So lets talk Core Rule books

[Daryk]

It's not just a 100 of you, I'm sure (being one.. so that makes at LEAST 200).

And you keep saying CampOps didn't sell well, but it seems to have sold out everywhere I looked (my wife finally tracked down a hard copy somehow).  Bad luck, I guess?

If those $100 keep that $2 problem from ever happening again, it's totally worth it.

[Sartris]

Rare =/= popular. Compared to the FASA (and even fanpro) books, I get the impression CGL print runs were tiny. It doesn%u2019t take much demand to make them look like a hot commodity.

The fact is only a handful of books since 2007 have gotten another print run (the actual outward sign something produced the desired profit). Most of them have been core books. I don%u2019t think the petty cash drawer is so overflowing that they would pass on another run of something that sold.   

circling back for this...

It doesn't matter that a book or a rule system has special meaning to you personally if it doesn't sell.

I'm telling you: as a guy who only plays TW and TO, who is proud of the work he's done on ATOW*, and who doesn't care about AS:
I am the problem. Because there's maybe 100 of me. Not 1,000,000

So wanting TW to be more or less like BMR misses the biggest point of all:

It doesn't sell. So it must die.
And all of you who are with me in favoring TW: you're all wrong too. BMM is the future. It doesn't matter if you disagree. We are wrong. We are the past.

i think i just made the face my toddler does when i make her put down her stuffed animal before bath.

[General308]

Rare =/= popular. Compared to the FASA (and even fanpro) books, I get the impression CGL print runs were tiny. It doesn’t take much demand to make them look like a hot commodity.

The fact is only a handful of books since 2007 have gotten another print run (the actual outward sign something produced the desired profit). Most of them have been core books. I don’t think the petty cash drawer is so overflowing that they would pass on another run of something that sold.

That would be assuming a company understood the demand for the product.  But Catalyst was completely cought off guard by the response to the kickstarter.  So there is at less some evidents that Catalyst may not be sure what the real demand for BattleTech is.

[Greatclub]

That would be assuming a company understood the demand for the product.  But Catalyst was completely cought off guard by the response to the kickstarter.  So there is at less some evidents that Catalyst may not be sure what the real demand for BattleTech is.

online. Drivethru and the catalyst store. They probably have a decent idea what the market is for e-book, and can see how fast physical product sells out.

Minis their datapoint was the alpha strike packs, and for various reasons (Not being particularly good deals for really old sculpts) those didn't sell well. We're also not sure how well the new lance packs will sell retail, or if they'll pass through distributors to even reach retail. My local distro seems to be ignoring the existence of mappack: Green despite at least five people I know wanting one. 

[Paul]

It's not just a 100 of you, I'm sure (being one.. so that makes at LEAST 200).

And I seek to keep cracking my buggy whips, hoping you and other come.
(Once we're good to be in public events)

And you keep saying CampOps didn't sell well, but it seems to have sold out everywhere I looked (my wife finally tracked down a hard copy somehow). 

If I make 10 books, how impressive is it if I say I sold 100% of the first print?

Here's the cold hard logic: either it sold poorly, and there's no reason to reprint, or it sold really well, and CGL isn't reprinting because they hate money?

If those $100 keep that $2 problem from ever happening again, it's totally worth it.

 ;D

Well, the good news is that an exact repeat of the circumstances in 2003-2005ish do seem rare. Can't recall when access to novels was re-acquired, but it's not long ago.

[Greatclub]

, and CGL isn't reprinting because they hate money?

CGL will definitely leave money on the table if it's too much effort. As you've pointed out, they have to in order to chase the next thing.

But the way the company has acted the last decade or so - tables designed for digital, lack of indexes and even TOC - has to have alienated the book portion of their potential market.

[Paul]

tables designed for digital, lack of indexes and even TOC - has to have alienated the book portion of their potential market.

Dude, that registers about as much as a whale fart in a submarine battle.

[Greatclub]

Dude, that registers about as much as a whale fart in a submarine battle.

Yeah, I get it, digital drives profit, and that's what the books are designed for.

But my understanding, limited as it is, is that FLGS help drive the growth for gaming companies.

I was gaming shadowrun at the time, and the lack of TOC and index in the splatbooks forced a level of system mastery that most people just weren't willing to put in. We migrated to another system rather than go digital.

[Sartris]

That would be assuming a company understood the demand for the product.  But Catalyst was completely cought off guard by the response to the kickstarter.  So there is at less some evidents that Catalyst may not be sure what the real demand for BattleTech is.

I’d say roughly zero people expected the Kickstarter to perform like it did. The favorable lawsuit ruling allowing the nuseen macross in was a game changer.

I’d say they have a decent handle on demand - it’s not like elements of current management are exactly new at this. Survival in this industry over the last twenty years counts for something.

[General308]

Yeah, I get it, digital drives profit, and that's what the books are designed for.

But my understanding, limited as it is, is that FLGS help drive the growth for gaming companies.

I was gaming shadowrun at the time, and the lack of TOC and index in the splatbooks forced a level of system mastery that most people just weren't willing to put in. We migrated to another system rather than go digital.

Ding ding ding...winner.  And it isn't that FLGS are against carrying BattleTech it is they get tired of nothing ever being kept in stock.  And if the FLG can't make money on a line there is no reason for them to support it.   If they don't support it the game doesn't grow

[monbvol]

And when the FLGS notice that Battletech stuff doesn't move?

Because that is a criticism I've heard far more than that a FLGS can't get Battletech stuff, that they won't carry it because it sits on shelves without selling for extended periods of time.

[Sartris]

It’s not just BattleTech. My flgs stocks dozens of systems. They’re mad dusty. They rely on magic, dnd, pathfinder, board games like catan, and comics

The one major area that was hugely painful in brick and mortar over the past decade was a reliable lack of starter materials, especially the box and maps. That’s the visibility the line needs locally. Because let’s face it most people aren’t progressing beyond the first level of products

[Greatclub]

1SW, 2SW, the liberation of terras, field manual 3085, some of the jihad books, they were beautiful, but they were also lorebooks of limited use to the tabletop. They were products for deep grognards. Somebody had to take them and make balanced scenarios out of them on their own. Early Age of Sigmar had the same issue, since corrected.

 
I was deeply happy when I realized there was scenario and campaign material in the back of Shattered Fortress. That is of use to entry level players.

[monbvol]

It’s not just BattleTech. My flgs stocks dozens of systems. They’re mad dusty. They rely on magic, dnd, pathfinder, board games like catan, and comics

The one major area that was hugely painful in brick and mortar over the past decade was a reliable lack of starter materials, especially the box and maps. That’s the visibility the line needs locally. Because let’s face it most people aren’t progressing beyond the first level of products

*nod*

Those are the two laws of consumer trends that most overlook.

1: It is just as important how quickly something sells as if it sells.

2: The vast majority of consumers will only go for the most basic option.

[RifleMech]

I mean, feel free to brainstorm, I know I have been. But don't expect to see any new core line at least until Tactical Operations volumes 1 and 2 have been on the shelf for more than six seconds. Which hasn't even happened yet.

The tentative plan is to explore re-releases/updates/reorganizations to Strat Ops, Interstellar Ops, and Campaign Ops, as well as A Time of War, to go along with the "nostalgia cover" versions of TW, TM, and TO v1&v2.

I'm glad that the other books are going to get updates and reorganizations but I would have thought they'd start at the beginning.

For all that my opinion's worth (zero), I know I'd be significantly more interested in books broken up by topic than by all-encompassing scope umbrella.  Tech Manual is fine pretty much as is, but all of the various Advanced Construction rules being in one place (i.e. mobile structures, buildings, warships, space stations, etc.) would be fantastic instead of having three separate <Adjective> Operations books to thumb through.

I would love it if the construction books were like that.

Downside to that, is the complaints of "All I want is WarShip and space station stuff, why is there blue watet oil tankers here?  And why are there parts here, and TacOps, and the other books?"  Every optimization in one axis results in less efficiency in others; it's like the game of how do you make a better shark.

The upside though is that all the construction rules would be in 2 books instead of four.

You guys can complain about the piddly little pagecount that goes to fiction, but removing it all fixes almost nothing. Its maybe 5% of tge problem.
BMM is the solution. The guy who said "Yeah, we've got a rule for that" in TacOps was the disease, and 55 """""core"""" rule books is the symptom.

It took how many years to print how many core books?  How many books would be needed just to cover Mechs? Then how many to cover the other unit types? How will increasing the number of books exponentially help? Would the series ever be finished? How many would stay in print?

I get print books are expensive which is why TacOps is getting split but how much more expensive will a series of rule books in BMM style be when there would be more books then we have now for the rules? Worse how much more expensive will it be when the production, or lack there of, of BMM Core books alienates players who want to use combined arms or just other units and the books aren't available?

Right now Amazon has the BMM for $245.03. Total Warfare is $39.99. Yet BMM is the future? And players are expected to buy an unknown number of these books or not use the units, equipment, and rules? Do I need to wear black?

Cost aside the biggest problem I've seem with the Core Rule Books isn't the fiction, it's the lay out. Having so much information scattered about is a pain. Going with a BMM series is going to be so much worse. And that's if it's even finished. If you want a mech only book why not just print the Introbook from the box set? If you want simpler combined arms with some advanced rules why not update one of the older rule books? And then revise the Core Books so that they're easier to use. Why create a new series of books that magnifies the problem?

[idea weenie]

I could see the BMM and similar books as the following pattern:
* BMM - rules for fighting Battlemechs.  DLC could include a few basic vehicles and infantry units for variety.  This would be the core book, with simplified rules for other units (i.e. just listing the cost and effect of an ASF strafing/divebombing run, rather than the full cost/construction).  I'd like to put the Mech variants in here (Mechs would be defined as a legged unit where the pilot is contained in a single location)

(future books)
* MechMakerM - making Battlemechs, including the construction rules, with a list of tactical items that can be put inside.
* VehM - rules for fighting and making Vehicles.  For the engine charts and weapons to put in the vehicles, it refers to the BMM.  Lots of sample vehicles are provided.  Anything that cannot be included on Mechs but can be included in Vehs would be put in here.
* TrooperM - Infantry units, including power armor (where the pilot's body is in multiple parts of the suit - i.e. head and torso of a Rottweiler).  It would include rules for the various ground unit weaponry in both BattleMch and RPG scales.  Lots of sample infantry units are provided
* AeroM - rules for fighting and making CF & ASF.  This includes air to ground, ground to air, air to air, and battles in space.  Construction would refer to the BMM for engine mas and weaponry/equipment.  Anything that cannot be included on Mechs but can be included on CF or ASF would be put in here (and could duplicate parts of the VehM tech listing)
* SupVehM - fighting and constructing Support Vehicles and Buildings.  This is where the 'strategic' items are included, such as MASH, Mobile HQ, Mobile HPG, etc.  Sub-Capital and Capital weaponry could be listed in here to allow construction of ground-based orbital defenses.
* SpaceM - fighting and constructing Dropships, Jumpships, Space Stations (of which satellites would be a sub-group), and Warships.  This is the key book that would have its own new set of rules, due to the lack of gravity and Newtonian movement.  It would use the BMM for small weapons, and a copy of the SupVehM charts/data for strategic items, Sub-capital weaponry, and Capital weaponry so you don't have to buy the SupVehM.
* Index - Every key word is added to this index, so people can search for "Engine Chart" and it will have sub-options for Mech, Support Vehicle, and Starship, each with the book that the word occurs in and the chapter/heading to look for.  If you see something interesting and you don't have that book, now you have a reason to research that book to decide if your interest is greater than the cost

Each of the books after the BMM would include the rules for that unit vs BattleMechs, and include how that unit is to be treated in its variation from a Mech.  This way players only have to learn the BMM, to understand the basics. 

For example, VTOLs being fired at by Aero would have the to-be-hit of a VTOL explained modified so the VTOL is treated as a Mech. From this, the Aero book can then use that modifier and roll as though it was attacking a Mech.

The goal should be that you buy the BMM as the core book, and all other books are 'attached' to it.  The most modern rule overrides the older rule

Imagine if all of the above was in a single book or PDF.  Fewer PDF are nice because you can search through fewer files, but some people might not want to buy all the components at once (or ever).  A beginner player might just want the basic Mech combat rules, while the price of the Megabook would discourage purchase

(The other reason for using multiple PDF is that if one book is updated, you only have to download that single book, rather than the entire PDF)

  Dude, that registers about as much as a whale fart in a submarine battle. 

Unless you hear what sounds like two whales - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEpEv6kWdtw    :D

[RifleMech]

BMM doesn't include industrials, or Tripods, Primitives. Retrotech, Superheavies, Extralights, LAMs, or Quadvees. What about Lowtech BattleMechs? FrankenMechs? How many books will it take to cover them? Which book will the maintenance and customization rules be in?
Will the combat vehicle book also include superheavy vehicles?
Will fixed wing airships and airships be included in the support vehicle book or  would they be moved to the aerospace book? What book will Satellites end up in?
Will the Infantry book cover all the infantry types? Foot, Motorized, Mechanized, Jump, Beast Mounted, VTOL, Engineers, etc?
You'd also need a book for Protomechs.

Right now there's TW, TM, TO, SO, IO, CO, AToW, AToWC, and AS. That's 9 Core Books. Going with a BMM series could easily have 2-3 times that or more. How is that a good thing?

[BoyOfSummer]

I think which is why reorganization is on the table. In strat ops you don%u2019t play space combat or battleforce, the refit and repair section and maybe the miniature rules at the end are the only items of relative interest to the normal player.

I knew I'm not normal! Now I've got prove!

I'm playing 'space combat' more than infantry or vees.

Although I must admit: we play to the ruleset of AS2, not SO. So maybe half normal?

[ActionButler]

BMM doesn't include industrials, or Tripods, Primitives. Retrotech, Superheavies, Extralights, LAMs, or Quadvees. What about Lowtech BattleMechs? FrankenMechs? How many books will it take to cover them? Which book will the maintenance and customization rules be in?
Will the combat vehicle book also include superheavy vehicles?
Will fixed wing airships and airships be included in the support vehicle book or  would they be moved to the aerospace book? What book will Satellites end up in?
Will the Infantry book cover all the infantry types? Foot, Motorized, Mechanized, Jump, Beast Mounted, VTOL, Engineers, etc?
You'd also need a book for Protomechs.

Right now there's TW, TM, TO, SO, IO, CO, AToW, AToWC, and AS. That's 9 Core Books. Going with a BMM series could easily have 2-3 times that or more. How is that a good thing?

The issue isn’t how many books the game would need to cover all of those topics, but whether or not the games needs to cover all of those topics at all.

Combat vehicles, infantry, and battle armor, sure, that’s a no-brainer.  Aerotech and Battlespace.... yeah... for old time’s sake, why not. 

But how many people care about Frankenmech rules, or superheavies, or retrotech? How many people in the game’s history have ever used rules for satellites or quad eyes or even naval units?

I don’t know the particulars of CGL, and I don’t particularly care to know them, but I know they are a small company and expecting them to constantly support 30+ years of oddball rules, edge cases, and highly niche interests just isn’t feasible. Especially if those products don’t sell very well because a very small minority of players are interested in them. Hell, by all estimates, the Combat Manuals did sell well and CGL still can’t keep supporting them due to production costs.   

[nckestrel]

That is definitely one of the difficulties.  Many things sell well enough for a single print run or digital only.  To keep something in print for years/decades is another matter.
TechManual struggled to get a reprint.

[Sartris]

If Paul’s comments upthread hold any weight, that’s the right of it. I think TPTB would agree a million books aren’t good. But they aren’t operating under the premise that everything has to be accommodated and stay on the ride. So if you ask “how long will it take to make all the books this time?” the answer might be shorter than you think. I feel like the inclusion of Elementals in the KS was largely due to the overwhelming funding. They were a special bonus reward.

Other unit types getting a rules makeover a la BMM might require extraordinary circumstances. The core book reprints so far have been errata updates. Heck, even the new cover art was cheap. Now going forward, the other books probably won’t appear as-is. They’re too big, expensive, and niche.

Something I’ve noticed over on the MUL... The mechs in the complication TROs are now listed under those sources. That’s their home now. You search for TRO 3039 units and the hunchback isn’t there.

For better or worse, it appears tptb are ready to bet on the notion that our tastes in the  community don’t drive the money bus.

[nckestrel]

The MUL is almost entirely left up to the MUL... team?  Or in that specific case, I did it.  I didn’t confer with anybody or have anybody tell me that’s what I should do.
There is a technical limitation to the MUL website of only one TRO and one RS can be listed per unit.  We did decide long ago on general trends of listing the most recent/in print source, with common sense about what is the source.  (If it has a full TR write up in a previous TR and no mention or only a sentence in current, we went with full write up TR).
So I applied the same with TR Succession Wars. But nobody higher up told me to do so or made some master marketing plan that stated I should. At most it was SOP (standard operating procedure).  At the least, rogue MUL operator :).

[Sartris]

i had considered that - but it makes little sense to flip flop the master source back and forth. clusters of relatively independent decisions still form paradigms

[ActionButler]

I feel like the inclusion of Elementals in the KS was largely due to the overwhelming funding. They were a special bonus reward.

There is a significant difference between Elementals and, for example, drone-operated superheavy mobile fortresses. 

Just about any Battle Armor, is a reasonable inclusion to any fighting force, even if the focus of the game is battlemechs.  Elementals, in particular, were a central component of the Clan invasion force, though, as they were the only Clantech non-mech ground unit that existed for a long time. 

All of those hyper-specialized units that you could go your entire battletech career having never seen, used, or even heard about, though? That just isn't the same scope as an Elemental or a Savannah Master or a Yellowjacket.  Would they be nice to have rules for?  Sure, but not if it means that 1% of the community is holding up rules for 99% of the community.

[Sartris]

i don't disagree. but i also think that non-mech units are all under the same roof in this scenario, no matter how big their room in that space.  the nostalgic and iconic nature of elementals (and their relatively small molds) put them at the front of the line for bonus inclusion - note IS standard suits (and the GD suits), which have existed in the rules almost as long were not. Nor were vehicles. 

what i'm saying is everything appears to be up for review and no matter how natural we around here think unit X or Y is in the fabric of the game, nothing is guaranteed going forward. that means that drones and tripods and LAMs and all the rest are probably relegated to IO or buried in TO for the rest of time but that doesn't put the biggest fish in a small pond on the same order as the whale.

[NeonKnight]

There is a significant difference between Elementals and, for example, drone-operated superheavy mobile fortresses. 

Just about any Battle Armor, is a reasonable inclusion to any fighting force, even if the focus of the game is battlemechs.  Elementals, in particular, were a central component of the Clan invasion force, though, as they were the only Clantech non-mech ground unit that existed for a long time. 

All of those hyper-specialized units that you could go your entire battletech career having never seen, used, or even heard about, though? That just isn't the same scope as an Elemental or a Savannah Master or a Yellowjacket.  Would they be nice to have rules for?  Sure, but not if it means that 1% of the community is holding up rules for 99% of the community.

makes me think, Yeah, I use BA and infantry, and I also use vehicles.

Would I think a BMM style book, let's call it BTGF (BattleTech Ground Forces), would be a welcome addition. We don;t need a Book just for vehicles, and another Book just for Infantry. Just put them both in One book. And if TPTB feel a need, then all Aero can go in another.

This is akin to how I play my games now. We play (in my Home group) combined forces. But we use the BMM for almost every rule for 'Mechs, and then pull out TW when we need to look for rules pertaining to Vehicles. The layout in the BMM is cleaner, and easier to find stuff compared to TW, but still need to dive into TW for the infantry/vehicle stuff.

I don;t see this as any different from D&D (and I played Basic/1st/2nd/3rd & 4th edition), where all rules sets had a 'Main rulebook' (PHB) that covered most of the stuff, but a second or 3rd for other stuff (DMG or MM).

[Cannonshop]

There is a significant difference between Elementals and, for example, drone-operated superheavy mobile fortresses. 

Just about any Battle Armor, is a reasonable inclusion to any fighting force, even if the focus of the game is battlemechs.  Elementals, in particular, were a central component of the Clan invasion force, though, as they were the only Clantech non-mech ground unit that existed for a long time. 

All of those hyper-specialized units that you could go your entire battletech career having never seen, used, or even heard about, though? That just isn't the same scope as an Elemental or a Savannah Master or a Yellowjacket.  Would they be nice to have rules for?  Sure, but not if it means that 1% of the community is holding up rules for 99% of the community.

If you're using Yellowjackets it's as easy practice targets, (and maybe a means to convince new players not to use vehicles.)

but talking "extreme Niche"...from "Total Warfare" the first core rulebook;

Airships.  You know, lighter-than-air baloons with engines.  zepplins.

in the core rules.

as in the least likely thing for anyone to use, ever, that doesn't figure even peripherally in most of the fluff material.

made it into the first book of the core rules, while a few things that everyone had, at least tried out since battletroops was relegated to the optional book.  (thus, why you need TacOps to do indirect fire of any sort-the IDF rules weren't included in the first, most basic book, but zepplins were.)

[NeonKnight]

If you're using Yellowjackets it's as easy practice targets, (and maybe a means to convince new players not to use vehicles.)

but talking "extreme Niche"...from "Total Warfare" the first core rulebook;

Airships.  You know, lighter-than-air baloons with engines.  zepplins.

in the core rules.

as in the least likely thing for anyone to use, ever, that doesn't figure even peripherally in most of the fluff material.

made it into the first book of the core rules, while a few things that everyone had, at least tried out since battletroops was relegated to the optional book.  (thus, why you need TacOps to do indirect fire of any sort-the IDF rules weren't included in the first, most basic book, but zepplins were.)

Umm...unless I'm missing something really obvious, Indirect Fire in on Page 111 of Total Warfare, and has been there since the 1rst printing I'm sure. Also, Zepplins/Airships have at most a passing reference in the rules, beyond a half page discussion of their special movement.

[Cannonshop]

Speaking of a hypothetical Core Rules revamp, one thing: KISS.

Keep it surprisingly simple.

When Artillery was returned to us via TacOps, the rules were made as intentionally complicated as you could ever dream, with holes that showed up after being discounted (like the ability for a shot fired ahead of you to land behind you at normal ranges.  :yikes:

not danger close, normal ranges.  this was because the drift rules were made a complicated mess of dice rolls.

notably, this was somewhat addressed more than a year after publication in the errata.

(a problem indirect fire with artillery already had complaints about from many quarters in the BMR era when it really WAS in the core book. the 'fix' was to make it so complicated and random NOBODY would choose to use it, then stuff it in the same text with Blueshield and tandem warhead srms)

A core rulebook should be able to 'roughly' handle the most basic cases.  Airship duels aren't basic cases, but very few battles have been fought since the age of gunpowder began, without field artillery or some form of indirect fire.

There's a focus issue here.  using the old "levels" (basic 3025 tech being Level 1) I should, with the core rulebook, be able to stage most of the fighting done in the 3rd and 4th succession war without needing another core rulebook. 

IOW everything from clashes of infantry platoons to full-scale combined arms battles.

including artillery and basic minefields.

You can't do that using only Total Warfare.  You could do that using BMR(R), and if you wanted aero, THEN you bought another book-but the incorporation of basic aerospace into the core book shouldn't be terribly difficult.  (AT2's main bulk driver were edge cases like warship skirmishes and vector movement options along with reprinting the basic turn-order of the basic game.)

above the basic level, you have:

Large Wet Naval, Warship, and deep space battles.  This is stuff that doesn't show up in the fiction much, except to show Davion Captains Boldly using their hyperexpensive warships as hyperexpensive clubs instead of using gunnery or tactics, to win the battles.

There are ridiculously few situations where ramming attacks are heroic, even fewer where they are also successful.  thus, why "steam Rams" went out of favor after the 1860s.

(Salamis, the last time ramming wasn't just viable, but decisive, happened a VERY long time ago, and was EXTREMELY terrain dependent-space is 3D movement, there is no convenient blocking terrain to hold a line of ships in place while you drive your galleys into their sides.)

this in mind, supremely stupid tactical doctrines belong in the advanced rules, with advanced edge-case rules to make them logical and viable instead of stupid and wasteful.

[NeonKnight]

Then you are Talking Artillery, not Indirect fire.