there was a valid reason to upgrade.  Hopefully that reason will be reintroduced in the Campaign Companion.

[Adrian Gideon]

No. There's nothing in Campaign Companion that relates to ISAW.

[Alexander Knight]

Well that's me told.  :)

[ScrapYardArmory]

Lets talk about Supply.  Or lack there of to be more precise.

Gone are the days of supply depots and force supply capacity from the old Inner Sphere in Flames rules.  In ISW, we have a highly abstracted system which involves a single die roll each turn that determines that state of supply lines to your Combat Commands involved in combat on hostile worlds.

And the roll is tough.  You need to roll less than a 6 to keep your supply lines open (less than 5 if you were in combat last turn).  That means that on any given invasion or battle, each attacking Combat Command only has a 27.78% chance to stay supplied.  That drops to 16.67% after the first ISW turn of combat.

New from the BETA version is the opportunity to modify this roll by spending RP.  However either side of the conflict can modify the roll (up to +/-2).  However, given what's at stake, I think it is almost mandatory for both sides to pay for the modifier.

Just how bad could it be?  A No Supply status has the following penalties:

• Increased repair costs (+50%)
• Engagement Control Penalty (+4)
• To-Hit Penalty (+3)
• Damage Reduction (-10%)
• Morale Check Penalty (+4)

If you are under No Supply for two turns in a row, you suffer from Sustained Neglect.

• 10% Armor Damage
• ISW Morale Check

That's rough.  To put things into perspective lets look at the hypothetical situation where a Combat Command invades an enemy planet for at least two turns.  The chances of maintaining supply lines for both turns of the invasion are a shockingly low 4.63%.  The chances of a Sustained Neglect result on the second turn is 60.2%.  (feel free to check my math...)

I can't help but feel these odds are highly punitive for attackers.  What does everyone else think?

[Terminax]

Is it true that ISW doesn't include the Clans? I thought IO was supposed to cover all eras.

[ColBosch]

Is it true that ISW doesn't include the Clans? I thought IO was supposed to cover all eras.

Find whoever said that, and punch them in the face. I'm serious, just drill them right in their stupid, lying piehole. ISW allows for the creation of any faction: major, minor, Inner Sphere, Periphery, Clan, canon, or player-created. It just gives some examples of 3025-era factions.

I'm wrong. Ignore me. Punching myself in the face as we speak, right in my stupid, lying piehole.

[Atlas3060]

Is it true that ISW doesn't include the Clans? I thought IO was supposed to cover all eras.

IO contains many rules for tech dealing with multiple eras.
ISW, as it is in IO right now, is focused on 3025 warfare. The book (last time I read beta) even states this, due to easier play.
There's plans for supplemental era ISW stuff down the line, but nothing is out yet.

That's the problem with IO's initial idea, it is supposed to be the "everything else" book.
Yet with a living universe like ours, there's always going to be expansions to help serve that "everything else" book.

[Terminax]

Find whoever said that, and punch them in the face. I'm serious, just drill them right in their stupid, lying piehole. ISW allows for the creation of any faction: major, minor, Inner Sphere, Periphery, Clan, canon, or player-created. It just gives some examples of 3025-era factions.

I'm wrong. Ignore me. Punching myself in the face as we speak, right in my stupid, lying piehole.

Stop that. There's only so many of us unrepentant Blood Spirits left! Don't make it any easier for the Star Adders to win!

[ColBosch]

Stop that. There's only so many of us unrepentant Blood Spirits left! Don't make it any easier for the Star Adders to win!

Um...have you read Wars of Reaving Supplemental yet? I may have some bad news. ;)

[Terminax]

IO contains many rules for tech dealing with multiple eras.
ISW, as it is in IO right now, is focused on 3025 warfare. The book (last time I read beta) even states this, due to easier play.
There's plans for supplemental era ISW stuff down the line, but nothing is out yet.

That's the problem with IO's initial idea, it is supposed to be the "everything else" book.
Yet with a living universe like ours, there's always going to be expansions to help serve that "everything else" book.

I've been shy about buying new books since ISP3 promised a reveal of the fate of the Wolverines, only to restate what we already knew and give a short story that cut off that reveal at the knees. IO's taken years already, been split and is supposed to cover all eras... except it doesn't on the part of the book I've been most interested in. I guess I'll still buy the book if only to support CGL making product but it's still profoundly disappointing.

[Atlas3060]

IO's taken years already, been split and is supposed to cover all eras... except it doesn't on the part of the book I've been most interested in. I guess I'll still buy the book if only to support CGL making product but it's still profoundly disappointing.

What IO gives you for ISW is the bedrock for other stuff to come in later.
Much like Total Warfare shows you how 'Mechs move and shoot, while set in the late 3060-70s, the rules on how to operate them doesn't change that much as we go into later eras. New toys however do change it a bit, but the basics are still what they were.

IO gives us how to play out simple ground fights, aero fights, and the basics of being a warlord bent on liberating your neighbors.
New stuff like Clans, Warships, etc can always come in via expansions.

Personally I wouldn't have minded a book just dedicated to ISW, but that would mean my grandkids would be awaiting its release.  ;D

[Terminax]

Personally I wouldn't have minded a book just dedicated to ISW, but that would mean my grandkids would be awaiting its release.  ;D

That would have been more sensible imo. It's just, we're always going back to 3025. Not that I don't like the era, but it's not the one I or my group want to play in. And now we're back into waiting for yet another unspecified length of time on an another maybe it'll happen product(s)? Meh.

Anyways I'll shut up now until I have the chance to read the book.

[ColBosch]

I guess I'll still buy the book if only to support CGL making product but it's still profoundly disappointing.

Never, ever, ever, ever do this. Only buy what you feel is worth your money. I say this as someone who really likes IO: if it's not what you want, don't buy it.

That would have been more sensible imo. It's just, we're always going back to 3025. Not that I don't like the era, but it's not the one I or my group want to play in. And now we're back into waiting for yet another unspecified length of time on an another maybe it'll happen product(s)? Meh.

Thank the vocal minority for this.

[Mishkin]

Just finished reading through.  Love the spirit of IO and my players are on board with the "multiple levels of resolution" stuff.  Can't comment about the rules yet, but I too was disappointed that if we want to start our campaign in any era other than 3025 we are SOOL.  (and even 3025 doesn't have a map)  Still confused as to how you can actually play the game without a map with the hexes, planets, factories, capitals, etc on it. 

Anyone have any suggestions for what we need for forces and planets for a late second succession war campaign?

[ScrapYardArmory]

Just finished reading through.  Love the spirit of IO and my players are on board with the "multiple levels of resolution" stuff.  Can't comment about the rules yet, but I too was disappointed that if we want to start our campaign in any era other than 3025 we are SOOL.  (and even 3025 doesn't have a map)  Still confused as to how you can actually play the game without a map with the hexes, planets, factories, capitals, etc on it. 

Anyone have any suggestions for what we need for forces and planets for a late second succession war campaign?

I don't think things are that bad.  There will obviously be work and organization required to play a game on the magnitude of ISW.  What do you honestly need to plan out a non-SW era game?  Want to run Clans?  Make a Clan map and use Clan 'Mechs when you create your Combat Commands.

The CGL team has already promised maps.  Hopefully those appear soon.  But that is not stopping anyone from making their own.

The other aspects of tracking a game of this size are more of a handful.  That said, I am more than willing to lend a helping hand to anyone trying to organize a game.  Anyone looking for some help, feel free to drop me a line.

[Atlas3060]

One of the Battletech Volunteers has a thread dedicated to maps he's made.
Big thanks to Alexander Knight, who apparently has put in quite the work for IO.

[ScrapYardArmory]

One of the Battletech Volunteers has a thread dedicated to maps he's made.
Big thanks to Alexander Knight, who apparently has put in quite the work for IO.

I wonder if those will be transformed into the official release and put up for download on the CGL website...

[Mishkin]

ScrapYard, 

My apologies.  I didn't mean to sound so negative.  I guess I was just expecting the final version to have the tables on pages 348-350 (number of planets, size of militaries, placement of factories) for a couple more dates in the timeline, at least one for each of the eras to which so much of the book is devoted.  However, overall this book is really neat. 

We were planning on running a first/second SW game then a parallel early Clan game (eventually going through most of BT history and rewriting it). 

Seconding the thanks to Alexander Knight.  1) I obviously need to figure out how to run vassal.  2) I need to figure out how to repaint the map for territory changes.

The House sourcebooks have maps for each succession war.  If we could only get those combined with a list of factories, regional capitals, and combat commands, everything would be set. 

[solmanian]

Talking about upgrading planets: the advantage of real estate, is that it's well, real. I think the level of industrialization should definitely play a part on the size and quality of the commands that get "popped" on that planet...

[ScrapYardArmory]

ScrapYard, 

My apologies.  I didn't mean to sound so negative.  I guess I was just expecting the final version to have the tables on pages 348-350 (number of planets, size of militaries, placement of factories) for a couple more dates in the timeline, at least one for each of the eras to which so much of the book is devoted.  However, overall this book is really neat. 

We were planning on running a first/second SW game then a parallel early Clan game (eventually going through most of BT history and rewriting it). 

Seconding the thanks to Alexander Knight.  1) I obviously need to figure out how to run vassal.  2) I need to figure out how to repaint the map for territory changes.

The House sourcebooks have maps for each succession war.  If we could only get those combined with a list of factories, regional capitals, and combat commands, everything would be set.

No need to apologize.  Sorry if what I said came off as harsh.

While we wait for CGL to provide additional details there is nothing stopping us from generating our own maps and tables.  I'll help!

We have a wealth of information from sourcebooks and other online resources to draw from to create any conflict we can think of. 

[ScrapYardArmory]

Why would I ever choose to put those 960RP into a Minor->Major upgrade?

I found one more use of Major Industry.  Such planets are slightly harder to pacify (one turn longer).

Not much, but it adds to the list.

[theagent]

Add to that the planetary garrisons. Using abstracted, Minor industrials have twice as powerful of garrisons as Other worlds, Major worlds are twice as strong as Minor, & Hypers are twice as strong as Majors.

If using the Detailed Garrison option, the more industrialized the planet, the higher the modifier.  The more industrialized the world, the more infantry & armor kits it has, & the better the chance of 1 or more 'Mech regiments as part of the garrison.  IO, p. 368

The main issue, though, is that ISAW rightly recognizes that it's much easier to destroy (engage in combat) than it is to create (build factories).  Of the factions listed in IO, the Outworlds Alliance is the only faction that generates enough RP to have 100% of its forces engage in combat -- only needs to spend 38% in combat ops, so it has plenty left over.  Everyone else is limited on how many units they can send into combat in a turn, but even at worst they only need to spend maybe 3 turns banking RPs before an all-out offensive.  Even with rebuilding units in between, the 26 turns it takes to recoup the cost of the Minor World upgrade would allow for 1-2 massive attacks, or nearly-constant harassment a (attacking 1 turn with 10-20% of your forces, then taking a turn off to rest & preposition the next set of units).  Sounds a bit like the Succession Wars era in canon.

Now, me, I like to mix both attacks & building in my Axis & Allies-type games.  Spend a few turns pushing into another realm, then rest & build up a few more factories in my rear areas so that I can have even more RPs coming in, rinse & repeat...

[YingJanshi]

The main issue, though, is that ISAW rightly recognizes that it's much easier to destroy (engage in combat) than it is to create (build factories).  Of the factions listed in IO, the Outworlds Alliance is the only faction that generates enough RP to have 100% of its forces engage in combat -- only needs to spend 38% in combat ops, so it has plenty left over.  Everyone else is limited on how many units they can send into combat in a turn, but even at worst they only need to spend maybe 3 turns banking RPs before an all-out offensive.  Even with rebuilding units in between, the 26 turns it takes to recoup the cost of the Minor World upgrade would allow for 1-2 massive attacks, or nearly-constant harassment a (attacking 1 turn with 10-20% of your forces, then taking a turn off to rest & preposition the next set of units).  Sounds a bit like the Succession Wars era in canon.

That gives me a thought, namely: that the high cost of upgrading Worlds is intentional. That since the base game is set in 3025 for simplicity, the high cost reflects that era's lack of resources and technological decay. Perhaps when they do supplements for other Eras, the various RP costs will be modified to better reflect that era's technological level. (Say decreasing costs by 25% or so in the Clan Invasion era to better reflect the decades of recovery granted by the Helm Memory Core [just as an example]).

[theagent]

That gives me a thought, namely: that the high cost of upgrading Worlds is intentional. That since the base game is set in 3025 for simplicity, the high cost reflects that era's lack of resources and technological decay. Perhaps when they do supplements for other Eras, the various RP costs will be modified to better reflect that era's technological level. (Say decreasing costs by 25% or so in the Clan Invasion era to better reflect the decades of recovery granted by the Helm Memory Core [just as an example]).

Good question. To kind of build on it, I did some thinking on the subject, & realized the issue isn't so much the high cost of the upgrades as the inflexibility. For example, a major factory world that has 7 factories not only produces significantly fewer resources than a Hyper world (8+ factories), but also only produces as much as a world with only 3 factories.  Similarly, both single- & dual- factory worlds produce the same RP per turn, even though the odds are good that the latter should be producing more.

So...

As a potential house rule, I would suggest the following:

 -- Add another level of world type, but have only 4 types. Other worlds & the capitals are unchanged, but in between Other & Regional Capitals add Major Worlds.  Majors add 20 RP per turn, it costs 480 RP to upgrade an Other to a Major, & it costs 960 RP to upgrade a Major to a Regional Capital.
 -- In place of the industrialized worlds, factories are now added separately. A planet gets 8 additional RP per turn for each factory it has. Adding an additional factory to a world, or adding one to a new world, costs 192 RP.
 -- Basic Garrisons are also slightly changed.  Major worlds get 375 Ground PV & 75 Aerospace PV.  Instead of combining from the table, each factory on the planet adds 125 Ground & 25 Aerospace PV to the garrison.
 -- Slight change to the Detailed Garrisons also. Modifier for Major worlds is +1. Modifier for factories is (# of factories / 2), rounding fractions up.

In case anyone's wondering, the in-book costs for upgrading the worlds are essentially their RP production per turn x24 (or 2 years of production in-game).  The rest of the numbers didn't always scale exactly, so I had to try to balance it out as much as possible.  And yes...using these house rules means the starting RP for the default factions will definitely change.

[solmanian]

You're looking at it upside down. The factories don't produce the resource points; they allow you to "use" the resource points. The number of factories doesn't effect your output; what it affects is the diversity of the output. You can have one factory that can build a battlemech company in a month, and another that can barely equip an infantry platoon. That's why you can't build commands on non-industrialized worlds.

Than again, that's just my interpretation, so I might be dead wrong.

[idea weenie]

You're looking at it upside down. The factories don't produce the resource points; they allow you to "use" the resource points. The number of factories doesn't effect your output; what it affects is the diversity of the output. You can have one factory that can build a battlemech company in a month, and another that can barely equip an infantry platoon. That's why you can't build commands on non-industrialized worlds.

Than again, that's just my interpretation, so I might be dead wrong.

Sounds like you'd want to decouple planetary production and number of factories.

You'd have an overall Production factor that produces RPs, and a number of factories that allow you to produce stuff.  You could even add a Industrial level that tells what the upper limit that can be produced at a planet is (infantry; vehs/CF, Mechs/ASF, Dropships/Civilian Space stations, Jumpships/Combat space stations, Warships).

For example a small planet that can at most produce one Mech unit per month might be:
Production: 10 RP (or whatever the cost for the Mech unit is)
Factories: 1
Tech level: 3 (Mechs)

At the above planet you get 10 RPs every turn from it.  You can also build one combat unit at it per turn, of infantry, or vehicles, or Conventional Fighters, or Mechs, or Aerospace Fighters.  If you want to increase production, that will cost RPs.  If you want to put another Factory on the planet, that will also cost RPs.  If you want to increase the Tech level, that will cost a LOT of RPs.

You can increase a planet's Production, but as you increase the production, the cost per increased production goes up.  Similarly, the more factories you have on a planet, the more it costs to add another factory.

[ScrapYardArmory]

You're looking at it upside down. The factories don't produce the resource points; they allow you to "use" the resource points. The number of factories doesn't effect your output; what it affects is the diversity of the output. You can have one factory that can build a battlemech company in a month, and another that can barely equip an infantry platoon. That's why you can't build commands on non-industrialized worlds.

Than again, that's just my interpretation, so I might be dead wrong.

But right now as the rules are written it doesn't matter if a planet is major industrial or minor industrial, both can drop 17 RCTs (or whatever you like) in a single turn so long as you have the funds to pay for it.  And they are immediately available for orders.