BT movement vs HBS BT movement and you

[StoneRhino]

The other day I was playing HBS BT and stopped and thought about how I should move my scout to avoid being killed. Although a Grasshopper is a rather heavy scout, when taking fire from several heavies and a few assaults, it feels as though it has paper thin armor. I needed to get it out of their range while keeping it in range for a sensor lock instead of punching out to keep the pilot safe.

While I was considering this particular move I realized that it was completely different then the quick clicks that I have been making since I learned the rules of the game. This pause resembled the 1 or 2 moves in a TT game that I allow myself to stop and take my time to think out. I push myself to think ahead, to remain flexible, but to also commit to less then perfect moves. Pausing and reviewing a move for more time then usual represents, to me, an effort to find a "perfect move" for that situation.

What I am wondering is if there is a difference between how you play either game. If so, what is different and why do you believe that is? Has anyone noticed an improvement in TT play since playing HBS BT?

[guardiandashi]

The big difference for me has less to do with picking the best or perfect move, but more of having to deal with the situation
When i play battletech i am typically playing with others, so in order to not be a jerk, and keep things flowing i don't take a lot of time during my turn planning moves.
Playing the computer game (since i have yet to play multi player ) its just me vs the computer, and frankly it doesn't matter how much time i take to do my turn.

[Drewbacca]

I have not played the HBS game but just over 28 years I have changed how I move several times.

[Crackerb0x]

Oh yeah, for one simple reason: initiative. If I've lost the initiative on the table, that turn becomes far more defensive and when I win, far more offensive.

The HBS initiative is nice for making things predictable, but it upsets the metagame by removing phases for each side because that makes a more streamlined PC game. Most of all it affects WHEN I do things because it's not simultaneous actions anymore. Just because my Atlas was killed before it went on round 1 doesn't mean it gets to complete it's actions.

[Colt Ward]

I think it encourages combat loss grouping . . . I know I chain called shots- using the morale to kill something which will dump morale back into the pool.  I also will try to kill something before it can unload when it comes to CQB- or to knock down so something else gets a free aimed shot.

Now . . . I went to play a TT game a few weeks ago, and was dismissing my Wolverine's ability to fire since he had not shots when I finished movement.  Other player had to remind me I was not playing HBS.

[Phobos101]

I find the two rulesets to be so far divorced that I don't even make the connection between the two. As Crackerb0x said, initiative is a huge change, and I think changing it removed a lot of the flavour of Battletech. I also find facing plays much less of a part in HBS, Mechs are far less often outmaneuvered, or unable to get shots on an opponent. A small part of me is holding out hope that a mod will rectify this in future, I would love to play the PC game with boardgame rules.

[Daryk]

Phobos and Crackerbox have the right of it... the games are very different.  Colt's knock down strategy is the key to the HBS game.  On anything lighter than an assault, knocking them down enables you to core their CT before they stand back up.  On assaults, multiple knock downs jelly the pilot and leave you some sweet salvage.

[RoundTop]

Phobos and Crackerbox have the right of it... the games are very different.  Colt's knock down strategy is the key to the HBS game.  On anything lighter than an assault, knocking them down enables you to core their CT before they stand back up.  On assaults, multiple knock downs jelly the pilot and leave you some sweet salvage.

Though the new 1.1 update looks like it is doubling the amount of stability damage needed to knock down heavier mechs. So this won't be as an effective tactic.

[Colt Ward]

Phobos and Crackerbox have the right of it... the games are very different.  Colt's knock down strategy is the key to the HBS game.  On anything lighter than an assault, knocking them down enables you to core their CT before they stand back up.  On assaults, multiple knock downs jelly the pilot and leave you some sweet salvage.

For more on what I meant, I will use last night as a example . . . a light lance was defending a Canopian outpost on a lunar map- 2 Firestarters, Spider and Locust.  My morale was high as I traded some ranged shots and the lights moved.  I took my Orion (which b/c pilots moves with the meds), used called shot and went for the Locust CT- it had already eaten some LRMs and half 75% armor.  BAM, AC to the CT which dropped the Locust before the LRMs even hit . . . now I got a increase in my morale pool b/c I killed something, so I switched to my Kintaro and walked up towards one of the Firestarters which was side on to me.  Oh well, I need to degrade it to keep it from cooking my mechs so I call that shot on the RT and only use SRM6++, SRM6++ and SRM+ to keep the heat down since I expect it try to cook me if it survives.  Blew off the RT with the SRM hits but did not get the CT kill even if it was weaving and internal.  That put my morale below 50, so no more called shots the rest of the turn- besides I had to kill some turrets too.

Facing does matter, try to run away and if you go maximum movement you cannot twist around to present front or side armor.  But it IS different, since each facing is divided into 90 degrees, its actually easier to get behind a mech- or present your back armor purposefully.  And when something is behind you the number of hit locations drops drastically . . . to 3, you cannot aim at the legs or arms.

[Phobos101]

What I was trying to say is  not that facing doesn’t matter, rather it has less of an impact on your movement decisions than it does on TT, as you can virtually swing 360 degrees for no penalty at all but the furthest extent of your movement range.
Definitely agree that the ability to farm morale selectively can make a big difference to your game. Although sometimes the AI seems to get a suspiciously high number of called shots against me...

[Scotty]

Having the speed to turn a particular facing of your 'Mech to shield its damaged side or demand your opponent expend significant movement (often across hazards) in order to exploit open armor is a good tactic that's not really possible to nearly the same extent in the tabletop.  It's not about how easy it is to get in arc, it's how you can spread your incoming damage while still having targets you want to concentrate fire on.

[StoneRhino]

 ???
I think you guys are bogged down in the rules of the games more then anything. Both games have rules, that while one is TT and the other is PC, there is some core values that connect the two.

Hit locations
Armor and internal structure
Hitting from a particular angle leads to an increased chance of hitting x location
Weapons have ranges, some have min ranges
Units have known maximum movement values and modes
Initiative has rules

If you can mentally adjust for the differences between the games, mentally, do you feel that your time spent making decisions is faster in the TT game or PC game? The values of heat, armor, and damage are different, but the concepts are very similar. The whole knockdown to make called shots on the CT is different, but you are really looking to exploit the rules for gains, without cheating. That is similar to stacking a load of damage onto a unit while using the expanded rule that increases the TN to remain standing after taking 20 damage in a turn. The concept is similar, except in TT you are pushing for falling damage, while in HBS you're looking for a CT shot.

To refine the question a bit more would be, "when playing HBS do you find yourself spending more or less time calculating the impact of the variables before committing to the movements of your selected units then when you are playing Battletech/ Total Warfare?"

Also, do you believe that playing HBS BT has had, or could have, a positive effect upon the pace of your decision making in CGL BT? Adjusting for differences between the games.

[Nightlord01]

I spend much less time, to be honest. The pie plate of movement options makes it much faster, not needing to count out my MP to work out where I can get to etc really speeds it up.

Also, in PC I find that I worry less about THM, not sure why, mostly because I now massively over ton the missions, and unless I want to salvage it most mechs don't survive more than one or two rounds of firing.