Author Topic: Monbvol's House rule emporium  (Read 94677 times)

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #330 on: 19 November 2017, 04:01:15 »
I'm finding myself considering two possibilities.

1: Instead of selecting a Primary Income type for each individual rank of Property just re-work it all so that you have that one Primary Income type for all your Property.

2: Keep going down this rabbit hole of details and record keeping that will almost certainly result in needing separate event tables for each Primary Income type and figuring out modifiers for how various Primary Income types interact that while it sounds actually more interesting and perhaps even useful for some "world building" that can lead to some great game/plot hooks to help drive adventures might be just a bit too much for most people.

I'll admit it is a tough call for me to actually decide which way to go.

Option 1 is simpler but I think might find itself a little lacking in frame works to help drive a campaign centering around player(s) with Property but said simplicity can be a lot easier on players and GMs even if it doesn't give as good frameworks.

Option 2 will take a fair bit more work to set up, both in me working out the mechanics and for the eventual player(s) to set up their Property, but I think it might not actually be that hard to keep it simple enough to upkeep once the initial work is done to be worth the extra work.

Maybe I'll try and work on both ways with it so that GMs and players can decide for themselves.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #331 on: 19 November 2017, 07:10:18 »
I like the both idea, but would add that the second should easily reduce to the first.  I think I've said it elsewhere, but my ultimate goal is to have consistency between all levels of abstraction/scale in the game.

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4872
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #332 on: 19 November 2017, 13:02:05 »
Quick thought about armor.  We have current armor that can put 2 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (3 per pt on the head), and hardened armor, where it can put effectively 4 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (forgot if the head gets 18).

What about a semi-hardened, and a 'foamed' type of armor, where semi-hardened allows putting 3 pts of armor per pt of internal structure, and 'foamed' armor is designed around low-weight (but high-volume materials) that can only get 1 pt of armor per pt of internal structure?  Semi-hardened might not get the 1 pt penalty to running, but would only get 4-5 pts of armor per pt of internal structure for the head, while foamed armor might take 1 less pt of damage from physical and energy attacks due to the armor's false appearance, and the foaming effect ablating energy weapons fire better?

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #333 on: 19 November 2017, 13:11:56 »
I like the both idea, but would add that the second should easily reduce to the first.  I think I've said it elsewhere, but my ultimate goal is to have consistency between all levels of abstraction/scale in the game.

*nod*

That may be the tough part, keeping it scalable so that you can go between one or the other without too much trouble.

Quick thought about armor.  We have current armor that can put 2 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (3 per pt on the head), and hardened armor, where it can put effectively 4 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (forgot if the head gets 18).

What about a semi-hardened, and a 'foamed' type of armor, where semi-hardened allows putting 3 pts of armor per pt of internal structure, and 'foamed' armor is designed around low-weight (but high-volume materials) that can only get 1 pt of armor per pt of internal structure?  Semi-hardened might not get the 1 pt penalty to running, but would only get 4-5 pts of armor per pt of internal structure for the head, while foamed armor might take 1 less pt of damage from physical and energy attacks due to the armor's false appearance, and the foaming effect ablating energy weapons fire better?

Personally I am not super inclined to add more hardware to the list for combat units.  Heck I am actually currently considering brutally reducing it.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #334 on: 21 November 2017, 13:26:13 »
To sort out the modifiers and mechanics for detailed Property/Primary Income types it would probably be good if I would be consistent on what I wanted for the event roll.

So I think roll low on the event table should be bad would be easier to make consistent and require the fewest revisions.

Investment is causing me some trouble still.  I really like the idea that a player's Property doesn't need to be so tangible and could be a stock portfolio instead and I think it would make a decent way to differentiate a land lord with little to no say on how the Primary Income types on their Property operate and someone who is in an actual position of power.  Making that work though may be a bit much and in thinking about it maybe I should just assume Property also means a certain amount of direct control so splitting off Investment into it's own thing may be the wiser move.

Which could be part of the answer for how to do both a simple and detailed Property.  Investment could be the simple option that just gives you a good chunk of change while Property is the detailed mess that you have to define.

I think I actually like that idea.  May take a bit to refine into mechanics but I think it'll be a very useful way to add some built in hooks for GMs and players to make a campaign focusing around Property more interesting and a bit easier to run if a little more laborious to setup.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #335 on: 22 November 2017, 23:51:19 »
Sorry for the delay... it's been a busy week already, and it isn't over.  I think you're on the right track with the Investment vs. Property idea... I look forward to seeing how you refine it.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #336 on: 23 November 2017, 00:33:38 »
*nod*

I already have the basics.  I do want Investment to be pretty hard to make a large chunk of money on as either Battletech proper or my AU setting it is an interstellar society we're talking about and some raid or invasion on the far side of the player's faction from where the company HQ is can cause ripples and a massive drop in investor confidence.  Add in HPG delays and it gets really tough.  Which I think provides good incentive to go for the more detailed version instead.

I am also working out the basics to make diversifying the Primary Income types worth more.

With the holidays I expect I won't have anything concrete to post for a while though.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #337 on: 30 November 2017, 23:42:57 »
Been making progress while on vacation with the family.

Got most of the Primary Income types finished.  Might have to tweak the Industrial stuff a bit more but decided to mostly leave it up to GM/Player agreement to flush out the production.

Should have something new to post in a few days.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #338 on: 04 December 2017, 23:36:41 »
So I have hit a new wrinkle.

I'll have to meander a bit to explain it so try and bear with me.

Liam's Ghost suggested that I look at some of the expanded Property information in the Companion.  What I found there led me to check out how much it costs to keep a unit operational.

Now to bring it all together to show what the wrinkle is.

Property 10 nets with no MoS or MoF 15,000,000 C-Bills in personal profit and this is a small moon or a group of continents in rough scope.

This is 5% of the Property's total budget though.  So working backwards that is a total budget of 300,000,000 C-bills.  Checking the Companion 20% of that is to support the defenses/garrison.  So that works out to 60,000,000 a year.  So when I checked Campaign operations the example reinforced mixed regiment was costing less than 1,000,000 C-bills a month.  Multiplying that by 12 to get annual costs a Property 10 can then easily support 5 combat vehicle Regiments with little trouble.

Where I am having difficulty is in reconciling these numbers and how to have Property have any sane correlation with what world it is on while not creating an implication of regiments of garrison troops that would make invasion all but impossible.

I am really starting to think Property may be one of those traits best reserved for only particular campaigns and not allowed for most PCs.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #339 on: 05 December 2017, 04:24:23 »
Five regiments isn't so bad once you spread them out across the holding, or try to pay for lift assets to enable to them to get to whatever random piece gets raided before the raiders leave.  That's also for 10 points of Property, so I don't think that's necessarily out of line.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #340 on: 05 December 2017, 04:58:48 »
It mostly bothers me in the implications of how much militia there is in a setting where we're told Battalions on down to Companies on rare occasion have captured planets and pirate bands would have trouble even raiding that kind of force without getting bogged down in a fight they really shouldn't win.

Maybe when I do more research on how much it costs to keep base facilities operational to house these forces it might not be so bad in terms of implications.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #341 on: 08 December 2017, 16:50:13 »
Still trying to nail down the upkeep for the base facilities themselves but in looking at the Property trait itself and how much it pays out each year I am having some ideas about how to reconcile some of this.

1. The chart just needs reworked to make things a bit more sensible and make the scaling a bit more even.  Property 5 you're looking at a yearly budget of 400,000 for your defenses.  That would not be able to support some of the Mech Companies I run in MekHQ as they can run 100k+ a month.

2. With the above in mind Property may have to be divorced from square kilometers approximations entirely.  Then I can use some of the location/Property Quirks to help handle that Property 10 means different things if it is on Anywhere versus New Sytris.

3. Instead of trying to establish base line forces maybe I should just embrace the budget aspect and maybe add some modifiers for the force generation rules to help ensure Mechs, ASFs, Dropships, and Jumpships are more difficult to get with Jumpships being all but impossible.  Which does mean figuring out how much it does cost to keep the actual facilities up and running.  This would also somewhat solve something I've been keeping in mind but wasn't sure how to deal with.  Certain environmental factors allow for human habitation but require specially modified units to be part of the garrison.  By allowing the player to use slightly modified force building rules it simplifies some of that.

With that established I need to dig out my jumpdrive again that has my latest revisions on it and get back to work on hashing this out.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #342 on: 09 December 2017, 17:52:07 »
Well I have been over the operating costs section in Campaign Operations and there is nothing that actually considers buildings.

I can extrapolate some numbers.  I am thinking in terms of keeping a building(going hex by hex as individual building even if it is one complex) in good shape could cost CF*levels*0.01*5000 in materials needed to keep the building in good condition.

So a one hex one level CF 150 bunker to give your PBI garrison a place to fight from would cost 7,500 C-bills a month.

Even with where I'm thinking of adjusting Property 1's income that won't let you have any NPC PBIs for your garrison but I still like the calculation enough that until I complete some Infantry upkeep calculations I may keep it as that is a pretty substantial building.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #343 on: 10 December 2017, 01:11:42 »
Property 1 is small enough that I think it's OK if it won't support a dedicated security force.  That said, I'd think a squad of infantry should cost less than 80,000 C-Bills a year... My search-fu is weak at the moment, or I could confirm that...

EDIT: Found it (finally)... a squad of seven troopers would cost 63,000 per year in salaries, plus 10,000 in annual "spares" (???).  That would leave 7,000 more C-Bills for other incidental costs, so yes, even Property 1 could support a minimal security force.
« Last Edit: 10 December 2017, 01:30:27 by Daryk »

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #344 on: 10 December 2017, 05:36:18 »
*nod*

I do kind of like the idea of you can choose between having a bunker that you and your fellow PCs can use for defending the Property or having a security force to do it for you for Property 1.

Only real problem I am still having is finding a cost calculation for buildings in the first place.  I still have to go through Campaign Operations a bit more to see what it offers for determining upfront costs of buildings.  Though it wouldn't surprise me if it was in Interstellar Operations.

If there is no upfront C-Bill cost then well I just might have to make something up.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #345 on: 10 December 2017, 06:53:24 »
I did come across some "base construction" rules in there... let me find them again...

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #346 on: 10 December 2017, 07:39:23 »
Hmmm... the rules there (pages 53-55) provide time lines, but refer to the construction rules in TacOps for costs (page 418).  CampOps doesn't provide specific operating costs for buildings, but you might be able to assume they look something like vehicles.  The trick then becomes figuring out how building maintenance should be divided between "Defense" (20%) and "Infrastructure" (15%).

Also, in looking that part up, I see the infantry squad I mentioned previously would only consume 100 C-Bills per year of spare parts (1% of the 1 ton their compartment would weigh).  That's much more reasonable.  With that money returned to the kitty, you could probably afford a dedicated tech (armorer) for the squad.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #347 on: 10 December 2017, 12:04:19 »
I was trying to decide what should be infrastructure and what should be defense myself.

Ultimately I decided that buildings built for the express purpose of defending the Property or otherwise expressly used by the garrison should count against the Defense budget.

And dang I missed 418 in TacOps.

As far as upkeep I do think buildings would be the cheapest as they never go anywhere.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #348 on: 10 December 2017, 12:39:22 »
Makes sense... now to nail down what you want upkeep to cost.  Vehicles annually pay 8,000 per ton of required support, which is figured off of 0.1% of the mass of the vehicle itself (page 24).

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #349 on: 10 December 2017, 14:11:47 »
I think using the basis for space stations would be more appropriate but with a lower base cost(hence my CF*levels*0.01*5000 equation for determining upkeep) as space stations are tons of unit*0.01*15000.


Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #350 on: 10 December 2017, 14:18:46 »
The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4872
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #351 on: 10 December 2017, 15:01:06 »
2. With the above in mind Property may have to be divorced from square kilometers approximations entirely.  Then I can use some of the location/Property Quirks to help handle that Property 10 means different things if it is on Anywhere versus New Sytris.

Agree on dumping the land area requirement.  You could have a situation where there is a (macguffin) mine producing several billion per year, but only take up a couple square miles.  Instead of just a Knight/Count being responsible for it due to area, I'd expect a duke to have some sort of security nearby due to the value of the mine.

It means you can have a duke responsible for five systems in the Periphery region that are all barely inhabitable, and just have a few mining operations on them.  Similarly, a duke could be responsible for growing food on New Syrtis that takes up a region the size of Australia, but the food makes enough money for that.  Both earn roughly the same income per year, but one of the two duchies is much smaller (but more valuable due to proximity to the ruling family and ease of habitation).

hat could be referred to as 'Income', while Property might just be land.  The worse off the place, the more square kilometers you get.  You also have to patrol the area to make sure pirates don't set up shop, squatters don't claim it, illegal miners don't go for the good stuff, your bases are kept stocked so they can keep an eye on the system, rogue asteroids are gathered and put into useful orbits (or just diverted), some sort of dedicated transportation is set up (or sufficient medical capability is located there).  Property might be cheap, but you wind up having far too much to deal with once it gets large enough.  The nice part is the GM can us the Property 'advantage' to do stories/missions.  PCs might want to upgrade the region, set up a refining station for the local miners (which means they need a semi-custom station/dropship), or even build a ground colony.  All very expensive and taking a long time to pay off, and unless you have good security someone else is going to want to grab it.


The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.

Wish they would make the formulas easier:
CF*Levels*0.5

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #352 on: 10 December 2017, 18:26:50 »
Agree on dumping the land area requirement.  You could have a situation where there is a (macguffin) mine producing several billion per year, but only take up a couple square miles.  Instead of just a Knight/Count being responsible for it due to area, I'd expect a duke to have some sort of security nearby due to the value of the mine.

It means you can have a duke responsible for five systems in the Periphery region that are all barely inhabitable, and just have a few mining operations on them.  Similarly, a duke could be responsible for growing food on New Syrtis that takes up a region the size of Australia, but the food makes enough money for that.  Both earn roughly the same income per year, but one of the two duchies is much smaller (but more valuable due to proximity to the ruling family and ease of habitation).

hat could be referred to as 'Income', while Property might just be land.  The worse off the place, the more square kilometers you get.  You also have to patrol the area to make sure pirates don't set up shop, squatters don't claim it, illegal miners don't go for the good stuff, your bases are kept stocked so they can keep an eye on the system, rogue asteroids are gathered and put into useful orbits (or just diverted), some sort of dedicated transportation is set up (or sufficient medical capability is located there).  Property might be cheap, but you wind up having far too much to deal with once it gets large enough.  The nice part is the GM can us the Property 'advantage' to do stories/missions.  PCs might want to upgrade the region, set up a refining station for the local miners (which means they need a semi-custom station/dropship), or even build a ground colony.  All very expensive and taking a long time to pay off, and unless you have good security someone else is going to want to grab it.


Wish they would make the formulas easier:
CF*Levels*0.5

*nod*

The only way to make Property workable for a setting as varied as Battletech is to make the trait represent more of the raw value of the Property rather than how much you have.

I also do believe if a PC is going to have Property it should feature in the campaign.

The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.

That is a good point and does raise a question which kind of dovetails into a bunch of other things I've been wrestling with.

The main one is exactly where do I draw some lines for what is workable as a Property.  Personally I don't have a problem with it being some orbiting space complex as an option but then that creates all sorts of issues about how to handle budget and automatically limiting force compositions based on what actual extreme environment is present and we do do have a pretty wide variety present in Battletech.

All in all it is becoming a bit of a mess and I'm becoming less and less sure how to fix some of the primary short comings of how the existing Property trait works now.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #353 on: 12 December 2017, 23:34:04 »
Okay I have made some progress wrestling with this particular beast.

As much as I wouldd love to allow Property to be a Space Station/Complex or even potentially a Dropship I think I have to prohibit all those options as well as prohibit any options that require Extreme Environment Infantry/Units.  I will have to look into the bounds of where all those are then start cobbling some rules together.

Likewise I am finding I am going to have to scrap the idea of detailed Primary Income types on a player's Property and just make the GM and player hash it out with some help from what I have been calling Property Quirks.

So like on the Property Administration table there is that -2 to Property Administration roll for being on the Clan border.  I'm going to expand on the first set of modifiers and re-write some to become quirks and even the negative ones will provide some incentives for taking them by themselves.

As an example On Clan Border becomes within 30 light years of a hostile power(Advanced) and while it still provides the -2 to the Property Administration roll it will also give some benefits like letting some of your defense forces equip salvaged gear and your techs being more used to working on it.

Once I get the research done I should have most of the quirks worked out already or will have very soon.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #354 on: 13 December 2017, 01:02:59 »
Progress is progress!

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #355 on: 13 December 2017, 02:21:49 »
So I've gone down another rabbit hole and gotten distracted again but it still ties into re-working Property.

So going by page 24 of Campaign Operations a squad of Regular Infantry is going to cost 5,500 C-bills in salaries(1 squad leader at Rank 4 getting a ~1/3 bonus, 6 guys who don't get Rank salary bonuses) with 100 C-bills of upkeep for their gear(since Infantry Compartments don't come in 0.25 ton increments as far as I can tell and there seems to be no Infantry ammunition usage rates).

Where does this leave me though as that doesn't seem so bad.

So to see if you could maybe get some sort of combat vehicle I start working through some calculations to see if I can start setting a starting budget per point of Property.

A Savanah Master is about all you could keep running(4,000 C-Bills in upkeep plus salaries of the suicidal bastard driver and tech team working out to 8,000 exactly if there are no Rank bonuses).

End result is this leaves me another mess to basically make up my mind about because the numbers at my disposal are not being helpful as the most expensive Infantry squad I can find in MegaMek is still less than 10,000 C-bills and making a Savanah Master affordable for Property 1 means having enough starting budget for a whole Platoon but not enough steady income to keep them up and running.

Progress is progress!

Yeah the Property Quirks are falling into place pretty nicely in my head for the oens that I don't need to research.

As a quick note I am thinking for Garrison creation to have certain limitations like maximum starting skill is Regular as well as Mechs, ASFs, Small Craft, and Dropships take extra modifiers to acquire in the force creation rules once I figure out starting budgets.

All quirks unless otherwise specified can only be taken once and will mention when another quirk is incompatible.

I have also determined you start at 0 so you must take some sort of negative quirk to get a positive quirk.

since my house rules require a Status equal to any Property I am doing away with the Title modifiers but have decided to replace them with the Reputation of the character but just to be clear the player's current edge will only be used on the Property Event table roll with the MoF/MoS of their Property Administration roll which is where you can get the Scandal, Raid, Invasion, and Natural Disaster events which I will have those modifiers carry over to future Property Administration rolls for a year unless a quirk modifies this or the result of an Invasion or Raid renders the point moot.  After all if the player dies defending their Property from invasion doesn't really matter anymore does it?

I will be keeping the separate Investment trait with it's -4 Administration roll modifier with it's own special event table.

So far I have:

Border World(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power more technologically advanced than your faction(represent some of the other eras like Age of War where the Terran Hegemony were being mean to their neighbors or later Clan Eras))
Cost: -2
Mechanics: Player takes a -2 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income but due to the raids and repelled invasions their techs do not take any repair/salvage modifiers for unfamiliar technology and may equip a weapon or piece of equipment available to this enemy power not available to your faction on one garrison unit per point of Property and any such equipped units may exceed the normal average skill rating of Regular and start at Veteran.
Special: To represent less actively hostile periods reduce cost to -1 and lose the ability to mount salvaged gear on garrison units but may still increase the average skill rating as described.  This quirk can be taken up to three times by GM permission depending on era.

Border World, Lesser(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power on the same tech base or lower than yours)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  Due to the frequent raids at the start of the game campaign your garrison may have one unit per rank of Property exceed the normal starting average experience cap of Regular to a maximum of Veteran.
Special: The best count I can come up with is 5 times this quirk may be taken.

Remote(more than 30 Light Years from the closest regional administrative center)
Cost: -1
Mechanics Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  The lack of interference and oversight from their superiors allows the player to be more free in setting their own local laws.  Player may reduce Black Market costs as if they had one better letter code for legality, including eliminating them altogether, for the entire party.

Resource Shortage(mostly to reflect not having enough clean water to go around but I imagine there are a few other things this could cover)
Cost:-1
Mechanics: -1 to Property Administration roll.  Lacking proper supply of a daily need your people are more adept at overcoming adversity but are more impacted in the short term by negative events.  Increase the penalties for all Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions by 50% for the first three month, round to the less favorable to the player penalty, but decrease recovery time by three months.  So a Minor Natural Disaster would apply a -3 for the first three months, -2 for the next six months, but then apply no further modifiers.

Administrative Center
Cost: +1
Mechanics: Player takes a +1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  As an Administrative center this quirk is incompatible with Remote.  With the attention of their superiors more focused on them players are not as free in their actions but are more likely to receive aid in case of emergency.  Reduce Property Administration modifiers for Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions for the last three months by 50% rounded in favor of the player.

Resource Surplus
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  Excess resources make your rivals more covetous and corruption more likely though.  -1 on Property Event rolls.

Lightly Industrialized
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  As with Resource Surplus this attracts the attention of rivals, enemies, and the corrupt but having some production offers some advantages. -1 on Property Event rolls as well as GM and player should work together to determine some good to be taken in trade.

Heavily Industrialized
Cost: +2
Mechanics: +2 on Property Administration rolls.  -2 Property Event rolls.  Work with GM to determine produced good to take in trade and may do a Class F refit of one unit type but takes certain levels of Property to do so.  Mass of unit/25 round up(-1 to a minimum of 1 for Vehicles, +2 for Small Craft) and take a -4 modifier(player does not get the +2 to counter act part of this modifier) while performing the refit.  To re-tool the factory take a total -8 modifier to Property Administration roll for 8+Proprty rank months then player makes a special Administration plus current Edge score against a TN of 8+Property rank each month.  Each success reduces re-tooling penalty by 1.  Each failure extends the modifier another month.  Yes I want retooling to be harsh and something not done lightly.

Yeah I'm skipping Agricultural completely as that can be covered by Resource Surplus and I know I need a couple more negative quirks but a few of those will be determined by some research I need to still perform.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #356 on: 13 December 2017, 07:23:08 »
The salaries on page 25 are per month, not per year, and the same applies to the 100 C-Bills for spares.  Infantry ammunition is specifically mentioned on page 24, but not likely to be expensive.  You just need either the infantry tables errata or AToW weapon tables for the base reload cost, then multiply that by 5 to represent a base load and divide by 4 for a monthly expense (the section doesn't explicitly say monthly, but all the other rules on pages 24-25 are).  If they're non-plasma energy weapons and stationed close to electrical power, divide that cost by 10 to represent only having to replace burned out power packs.

I think you may be overestimating the support costs for a Savannah Master (like I did the first time up thread for the infantry).  8,000 is the cost of a whole ton of support, but you only need 0.1% of 5 tons to support the tank, so your monthly support cost would be 40 C-Bills for a single Savannah Master (plus salaries, of course).

As for your quirks, I like them, but think Heavy Industrial should draw more raids (specifically, beyond the penalty to the event roll).

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #357 on: 13 December 2017, 09:18:44 »
OK, I did some quick math:

One Savannah Master, monthly support cost: 40 C-bills (480 annually)

One Savannah Master driver: 900 C-Bills/month (10,800 annually)

One Tech Team: 38,400 annually
One Technician: 800 C-Bills/month (9,600 annually)
Six AsTechs: 400 C-Bills/month each (4,800 annually, each, 28,800 for all)

Based on the above, a lance of Savannah Masters and one tech team would run 83,520 per year.  Dropping a single AsTech in favor of having the drivers help out would get it under the 80,000 you mentioned earlier for Property 1.

And to recap what I did earlier for the infantry, a squad of 7 would run 63,000 C-Bills per year for salaries, 1,200 a year for spares, and some relatively small expenditure for ammunition depending  on the weapons involved.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13277
  • I said don't look!
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #358 on: 13 December 2017, 12:12:27 »
I'm really starting to wish the section on page 24 had slightly more verbose language because I keep reading 0.1 as to mean mass*0.1 not mass*0.001.

And yes I am aware that the salaries are monthly.  The chart in Campaign Operations also does not match the math or have all the options of the one in AToW.  AToW Rank 4 Regular Mechwarrior should be drawing 2,500 C-Bills a month while Campaign Operations has the same Warrior drawing 2,000 C-bills a month.  I may have to ask a question about this in the rules forum.

One of the other things I am going to go ahead and do for Property is fix the starting amounts to, among other things, make it easier to divide into monthly rolls/incomes.  Something the existing amounts don't do well at all for most ranks of Property.

Which means I have to make up my mind about how I want the chart to go.  I do have an idea and it'll be pretty simple math too.  I am probably just going to double the income for each rank of Property unless that causes some issues.  I know it does make Property 10 less valuable than current rules in terms of raw income but that doesn't really bother me too much as by then they really should be getting some other perks via my Status trait and evens out some of the lesser ranks.

Property 1 will get boosted to 2,000 C-Bills a month, 24,000 C-Bills annual, personal income as a starting point for sure.  Makes it a lot easier to divide up into what ever time periods the GM and player decide on to roll for personal income and it is not much more than what Property 1 already gets.

So Property:
1=24,000
2=48,000
3=96,000
4=192,000
5=384,000
6=768,000
7=1,536,000
8=3,072,000
9=6,144,000
10=12,228,000

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37269
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
« Reply #359 on: 13 December 2017, 12:21:24 »
Cool... will the boost carry on through to the amount available for defense and such (i.e., Property 1 will now have 96,000 to work with vice 80,000)?  That would be enough for a squad AND a Ferret for them to ride around in (assuming the troops do double duty as AsTechs)...

As for salaries, I'd be inclined to use the newer book values (CampOps) as the baseline from which to vary.

 

Register