Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Fan Articles / Re: Mech of the Week: DVS- Devastator
« Last post by spotH3D on Today at 12:17:36 »
In later ages I'm not a fan of Devastator but faster. 

So a Dark Age/ IlClan version with 2 cERPPCs and 2 SB Gauss sounds Deliciously nasty, and plan hasn't been done at all yet.

In addition to punching holes and filling them with SB Gauss flechettes, nasty as hell to VTOLs, aerospace, and combat vehicles, just searching for crits/motive hits.
2
General BattleTech Discussion / Re: Most Iconic Mech
« Last post by tassa_kay on Today at 12:14:27 »
I would sooner see certain units as being iconic of certain Eras, for various reasons.

By all means, start a poll for what you want to see. But there's nothing wrong with having a poll for BattleTech's most iconic Mechs regardless of era.
3
Strategic Combat / Re: SBF Engagement Control Clarifications
« Last post by Zematus737 on Today at 12:12:28 »
    • Of the 3 types of engagement, is Overrun the only one limited to the moving formation, or can a player declare an overrun when their opponent is moving a formation?

    Since an Overrun is something you do on the movement phase, it is not something an enemy can do as a response.  I think you may be referring to the Rear Guard option, as that is the only defensive maneuver that comes to mind that plays like this pg.245 IO:Bf.
    4
    Strategic Combat / Re: SBF Engagement Control Clarifications
    « Last post by Zematus737 on Today at 12:06:05 »
    There is much more Engagement Control text found further in the SBF Adv. Aerospace movement section for multiple engagement pg176 and pg185 IO:BF aside from those found on pg167 of the same rule book.  What are your sources for these questions?  Old SO's rules on engagement control in their abstracts are very thin by comparison.
    5
    The scales can be confusing as times.  I made a post on a player aid where I go into detail on just how to convert Scaled SBF and have it play well with ACS Formations and that time scale.  You may adopt whatever helps.  There is not enough rules for scaled 12 hour turns play to be its own thing, but most of the combat and other stuff is recycled from SBF, to be fair.

    The 3.5 days fits into the ISaW timeframe of 8 turns being a whole ISaW turn, it taking place every month.  I feel it is a good portion.  The SBF 3 minute keeps it its own thing and you can do as much as you like at that scale without stepping on the toes of ACS.  The 12 hour portion of Scaled BF can play well with ACS too, you just have to use one scale for movement representation and sink lower into the other scales for deployments, reinforcements, actions and combat.  There's flexibility in the rules that are pretty much thrown out like a banquet.  You just have to pick and choose.  C.O. has many things that are useful in it, most of all the Transit Times table that you can figure the travel time from zenith/nadir points from any custom system or campaign with just the distance of the planet from its star and the size or type of star.  It's hard to give someone a full rulebook sometimes.  It leads to jumbled confusion of terms and a terrible option paralysis. Or at least that's what happened to me. 

    SBF is great, but you lose the shining jewel of BF, being the freedom of movement over the maps that is similar to TW core, the use of Command points that are like SPA's on steroids that can be disrupted with espionage points.  They all have their caveats and SBF truly is required for forces reaching regimental levels for planetary invasion scenarios-- yet! you can still fit these into a great campaign when you sub-divide the best of both worlds and really experience a planetary invasion as it should be experienced.  It, imo, should be a an evening affair and not something that would end so quickly as SBF scale play would make it.  What TW takes too long with several Lances, SBF makes a prompt and expedient massacre of.

    If you want, some day, to have multiple planetary invasions that run into each other and share history, ISaW is the most practical tool and you can borrow only the top phases really and do the rest in lower scale SBF.  But if a single planetary invasion scenario is what you're after, ISaW is overkill and excessive paperwork.
    6
    maybe start...smaller.  Total Warfare's big problem, is that it's difficult to navigate and laid out for use with search functions on a computer, not 'turn to index, find page, read.'

    So, let's really get more practical/pragmatic with this;  The first need isn't new rules, or old rules, or extra rules, it's the imposition of order.  Order and clarity.  From there, it's EASIER to see what rules CHANGES need to be made (additions, subtractions, versions, etc.)

    Organize the existing text BETTER, then see about making rules changes.

    That's my last word on this, because any rules changes I would like aren't likely to happen, just due to how unpopular my other ideas really are, but fixing the core rules has more to do with making them handy and accessible to newer players (in my opinion).  This goes for every aspect people complain about on the forum, from the Ground game, to Aerospace.

    Make the book simpler to use, codify the format, and then make your additions and changes.

    I have to agree the Organization of the rules is the biggest problem.   You are right sure you can find things if you got that PDF.  But reading that book to find things yeah it is not great.  If you solve that porblem you solve it's biggest problem in my opinion.    The crazy part is they had the templete to make it easy to read.  One thing about BMRr and the others before it you didn't see complaints about the way the books were orginized.
    7
    General BattleTech Discussion / Re: Most Iconic Mech
    « Last post by Nerroth on Today at 11:51:00 »
    I would sooner see certain units as being iconic of certain Eras, for various reasons.

    For example: the Timber Wolf is arguably the iconic Clan 'Mech of the era of Operation REVIVAL, to the point of it being used to mark the Clan Invasion Era by CGL themselves.

    Yet might the Savage Wolf be considered a more representative Clan 'Mech of the Dark Age era? Not just in terms of being one of the "new" designs bequeathed to the setting by MechWarrior: Dark Age/Age of Destruction, but also in-universe as the chosen 'Mech chassis of both Alaric Ward and of Anastasia Kerensky. Indeed, with the latter's Savage Wolf being used on the front cover of the IlClan sourcebook (and the former's on the back cover), that design's prominence in the universe does not appear to be going away any time soon...

    But then, one could also argue that the Ares is an icon of the Dark Age, from an Inner Sphere perspective. There are few "new" MW:DA/AoD designs which, for good or ill, have been as symbolic of this era. Yet while the Republic it was originally built for no longer exists, it too is now beginning to proliferate across the setting, as more factions gain access to these superheavy tripods in the ilClan Era.

    Although, I might also wonder what designs, be it Clan or IS, would be emblematic of Catalyst Game Labs' stewardship of these new eras. I think of new Clan designs like the Hammerhead, which is already being used as one of the 'Mechs featured on the cover art for BattleTech Universe. If the Timber Wolf and other TRO:3050 'Mechs spoke to the Clans of the REVIVAL era, the Hammerhead symbolizes the degree by which the Clans known to exist as of the 3150s have adapted from over a century of life in the Inner Sphere and known Periphery.
    8
    So, let's really get more practical/pragmatic with this;  The first need isn't new rules, or old rules, or extra rules, it's the imposition of order.  Order and clarity.  From there, it's EASIER to see what rules CHANGES need to be made (additions, subtractions, versions, etc.)

    Organize the existing text BETTER, then see about making rules changes.
    <Above is snipped>

    THIS ! SO much this.
    Earlier I saw talk about changing vehicle rules. WHY ?
    Those rules themselves aren't the problem.
    The problem is the overall organization and a lack of clarity.

    We need all of the corrected rules put close enough to their subject
    to be easy to find and understand.
    I can understand moving some things out of an initial Core book but
    not changing rules that aren't a part of the problem.
    9
    The Inner Sphere / Re: Research: Maximilian Liao's first wife
    « Last post by tassa_kay on Today at 11:33:12 »
    Why not just... correct the error, instead of running with it? I don't understand why BattleTech seems almost allergic to fixing errors in the fiction.
    10
    can we please stop acting like this complete ignorance of fedsuns history and consitituional structure is some character flaw of Victor's? and instead reckongize it as what it is... FASA not reading their own bloody sourcebooks?

    If you make the same mistake enough times it becomes a character trait. If you write "Victor is a soldier's soldier, he's not interested in politics" and then your writers screw up on history or political structure, that isn't incontiguous with what you wrote, it is a supporting detail to a character trait you already established. I know you don't like it because it does worship the almighty Davion like you prefer, but Hanse and Melissa were clearly parents who were way too permissive and let their kids avoid any subject they didn't like.

    Let's say I mean to say that Chandrasekhar Kurita weighs 200 kilos but I'm on a ten-key so I type that he weighs 500 kg. Then that gets through fact check. Well we were already told he was fat, now we know HOW fat he is.
    Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
    Register