Should I get the Interstellar Ops BattleForce over BF-2?

[Weirdguy]

I own the BF-2 boxed set.

I also own the PDF of Strategic Ops that has BattleForce-3 rules in it.

Do I really need to buy Interstellar Ops?  Is the version of BattleForce in that book that much different or better to justify buying it?

[Zematus737]

If you have the SO book prior to the split where BF was removed from it, I'd say you're not going to see that great of a difference in the rules as they are presented by themselves in IO:BF.  The book was just very huge when SO:AA and IO:BF were once a single volume, along with large portions of Campaign Operations. 

You are actually getting more information with the older SO version as some of the TW to Alpha Strike conversions are gone from the new IO:BF and you are just directed to the MUL and forced to find the AS:Companion for the latest conversions (including the horrid SI conversion issue for Aero).  The 2009 SO version does have the older unit graphic.  The short story, Warfare Symbology, was updated in the new 2022 IO:BF to reflect those found in the BF counters pack, alongside the objectives graphic.  A lot of the poor image quality and missing text issues in the previous IO:BF have since been resolved, so complaints are gone and quality is high.  There are some errata you should use to bring your SO version up to speed.  Check out the updated unit pieces, as they don't give away free intelligence like the BF2 pieces do and have the Radar Blip sides that are all the same in the BF Counters Pack.

In short.  IO:BF is worth it over BF2, but there are some things in BF2 that I would preserve for the sake of playability, but not needful if you have the SO book that has the complete BF rules included.

[Weirdguy]

So I bought Interstellar Ops.

I have to say I’m disappointed.  It is the same BattleForce that was in Strategic Ops, although that was not a surprise. 

The larger scale games are I there too.  However, BattleForce-2 had a larger scale game in it called Planetary Assault, with a standard playing piece being a company sized unit. 

All of that is fine.  IO or BF-2/BF-3 is a bit of a wash.  Neither seems better.

But, there is one thing that BF-2/Planetary Ops has to recommend it over IO.  BF-2 has the stats for all the units already included.  That detail alone is enough to make me prefer it.

There is a second detail, but it is more subjective.  I think the BF-2 rules are better written.  At the very least it is written with a smaller word count.  They seem to be more clearly written than BF-3, but that is just my opinion. 

The BattleForce-2 rules PDF is still sold by Catalyst bundled together with BattleForce-1 rules.

https://store.catalystgamelabs.com/products/battletech-battleforce-bundle-pdf

I have to say, I think I like BF-2 better. 

[Zematus737]

 I'm pretty sure that I said it was the same content with minor differences in your older copy of SO... but either way you get updated versions of the PDF purchased content for free if you registered and that's worth it alone.

You definitely are saving when you get the BF1&2 bundle, but BF2 uses Companies on the PAM's, whereas BF3 is using Regiments for movement over the Planetary Assault Maps.  BF3 gives you the ability to drop further down into SBF scale from there! but that's a whole other discussion.  Without repeating any information I've already covered on some of the differences, BF3 rules are far superior in handling Aerospace and the scales transition well within each other.  The quick access the the MUL in BF2 is a huge thing and cannot be overstated.  You won't be getting much info on Warships, but you can always use the same conversion that are given with dropships in adding all the facings, making the division calculation and splitting that evenly across armor and structure.  It's simple and its the simplicity of the rules that are so appealing.  Things get bogged down with Core as things soak up a lot more damage than in Battleforce,  where the armor is less than 4% against weapon conversions at 10%.  You're going to have a lot of overkill with larger unit fire.  Capital scale is just murder if you don't apply some kind of limiter or cluster hits to arcs. 

One of the biggest advantages is multi-target options in BF3, to say nothing of Combat Vehicle and Support Vehicle roles in combined arms play.  You're just getting a whole lot more trickle down from Core with access to a greater variety of units and structures in the latest rules. 

Give them both a shot and adopt what you prefer.  That's how I deal with it and really what the rule books recommend so often it gets worn out.  The only strict rulings are those that have to do with tournaments and that only applies to Core Total Warfare stuff.

Check out Inner Sphere at War too since you already got the IO:BF book.  And print them out man!  It's way easier to digest.  Print the BF rules and Advanced rules together.  SBF by itself, ACS by itself and ISaW by itself.  Makes for a smaller stack you have to lug around.  The index might have to be printed out several times so each packet has access to it.

[Weirdguy]

Zem, I do believe you are one of the few people who regularly posts in both the Alpha Strike and now the BattleForce forums.

It is because of how similar that BF-2 and BF-3 are to each other, and the fact I already had BF-3 rules in my Strat Ops PDF that I held off getting Interstellar Ops until now.

Really, I bought Interstellar Ops to see if I was truly missing out or not.  I kind of knew that the BF-3 game was going to be the same.

But, it really is the lack of an included unit list that tanks the newer games for me. 

I also firmly believe in retro gaming.  Hell, I recently bought two copies of the original "all-in-one" rulebook for normal BattleTech called The BattleTech Manual (product code 1626).  It was the first time that BattleTech, CityTech, and AeroTech were compiled together.

Why did I buy that?  I don't really like the bloat of the new games, with quad proto-mechs armed with gatling plasma guns that fire out variable ammunition types (its a joke, no need to correct me).  Other than how partial cover works, the rules really are pretty similar to how you play today.

I think the same of the new BattleForce games.  I do see how bizarre that BF-1 is, but BF-2 to BF-3, and now Alpha Strike all seem to be the same game, more or less.  And I am the guy who thinks about the "less" side of that equation.  I would rather have rules that are easy to play instead of the current edition.

BF-2 seems like the best option for me because of how I like to game.

And really, I have to say it again, the fact that BF-2 includes the stats for the war machines in the rulebook is a big plus.  That one is a big standout for me.  I don't like looking things up in a website, or owning a box of playing cards to search thru to get the stats for the one thing I'm looking for.

I don't think that new games do it better than old ones.  Thankfully BattleTech has barely changed since its inception. 

[Zematus737]

I agree with so much of what you're saying.  The Master Units List in BF2 makes it much more accessible than having to fish out the same information on the website MUL. 

In time you'll notice some information you'll need to supplement on, such as the turret critical for vehicles and not knowing which vehicles HAVE turret weapons.  The turret plays no part in the unit in BF2 when firing arcs are all the same for vehicles across the board.  They make a huge difference in BF3 when a fast CV can fire 360 degrees.  But you completely lose that advantage for vehicles in BF2.  The current unit information makes that clearer and lets you incorporate turret affects and crits.  Artillery, in time, may feel lack luster also and you'll yearn for a more hands on approach to artillery and there are fine rules on that in the Battleforce3 book.  Things like that, holes that appear that will justify the purchase of BF3 that you can apply to BF2 retroactively.

Keep in mind you have a lot of the new Campaign Operations present in that older copy of S.O.

[Daryk]

There have been some changes to the customization rules in the newer CampOps, so I think that one (at least) is worth investing in, even for only the pdf version. :)

[Alexander Knight]

Bear in mind that the BF2 book is actually outdated when it comes to the unit stats in the back.  It only has the units that existed at the time of publishing.