Is a streamline of the rules past 3050 something possible?

[Retry]

IMO, the amount of ammo for MG's is the issue.  In thinking of Battletech lore, I could see a metric tonne (that seems to be the correct unit of measurement since Battle Armor is weighed in kilograms and distance is in meters) of heavy-caliber, MG ammo exploding destroying a mech.  All those rounds getting sent through the internal structure would spell out a bad day.  It isn't just necessarily the amount of damage a weapon does, but you have to think of how does that ammo disperse or explode when the bay gets hit.

I'm not saying exploding MG ammo bays are not a problem.  I mean that I don't think exploding MG ammo bays should be 4x as big a problem as a similar-weight exploding AC ammo bay... which it currently is.  Not that it makes a huge practical difference.

Another way to phrase it, I don't think the optimal path of making a Buffalo Drone Bomb should consist of loading in ten metric tons of MG ammo instead of actual explosives like TNT or something.

[carlisimo]

This is the first I've ever heard anyone say anything like this. What do you mean by it?

The experienced players around me tend to think Clan mechs are too expensive in BV (2.0) relative to 3050 Inner Sphere mechs, allegedly because BV overvalues speed and weapons that a mech doesn't have the heat dissipation to actually use (e.g. the Puma/Adder Prime).  They often let the clan player take free gunnery/pilot skill upgrades to compensate.

I’d heard the same about Alpha Strike, but looking through that subforum just now… it looks points values have been tweaked more recently than the complaints I’d heard.

[Weirdo]

They're expensive because they're just that good, and it sounds like the experienced players in your area are scared of their heart scales.

[Retry]

The experienced players around me tend to think Clan mechs are too expensive in BV (2.0) relative to 3050 Inner Sphere mechs, allegedly because BV overvalues speed and weapons that a mech doesn't have the heat dissipation to actually use (e.g. the Puma/Adder Prime).  They often let the clan player take free gunnery/pilot skill upgrades to compensate.

That's really a problem with mechs that run "hot" than the Clan mechs in general, isn't it?  Not really with Clan Omnis being Clan Omnis?  For instance, Taking the Nova Prime and trading 4 ER MLs for 4 DHS gets you a much more useful Mech for 400 less BV.  But that's not over-valued because it's a Clan Omni, it's just over-valued because it's not a good design.

[Apocal]

That’s the thing… pretty much everybody houserules it.  That’s a sign that something needs changing.

Ammo dumping isn't a house rule. I don't think pre-game ammo dumping is either, but I'm not as sure about that one.

[massey]

I'm not saying exploding MG ammo bays are not a problem.  I mean that I don't think exploding MG ammo bays should be 4x as big a problem as a similar-weight exploding AC ammo bay... which it currently is.  Not that it makes a huge practical difference.

Another way to phrase it, I don't think the optimal path of making a Buffalo Drone Bomb should consist of loading in ten metric tons of MG ammo instead of actual explosives like TNT or something.

They aren't 4 times the problem.  They're exactly the same level of problem as other ammo bays.  Pre-CASE, virtually no mech could survive an ammo explosion of any kind.  Yeah, maybe you get lucky and you've only got that last 10 point shot or something, but in my experience that is quite rare.  Ammo explosion = dead, no matter what kind of ammo it was.

[Retry]

They aren't 4 times the problem.  They're exactly the same level of problem as other ammo bays.  Pre-CASE, virtually no mech could survive an ammo explosion of any kind.  Yeah, maybe you get lucky and you've only got that last 10 point shot or something, but in my experience that is quite rare.  Ammo explosion = dead, no matter what kind of ammo it was.

4x the damage per ton, 4x the problem per ton.  If you use tac ops ammunition explosion rule then that's also 4x the splash damage to your other Battlemechs or infantry

[Apocal]

They aren't 4 times the problem.  They're exactly the same level of problem as other ammo bays.  Pre-CASE, virtually no mech could survive an ammo explosion of any kind.  Yeah, maybe you get lucky and you've only got that last 10 point shot or something, but in my experience that is quite rare.  Ammo explosion = dead, no matter what kind of ammo it was.

I actually survive AC/20 bin hits reasonably often because they drain in five rounds or less.

[Psycho]

allegedly because BV overvalues speed and weapons that a mech doesn't have the heat dissipation to actually use

More importantly, the BV values range. If your board isn't large enough for Clan 'Mechs to keep their distance, many are going to come out over-priced for what you get. I have had this issue more often than any other regarding Clan 'Mechs. Something like the Shadow Cat A is fantastic if you can run around all day and snipe from 20+ hexes away. Forced to fight in a box, its 2k+ BV cost is equivalent to many IS assaults, and it just isn't going to fare well against that sort of opponent in that environment.

[dgorsman]

Yeah, trying to post up with a Shadow Cat as if it was a Devastator (or an Adder like it's a Warhammer) just isn't going to work.  Sometimes the fix is as simple as adding a third mapsheet.

[Colt Ward]

The experienced players around me tend to think Clan mechs are too expensive in BV (2.0) relative to 3050 Inner Sphere mechs, allegedly because BV overvalues speed and weapons that a mech doesn't have the heat dissipation to actually use (e.g. the Puma/Adder Prime).  They often let the clan player take free gunnery/pilot skill upgrades to compensate.

I’d heard the same about Alpha Strike, but looking through that subforum just now… it looks points values have been tweaked more recently than the complaints I’d heard.

Yeah, its why most Clan players always talk about making sure you are not fighting in a phonebooth (aka, 2x2) simply because the Clan player will start off in range, and usually a IS player's long range weapons will also be in range . . . You cannot burn through the armor fast enough to avoid being pinned to the edge of a map by a wall of armor.  A related problem is you are typically going to be outnumbered, so its harder to move about b/c those extra units can be used to close off escapes.

[Caedis Animus]

Yeah, its why most Clan players always talk about making sure you are not fighting in a phonebooth (aka, 2x2) simply because the Clan player will start off in range, and usually a IS player's long range weapons will also be in range . . . You cannot burn through the armor fast enough to avoid being pinned to the edge of a map by a wall of armor.  A related problem is you are typically going to be outnumbered, so its harder to move about b/c those extra units can be used to close off escapes.

Actually, that makes me think that Clan mechs and tech need to be changed, because you shouldn't be thinking about escaping if you are a Clanner.

(IE make the tech benefit more from aggression somehow)

[Apocal]

Actually, that makes me think that Clan mechs and tech need to be changed, because you shouldn't be thinking about escaping if you are a Clanner.

(IE make the tech benefit more from aggression somehow)

It isn't about escaping, but keeping your opponent at your preferred range. Even with a speed advantage, it is tough to do that on a single mapsheet with numbers working against you.

[Ursus Maior]

Exactly.

I find the official rules, as found in TW, on how many maps to use (i. e. one map sheet per lance) lacking proper scalability. And that counts for both scalability in numbers and in technology. It's fine to use jus two mapsheets, if you want to play a fast game lance versus lance. And that is probably what most games are.

But once you go bigger, and you have to go much bigger, once you introduce Clan technology and want to use BV as a balancing system, as one star equals about eight Intro Tech 'Mechs of the same weight with regular pilots. You game jumps to 13 'Mechs, of three to four mapsheets, none of which offer enough space for proper maneuvering.

The same is true for those truly large and legendary battles of company-sized combined arms formations. A lance of 'Mechs, a lance of hovercraft or VTOLs plus a lance of tanks or a company of conventional infantry (i. e. 3-4 bases) and you look at a meager 3x2 mapsheets board. That's not gonna cut it for your hovers and VTOLs.

We once tried a battle of just under 20 units per side (company of 'Mechs plus a couple of vehicle lances) and found board a 3x3 mapsheet board was good for a really intense slugfest. One of those, where a reinforced company tries to achieve a breakthrough at a well defended point in the front, but it still leaves little enough space for hovers and VTOLs.

In a way, that's how combined arms warfare and defense in depth tend to work, i. e. there's always the next section in the front or nearby enemy position, so you cannot freely maneuver around a fortified position. But in this particular case, it makes off-board artillery or using ASF on the board very problematic. It's probably true that you should not - in the sense of realism - widen your battlefield too much, but it should be deeper in many cases.

[Colt Ward]

Actually, that makes me think that Clan mechs and tech need to be changed, because you shouldn't be thinking about escaping if you are a Clanner.

(IE make the tech benefit more from aggression somehow)

Its about escaping the closing net, not even keeping them at ideal ranges.  This was driven home to me on a Invasion era server where I took a very Wolf flavor star- Timber Wolf Prime or C, Ice Ferret B, 2 Adders (B/C/Ds)and another medium.  I went up against two mech lances and I think a light armor company for matched BV.  I closed it up some into medium range trying to get clear shots.  He was moving 3 or 4 for my every single unit . . . as my heaviest mech and biggest hitter w/ ERLL & LRMs I planned to move the Timber Wolf last . . . only to find that he had cut off all movement by the Timber Wolf for a move mod by blocking all the hexes.  MOST were in base contact, and the only opening I remember was moving 1 hex closer to his mechs.  It was really easy for his medium mechs with the surrounding armor to pound the Timber Wolf into scrap because it could not move and when that happened the battle was over since that was a chunk of the BV and nothing else really had the armor to soak up damage.

For most of the 3050 Clan Omnis you are paying BV for that +3 TH mod, and you need map room to be able to get it.  On a small map, the IS force can use the edge to pin down a Clan force's ability to dance circles around the IS forces.  Its not the same as pinning the Clan force against a terrain feature- rivers, cliffs, forests or anything else that can slow down the Clan forces . . . pinning Clan forces against a terrain feature is quite legitimate.  Pinning a Clan force against the artificial boundary of the map edge, because they are backing up or worse in a corner b/c they are trying to run around- and against a interior position its ultimately a losing plan- indicates a flaw in map size.

[HABeas2]

In my dream world, the 3250 setting would dramatically shorten the weapons list.  Keep the old ones as legacy weapons so you can use your old mechs and record sheets, but don’t put them into anything new.  Era-specific record sheets would come in three flavors: two for the conquered subjects using old mechs (i.e. all the mechs we’ve ever seen so far) in the arena, and one for the new SLDF. 

Heh. I remember that dream...

- Herb

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

Actually, that makes me think that Clan mechs and tech need to be changed, because you shouldn't be thinking about escaping if you are a Clanner.

(IE make the tech benefit more from aggression somehow)

  You shouldn't be thinking of losing, either but it will happen...and Clanners do flee battle, the Smoke Jaguars had plenty of practice.

[ArchonDan]

For most of the 3050 Clan Omnis you are paying BV for that +3 TH mod, and you need map room to be able to get it.  On a small map, the IS force can use the edge to pin down a Clan force's ability to dance circles around the IS forces.  Its not the same as pinning the Clan force against a terrain feature- rivers, cliffs, forests or anything else that can slow down the Clan forces . . . pinning Clan forces against a terrain feature is quite legitimate.  Pinning a Clan force against the artificial boundary of the map edge, because they are backing up or worse in a corner b/c they are trying to run around- and against a interior position its ultimately a losing plan- indicates a flaw in map size.

I have to disagree, It's not a map size flaw, it's the boundaries of the game. If maps were just added as a player reached the edge it would just play into the strengths of the Clan/Long range equipment Mech with no downside. It would effect the value of balance significantly.

Map/game boundaries are just another factor that players need to minimize or take an advantage of in the game.

[Weirdo]

Rolling maps are a thing, for players that want to go that way.

[Colt Ward]

I have to disagree, It's not a map size flaw, it's the boundaries of the game. If maps were just added as a player reached the edge it would just play into the strengths of the Clan/Long range equipment Mech with no downside. It would effect the value of balance significantly.

Map/game boundaries are just another factor that players need to minimize or take an advantage of in the game.

And ridiculously small maps favor the IS.  I never said it was a flaw, I said it was a problem for the Clan player in BV based games- especially since the books recommend IIRC, 1 mapsheet per lance . . . so even star vs 2 IS lances you technically get 3 sheets, which most people bump to 4 b/c rounding up so it goes 2x2 (1x4 would be interesting and a different matter) the playing area is 33x32 . . . go with 3 hex deployment zones, and its 26 hexes- Clan player will move into their long range.  Even put them on the edges, and a IS player with the typical 4/6 heavies can nearly run into the Clan long range, and that is if a Clanner does not move- and they need to for the +3 TMM.

Even WITH rolling maps, a IS player can still force a Clan player into closer ranges or using their numbers pin them against a terrain feature . . . you are just not going to be able to pin a Clan force that has 5/8 as the lowest speed against a artificial boundary with your 3/5 Lyran Wall of Steel- hint, why did the Wolves and even Falcons run Lyran units ragged?

[ArchonDan]

Rolling maps are a thing, for players that want to go that way.

Never said rolling maps wasn't a thing  :) There are scenarios that state the board edge is hard stop and, as always, people are free to play the game however they want. I'm not saying rolling maps are bad. Without other objectives in a game, a fast force with long range weapons can be un-fun as they just keep running away.

pinning Clan forces against a terrain feature is quite legitimate.  Pinning a Clan force against the artificial boundary of the map edge, because they are backing up or worse in a corner b/c they are trying to run around- and against a interior position its ultimately a losing plan- indicates a flaw in map size.

The bolded part is what I was referring to, maybe I misinterpreted it. It read to me that using the board edge to pin a Clan force was not considered a legitimate tactic.

[Colt Ward]

Well, its not just something used against the Clans . . . and to be honest, with the Clans' 'Circle of Equals' cultural use its quite legitimate.  While mostly only discussed in fiction for hand-to-hand fights, a Clan warrior who finds themselves fighting a Circle that is too small screwed up in the bidding- but that is fluff/fiction.  Not every Clan vs IS battle has a declared circle.

You want to play a BV balanced fight . . . I pay a higher BV cost for longer ranged weapons and faster mechs.  Explain to me why I should pay that higher BV price when a small battlefield is chosen?  Small map?  Lets balance with tonnage and see how that works . . .

I played the Clan vs IS BV game, competitively in BV1 & BV2- I know the undervalued Clan mechs to use . . . and I have played 3025 vs Clan Invasion, so I know both sides of the equation.

[massey]

It's just a small conflict between suggestions on how to play the game, and a balancing mechanic, where the two don't fit together properly.  In universe, BV isn't a thing, so how the Clans fight in fiction doesn't really apply.

In 3050, most battles would probably be a Clan unit slamming right through an IS unit of much lower BV.  Here's a Clan Binary full of heavy mechs, and they're fighting an Inner Sphere company of mediums and a lance of Scorpion tanks.  The Clans are gonna smash through that like Kool-Aid Man through a wall.  Oh Yeah!  The Clans won't be running away keeping range, they won't care about mobility, they'll just close in and annihilate their opponents.

Now, that's not going to be fun for the Inner Sphere player.  He's going to want to outnumber his Clan opponent significantly to have a fair fight.  There's nothing wrong with that, but that's not really what the Invasion was like.  So we've got to set aside the fiction in the interest of having a good game.  BV is one way to do that, but we know that it places a lot of value on speed and range.  We also know that if you fight on the recommended map sizes, then it places too much value on those factors.  Personally, we've always played with one mapsheet for every two mechs, and even that feels a bit cramped.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

Rolling maps are a thing, for players that want to go that way.

  As a GM, I always prepared rolling maps, because combat rarely occurs in a closed box. Face it, nobody like to lose due to a game quirk, like getting trapped in a corner that should not exist in the first place. I never would inflict that on my players.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

  So we've got to set aside the fiction in the interest of having a good game.  BV is one way to do that, but we know that it places a lot of value on speed and range. 

  I never use BV. In a campaign of tactics and maneuver, each player has fixed forces and they aren't always balanced. What changes the balance is how those assets are used. One commander may keep his entire force together as a 1000-lb gorilla, but can't be everywhere. The other commander may take and hold vital sites by parsing out units from the main body, and do his best to avoid the gorilla.

  The 1000-lb gorilla failed in Luthien because the defenders had some time to prepare defense in depth and faced some of the best forces in the Inner Sphere. The Clans crashed into one wall after another until they were too weak to continue. On Tukayyid, the Clans were, for the most part, overwhelmed by numbers of average forces. The feeble speedbumps of the Periphery border worlds no longer applied, and the Clans were never ready for total war.

[Colt Ward]

Sure, and when I campaign I wargame too . . . but this also applies to pick up games or scenario crafting, and not everyone campaigns like we do . . .

I mean, for my campaign games I use DB and 6x6 at least of BT-size maps in MM- done some that were pursuit scenarios that were 3x5.  Still trying to find the sensor & LOS rules I like.

[Stormy]

I feel like I should check back in here.

I went the BMM route, since it seemed like the most efficient route. It covers most things, though the edge cases can be pretty frustrating (like, say, my son getting -really- interested in superheavy tripod 'mechs).

The dispersion of the ruleset is definitely a frustration - especially since I'm pretty much the Battletech banner-bearer in my group. Things have been improving in the past few months, though. It is finally possible to find Battletech in the FLGS now, though it is pretty hit-and-miss as to what is available.

Thank you, though, for jumping in.

[Sartris]

The dispersion of the ruleset is definitely a frustration - especially since I'm pretty much the Battletech banner-bearer in my group. Things have been improving in the past few months, though. It is finally possible to find Battletech in the FLGS now, though it is pretty hit-and-miss as to what is available.

the issue is that unlike the old days, the main and advanced rulebooks don't get refreshed every couple years. those new books would fold in the newer rules into what was the standard. TW has been the core book since 2005, about 14 years. between '87-'02, we got the BattleTech Manual, BattleTech Compendium, BattleTech Compendium: Rules of Warfare, BattleTech Master Rules, and BattleTech Master Rules (Revised). each installment tweaked the rules a bit and compiled new gear / unit types from sourcebooks.

it looks like TW has a shot to celebrate 20 years as the core book at the rate we're going