Register Register

Author Topic: Does Catalyst Not Know How to Handle Infantry?  (Read 9807 times)


  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24526
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Does Catalyst Not Know How to Handle Infantry?
« Reply #210 on: 24 November 2021, 18:01:22 »
I'll shoot you a note, thanks!   :thumbsup:

We now return you to the regular discussion regarding BT infantry...


  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 313
Re: Does Catalyst Not Know How to Handle Infantry?
« Reply #211 on: 24 November 2021, 21:48:24 »
While the principal focus of this video is on video games, I think the principles discussed are applicable to the argument about the soul of the game:
I don't think that is a real issue with Battletech, in a game system like Battletech there is plenty of room for both types of people. The real issue with Battletech is "Brute Force" vs. "Elegance and Efficiency". You don't need to study rules in battletech to become a better player, you need to study them to be able to play in a timely manner. This is why Battletech needs a new edition. Not to "Dumb-down" the game but to make the game more time efficient to play and learn.

This can be done in many different ways, some are so stupidly simple to do it's not even funny. For example, just changing the Engine critical slot to "Engine (+5HT/turn per) so you don't need a critical hit chart along with all the rest. These things are just changes to how the players interact with the rules to reduce the need for a 10 double sided "Cheat sheet" or just rote memorization. The other thing is just changing some of the more glaring excessive resolution mechanics (*cough* Cluster hits *cough). The last which includes things like Infantry and Electronic warfare is to bring them into a system that standardizes rules as much as possible. For example, by treating infantry squads like battle armor you need less rules. By creating a good EW system you don't need to reference how each systems interacts with each other on a case by case basis as the system determines it.


  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4746
  • The Future of BattleTech
    • Never Tales and Other Daydreams
Re: Does Catalyst Not Know How to Handle Infantry?
« Reply #212 on: 17 January 2022, 17:26:12 »
Well, something can also be said for sheet design.

I actually like Heavy Metal's advanced print options for the record sheet.  It puts the core tables along the side.  You have a basic attacker to-hit list, then the different hit location tables and the core cluster hit char.  Having the to-hit mods right there for reference, barring some situation-specific ones, is extremely helpful. 

Doing this with vehicles is extremely helpful, since you have different hit location tables for VToLs over Hover/Wheeled/Tracked. 

Having a shortened cluster hit table to reference is really nice.  That was very insightful programming on Rick's part, and when we print out sheets, I always go that route.

The little section below where you can track movement mode and heat, in detail, by turn up to 12 turns is also useful, especially for record-keeping if you're wanting to use a battle in a story (fanfic).

So, sometimes, it's more a matter of having the relevant information readily to-hand so you don't have to go digging through a book, even referencing BoB. 

This is one of the reasons I actually pine for a notes section on the sheet that prints out minor rules for equipment, or a set of gear cards with said rules on them.  There's so much equipment with specific in-game modifiers or quirks for the later eras that I feel like I have to spend an hour refreshing my knowledge on them so I can play them properly in the same vein as reading up on spells for a Wizard or Paladin build in Pathfinder. (Fantasy RPG)

Back to infantry:
At least with City Tech, I could imagine that the support weapon was what was indicated by the type of platoon, and that it was what they were using to damage armored units.  Not as elegant as using the light weapon stats of armored units to match, but it was something to head-canon due to the abstract stats.

Again, I'll point out that my group played with the BA platoon layout, and we liked it.  Even were okay with the nebulous Anit-Infantry Attack stat and range values.  Why they didn't decide to go this way after a while, or from the start? Quoth the Critical Drinker: "Don't know!"

Why Cat Labs doesn't try using that now, even in a stand-alone generic Stellar Conflict setting? See prior quotation, but someone pointing out Renegade Legion and what may have happened there could be a reason.

It just feels like a missed opportunity that it's only being used as a home-brew modification. 

Same with infantry as objective pieces and objective modifiers.  Watching playthroughs of HBS's BattleTech shows how infantry can be escorted or blocked in such a way as to have in-game effects, like the activation of sensors, gates, or especially defense towers, looks loads of fun!  And, they don't even have to be shooting at Mechs and tanks to swing the battle so wildly.

It's your world. You can do anything you want in it. - Bob Ross

Every thought and device conceived by Satan and man must be explored and found wanting. - Donald Grey Barnhouse on the purpose of history and time.

I helped make a game! ^_^  - Forge Of War: Tactics