Alpha Strike: Commander's Edition?

[DarkJaguar]

So...Commander's Edition.

From the blurb, this sounds like it combined the Core and Companion into one book, with all of the errata?  Any other changes that are super exciting?  I'm looking forward to retiring my signed first-print, but the info I can find is a bit scanty!  What do you all know about this?

[abou]

You have as much info as any of us. And that pretty much sounds like it all. My guess is that if there is anything we haven't heard of, it might include some of the new lance/star types from Campaign Operations.

[Hayden.]

I'm quite excited to learn more about this edition.

[Valkerie]

Me as well.  Alpha Strike is my primary way of playing these days.

[Garydee]

Biggest thing to fix is not having small units dominate the game as much.

[Pat Payne]

One thing that would be nice (It's a pipe dream, but still) is to have the remaining unit availability lists from the unreleased Combat Manuals included.

[NeonKnight]

I'm guessing it's a major clean-up...maybe even like a 2nd edition if one will....

[calendraug]

I hope there is some stuff in there for non standard unit sizes, such as comstar/wob or the society even if it's just sidebar rules .

[nckestrel]

I hope there is some stuff in there for non standard unit sizes, such as comstar/wob or the society even if it's just sidebar rules .

What stuff would you want?

[NeonKnight]

What stuff would you want?

Stuff that helps them make use of Lance Abilities. The fact that Lance Building kinda hoses these guys because they are all about Mixed Units.

i.e.  Hard to build an Assault Lance when there is not many jumping infantry for the Word of Blake outside of Djinns and a few others :(

[Scotty]

That just means that Level IIs featuring injury can only be assault formations in strictly limited circumstances.

In other words: working as intended, feature not bug, etc.

[Xochi]

Biggest thing to fix is not having small units dominate the game as much.

I took one longtom for 37 PV with cluster munition and destroyed 2 stealth special Wolfen's and two Fire Moths. They don't dominate, just need the right kinds of counter.

[NeonKnight]

That just means that Level IIs featuring injury can only be assault formations in strictly limited circumstances.

In other words: working as intended, feature not bug, etc.

Actually the can also be Scout...and the mere fact that one views the limited Roles WoB can fill is a Feature is a pretty poor excuse.

[nckestrel]

Actually the can also be Scout...and the mere fact that one views the limited Roles WoB can fill is a Feature is a pretty poor excuse.

Maybe just rewrite Novas to be less Clan specific. A formation (CS/WoB Level II) can be any number of 'mechs/vehicles (3+) that must meet the requirements.  The infantry do not have to, but then they cannot be assigned the bonus abilities of the formation.

But that example seems to be about mixed units, not formation size.

[NeonKnight]

Maybe just rewrite Novas to be less Clan specific. A formation (CS/WoB Level II) can be any number of 'mechs/vehicles (3+) that must meet the requirements.  The infantry do not have to, but then they cannot be assigned the bonus abilities of the formation.

But that example seems to be about mixed units, not formation size.

And that I could live with. It would also help with something of the we have Lance Size/Abilities spelled out, and we have Star/Novas spelled out, but LEVEL IIs seem to be missed.

Also, having just run it this weekend, where would a Marian Hegemony Century fit in? Same rules as a Nova I would expect.

[nckestrel]

Can’t you just play a real faction? (Kidding!)


More seriously, what does a Marian formation need rules for it doesn’t have already?

[Maingunnery]

And that I could live with. It would also help with something of the we have Lance Size/Abilities spelled out, and we have Star/Novas spelled out, but LEVEL IIs seem to be missed.

Also, having just run it this weekend, where would a Marian Hegemony Century fit in? Same rules as a Nova I would expect.

Un, Sept...... ?

[nckestrel]

Anything 3+ follows the same rules. Doesn’t matter what it’s called.
Its a formation, there’s nothing in the rules (for most) that says it has to be four or five or six. As long as it’s three or more.

[Azakael]

"...four or five or six. As long as it’s three or more."

Please see "Horde Lance" - CM:K.
(Has anyone used one of these?)

[Scotty]

Anything 3+ follows the same rules. Doesn’t matter what it’s called.
Its a formation, there’s nothing in the rules (for most) that says it has to be four or five or six. As long as it’s three or more.

This is essentially what I was getting at.  'Mech/tank Level IIs get exactly the same treatment as 'Mech/tank Lances and Stars.  X/Y/Infantry Lances get exactly the same treatment as X/Y/Infantry Level IIs.

Infantry are inherently inflexible on the strategic and organizational scale in BattleTech.

If anything, having easier access to things like Assault and Fire Lances will (unless the abilities therein have been changed to be more in line with other bonuses) be worse for the game overall, in my opinion.  The formations with great bonuses shouldn't really be the flexible and easily built ones (again, pending a formation rebalance).

[sadlerbw]

I asked if this new edition would include the new PV calculation Xotl was working on. The answer was unknown, but probably not unless someone had poked Brent/Ray about it.

[Weirdo]

A formation-based bit of information we need is how to run Society Uns/Treys/Septs. It's hard to tell if the three-mech Trey is the formation to look at for SPAs, the seven-mech Sept...and if it's the Trey, is there any way for a Sept's commander(which is outside either Trey) can get any SPAs...there's an entire can of worms in there.

On top of that, it'd be nice to have rules supporting combined-arms formations, lances and stars and such with multiple unit types. Last I read, my impression was that proper formations had to be unit-pure, with the exception of Novas and Support lances. This can be an issue for units that go combined-arms by necessity(struggling mercs, backwater militias) or by choice(Cornstar, WoB).

[DarkJaguar]

A formation-based bit of information we need is how to run Society Uns/Treys/Septs. It's hard to tell if the three-mech Trey is the formation to look at for SPAs, the seven-mech Sept...and if it's the Trey, is there any way for a Sept's commander(which is outside either Trey) can get any SPAs...there's an entire can of worms in there.

On top of that, it'd be nice to have rules supporting combined-arms formations, lances and stars and such with multiple unit types. Last I read, my impression was that proper formations had to be unit-pure, with the exception of Novas and Support lances. This can be an issue for units that go combined-arms by necessity(struggling mercs, backwater militias) or by choice(Cornstar, WoB).

combined arms formations would be nice, at least for the freeborn scum to be able to put up a worthwhile fight.

[JadedFalcon]

The rules for Novas don't really do much outside of the force org chart. If I make my star of Elementals a support formation to a separate formation composed of my omnimechs, then I get more gameplay benefits from playing a Nova, where the Elementals gain no abilities (apart from using their numbers to mitigate the loss of formation SPAs). Though I really don't have a brilliant solution to solve this issue for Novas and Air Lances.

[Xotl]

I'm told the revised PV system will be used going forward.  However, whether or not it's in the book is up in the air, as things are still being hammered out.

[DarkJaguar]

The rules for Novas don't really do much outside of the force org chart. If I make my star of Elementals a support formation to a separate formation composed of my omnimechs, then I get more gameplay benefits from playing a Nova, where the Elementals gain no abilities (apart from using their numbers to mitigate the loss of formation SPAs). Though I really don't have a brilliant solution to solve this issue for Novas and Air Lances.

Their numbers don't count toward or against formation requirements though, so losing 3 mechs out of a nova would still count as losing the formation.

[sadlerbw]

I'm told the revised PV system will be used going forward.  However, whether or not it's in the book is up in the air, as things are still being hammered out.

Well get a nice, big hammer and knock it out of the air and onto the page! The math wasn't really that bad to describe verbally, and I think the PVs it produced were a better fit to the 'how good is this stuff' data. In fact, while I know some folks wanted more or less in some areas, by the time everyone stopped poking at it regularly, I don't think ANYONE looking at the numbers though we would be better off sticking with the original PV's. Of course, I may be preaching to the choir a bit here.

[DarkJaguar]

Well get a nice, big hammer and knock it out of the air and onto the page! The math wasn't really that bad to describe verbally, and I think the PVs it produced were a better fit to the 'how good is this stuff' data. In fact, while I know some folks wanted more or less in some areas, by the time everyone stopped poking at it regularly, I don't think ANYONE looking at the numbers though we would be better off sticking with the original PV's. Of course, I may be preaching to the choir a bit here.

Just to get a feel for things, since you seem to have been able to play with the new PV system, what kind of PV would a Fire Moth H have under the new system?

[Scotty]

I don't remember the specific number but I'm pretty sure it was close to a 30% PV bump.

[DarkJaguar]

I don't remember the specific number but I'm pretty sure it was close to a 30% PV bump.

for things with high TMM? or across the board?