BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Player Boards => Fan Designs and Rules => Topic started by: Mostro Joe on 29 March 2024, 11:15:46
-
I begin saying One rule that Will never be someday, because too unpopular.
The torso locations should be reduced from 3 to 2. Let's Say "shoulders" and "central torso".
This way the hit locations would be less fragmented and It would be less frustrating to hit an enemy. Indeed, with too many hit locations, you see dispersed a lot of the damage inflicted. Less hit locations, more focalized damage, less game lenght, where to seriously damage even a light mech can take forever.
Your unpopular ideas? :cheesy:
-
Playing with ACS Capital/Planetary, Atmospheric AND low-altitude maps with Battleforce and ditching the high-altitude map. The atmospheric interface control roll now taking place from Central Zone into Atmospheric Radar Map periphery. No cost going down except including the same control roll for dropping over 2 (3 or more) altitudes in a single turn.
-
Asymmetric forces initiative movement order; instead of moving one-for-one then two-for one, (rear loaded, as is currently the baseline)...
movement of two for one until parity is reached on every movement phase regardless of win/loss on initiative. (that is, 2-1 or 1-2, repeat until you have equal numbers, then go 1-for-1.)
Why would this be unpopular? think about the complaints about 'initiative sinking' and what this means for having a larger force on the map.
Basis; Larger forces suffer from more tactical 'friction' or 'inertia' than smaller forces. this is natural, but not reflected in the standard rules.
-
Cannonshop, Ive seen a version of that rule called 'frontloaded initiative'. Its popular for making larger forces less overwhelming in initiative. My only issue is how the rule plays with casualties. If we both started with 4 units, and I destroy one of the enemies, now I have an initiative penalty by being forced to move 2 units up front. My command shouldnt be worse then the enemies, as we both started with 4 units and the enemy is suffering from casualties/loss of cohesion--the unit with damage and who is now outnumbered should be in danger of being over run.
Id love a more in depth setup though, where at the start of the battle command inertia was established. So a player with 2 lances, versus 1, suffers initiative 'friction' like you said, until they are down to 1 command structure. Likewise, attaching some unrelated units to a lance, like some militia tanks, would cause tactical friction. After all, having more unit then your opponent is a huge benefit, so an initiative drawback would make sense--as long as you arnt punished in initiative for defeating your enemy when you both started with the same number of units.
-
All I can say here is "see my sig block"... ::)
-
Playing with ACS Capital/Planetary, Atmospheric AND low-altitude maps with Battleforce and ditching the high-altitude map. The atmospheric interface control roll now taking place from Central Zone into Atmospheric Radar Map periphery. No cost going down except including the same control roll for dropping over 2 (3 or more) altitudes in a single turn.
It can be done yet, if I'm not wrong.
-
Asymmetric forces initiative movement order; instead of moving one-for-one then two-for one, (rear loaded, as is currently the baseline)...
movement of two for one until parity is reached on every movement phase regardless of win/loss on initiative. (that is, 2-1 or 1-2, repeat until you have equal numbers, then go 1-for-1.)
Why would this be unpopular? think about the complaints about 'initiative sinking' and what this means for having a larger force on the map.
Basis; Larger forces suffer from more tactical 'friction' or 'inertia' than smaller forces. this is natural, but not reflected in the standard rules.
Actually it seems a good idea, not so unpopular.
-
Asymmetric forces initiative movement order;
I always wanted all Assaults to move first, both sides, then all Heavies, then all Mediums, then all Lights. Made lights far more useful as backstabbers. (TO extend, make it infantry, then vehicles, then a/h/m/l, then BA ;) )
I liked the idea so much, it got baked into Leviathans, where it works very nicely, thank you!
-
I always wanted all Assaults to move first, both sides, then all Heavies, then all Mediums, then all Lights. Made lights far more useful as backstabbers. (TO extend, make it infantry, then vehicles, then a/h/m/l, then BA ;) )
there is something very similar in the Aerotech rules!
-
I always wanted all Assaults to move first, both sides, then all Heavies, then all Mediums, then all Lights. Made lights far more useful as backstabbers. (TO extend, make it infantry, then vehicles, then a/h/m/l, then BA ;) )
SO everyone moves, THEN everyone shoots? Would it also be in the same order?
-
The torso locations should be reduced from 3 to 2. Let's Say "shoulders" and "central torso".
That's reasonable. The targeting rules are a bit onery. Playing Mechwarrior, it's entirely reasonable to target a Griffin's right torso until it's unarmed, but it's hard to simulate that in tabletop. Fewer locations per target arc would make right side shots fall on the right side more reliably, and that's an improvement.
I love slamming damage at a 'mech until you hit the narrow end of the probability curve and something unpredictable happens, but I'd also like good mechwarriors to be able to 'nudge' their shots in.
My unpopular rule is to forgo the cluster table and use pilot die for determining to-hit and hit location for cluster weapons.
-
My unpopular rule is to forgo the cluster table and use pilot die for determining to-hit and hit location for cluster weapons.
Roll 3d6+2, subtract the to-hit number, and that is the result on the Cluster table?
Time-on-Target artillery
You calculate the farthest that the artillery shell can travel (in turns), subtract your current range (in turns), add 1, and that is the maximum shells that can arrive in one turn. For example, if you were 2 turns away and the artillery had a max range of 7 turns, then your fire pattern would be:
Fire Turn - flight time
X - 7
X+1 - 6
X+2 - 5
X+3 - 4
X+4 - 3
X+5 - 2 (min flight time)
X+6 - (none fired to make my example easier to read/understand, and because the adjustments haven't come in yet)
X+7 - 6 shells arrive
Spotter only has one turn of observation, so instead of getting an adjustment bonus for all 6 shells they only get the bonus for one turn.
Arrow IV loiter
Arrow IV missiles are semi-smart and can be instructed to use a higher trajectory than normal. Treat this as Time-on-Target. Disadvantage is that these missiles are nice and bright targets so enemy ASF and AA platforms have a small chance to shoot them down.
Autocannons can be given AoE ammunition, turning them into baby artillery. Damage is 20% of the Autocannon's base value, FRD. Range in mapsheets is equal to the autocannon's short range. As it is AoE damage, this is separate ammo from standard Autocannon ammunition. But if all you have is a Vedette with its single AC/5 and the pirates are getting too comfy, sometimes you need to put out the go-away mat.
-
Roll 3d6+2, subtract the to-hit number, and that is the result on the Cluster table
1D6 pilot die + 1D6 cluster die. If a cluster's cluster die + pilot die meets or exceeds the TN, then it hits.
Remove cluster die that miss, and reroll all remaining dice. Hit location for each cluster is Pilot Die + Cluster Die.
It moves cluster weapon average damage from Max Damage * 66% * To-Hit Chance to Max Damage * To-Hit Chance and lumps cluster locations together, but it's so much faster.
-
I like the feel of the pilot die, where you have a pilot die and all weapons have a matching die that goes with it.
It would be a very different game, BUT a 'dice' set that had different shapes and colors for weapons, so that a machine gun was a brown die, an AC2 was a same sized grey die, ac5 slightly larger grey die, up to ac20 rolling the largest sized grey d6. Lasers would be color coded similarly, with red-orange-yellow ect for the small/medium lasers, ect. Just a cool tactile approach to weapons, and each pilot would have their own unique pilot die based on their skill--green gets a d4 instead of a d6 with 1 more base TN, while an elite pilot would have a d10 in place of a 2 gunnery. The average would be the same, but you would see how good a shot the pilot was based on their pilot die.
SRMs would be Black little d6, LRMs would be Larger Black dice for larger cluster size, ect.
-
and each pilot would have their own unique pilot die based on their skill--green gets a d4 instead of a d6 with 1 more base TN, while an elite pilot would have a d10 in place of a 2 gunnery. The average would be the same, but you would see how good a shot the pilot was based on their pilot die.
I see here something like the "Stargrunt II" game. Or "Force on Force".
-
Incorporating the other polyhedral dice into crit table resolution.
My group already does it to save time. And, we move from exact number to 1st one on top and then next undamaged crit down style of counting. So, on an arm, for example, if you have 9 slots full, we would roll a d10, and reroll on a 10. (I'm now toying with the cycling idea.) And, as you take crits, you work your way down the dice sizes, as best fit. So, if after that 9-slot arm takes its first critical hit, the next two crits will be determined with a d8 because there are only 8 valid critical slots left. 7 crits left would still be resolved with a d8 with a potential reroll. Then a d6, and so on.
Although, a cyclical style of crit table resolution might work that doesn't require a reroll. To use the 9 slot arm example above, you would roll the two different colored d6s as normal, figuring out high-low first, and then if it was the lower box (4-6) and you rolled a 4, 5, or 6 which would hit a blank spot, you'd just cycle the count from the top of that section.
To save on Initiative rerolls: If you get a tie, check to see who has the highest individual d6 result. That breaks ties. If you're still matched, THEN you reroll.
Edit: As an example, you have two sides roll Init, and both roll a 7 on 2d6 as per standard. But, in this case, one roll is a combination of 3 and 4 while the other is a combination of 2 and 5. The result with the 5 wins.
-
Perhaps Battletech could benefit from polyedrical dices after all?
-
D20 BattleTech.
Variable weapon damage.
BattleTech a Square Grid.
-
To save on Initiative rerolls: If you get a tie, check to see who has the highest individual d6 result. That breaks ties. If you're still matched, THEN you reroll.
Edit: As an example, you have two sides roll Init, and both roll a 7 on 2d6 as per standard. But, in this case, one roll is a combination of 3 and 4 while the other is a combination of 2 and 5. The result with the 5 wins.
Hows about Tied initiative then, if they roll the same init..