Is it time to consider a reformatting/rewriting of the Core Rulebooks?

[Cubby]

Yes. Already in development.

Expanding on this.

I've mentioned this upcoming core rulebook realignment in multiple interviews and formats over the past year or so because it's become my new pet rock project--but I certainly don't blame the OP for not catching any of that, with so much BT info around these days. Most recently I discussed it in the interview Ray and I did with Sarna (where good lord, I apparently could not stop running my mouth, sorry again, Sean!).

Here's the relevant portion:

Whoever’s next will have their dream products that they get to make. But for me, the thing coming up is the new Total Warfare—and we’re not gonna call it that, but I’ve shorthanded it that way. The realignment of the core books is something that Keith Hann is gonna lead. We [begin] them on the MechCommander’s Handbook, but to realign those core books and do for Classic BattleTech what Alpha Strike has with Commander’s Edition…Doesn’t mean we’re going to do one book, but that there’s going to be people who look at the BattleMech Manual as this great tabletop reference, the book you bring to games.

We can bring order to chaos. We can create a core line that makes sense; that’s fewer books, that still has the same content for the most part, but makes sense. A single book that Total Warfare once was when there was no BattleMech Manual, when there were not as many other core books. That project excites me because, you know, I still love Classic. I’m so happy to see Alpha Strike take off too. It’s been around for a quarter of BattleTech‘s existence, I like to remind people. Oh, the new Alpha Strike thing? It’s been around ten years—that’s a quarter of BattleTech‘s history, right? It just wasn’t doing anything for a long time because it took miniatures to unlock the full power of Alpha Strike and let it be what it is now.

But Classic is not dead, it’s not going away. I ride for it, and I think there is a way to make the core rulebook line more accessible, more engaging, to bring the layout stuff that we’ve learned from BattleMech Manual and other rulebooks into Total Warfare (because it was laid out almost 20 years ago).

To do that for the Classic players out there would really be great. I’ll be playing BattleTech probably the rest of my life. That’s a book I could see using for a very long time. So to get the chance to help make it is a dream.

The current "core" rulebook line's issues are ones of organization and marketing. We cannot have nine "core" rulebooks. Go count your spine art, that's what we're up to now from splitting TO and IO. (And if you think that those splits don't really count, remember that they're separate SKUs and separate things for store owners and distributors to try to make heads or tails of and have to stock.)

But no, it's not a new "edition" of BattleTech. There will be rules tweaks, as some others upthread have described. And I get that for some long-enfranchised folks, some of those tweaks are tantamount to editioning. I respect that, but objectively--they're tweaks. I also get that there are folks who would go far the other way, and want to nuke Classic BT and build CBT 2.0 from the ground up. I respect that too, but there have been pitches like that to management over the years, none have landed, and if they weren't going to rebuild during the lean times of 2014-2018, they're not going to do it now.

On organization, we can talk for a million years about where each of us would draw the lines and move the deckchairs--and sorry, we're not soliciting those opinions at this time from the public. I will say, those lines are finer than you might think. For instance, Keith is working on MechCommander's Handbook right now, what will become a new-core book eventually. And the famous p. 70 of Campaign Ops, the CBT-version of the SPAs, will be sliced out of CO and moved to MCH. But a lot of CO probably will not continue on into the new-core. We simply don't feel any obligation to keep all of this very large stack of rules in print for all eternity. That may lead to what I've called an Archive status of certain rules--they're not being deleted or crossed-out, but they're not being actively rewritten either. They're just not in print, though they'll always be available in PDF form (ideally at a very friendly price, too). Before anyone gets too worried about that concept, understand that we'd be talking about extreme corner-cases or things that don't have an obvious home in the new-core. I'm not trying to dump all of the full vehicle rules into Archive status, they do have a place.

I think we also need to be much more careful about what we're defining as "core." In the same way that fiction is trying to move away from a spine / not-spine binary, I'd like to see us have very few true new-core books, but lots of game product that modify or add onto that core experience. The "core" books now kind of do this--TechManual is only so useful if you don't plan to ever design your own 'Mech--but because they're all labeled and marketed as "core," it warps what a casual customer or store owner might believe is truly essential to the most common BattleTech experiences. For an older example, answer me this: do BattleForce / BattleForce 2 count as "core" products of their time? My opinion--I think it's a common one--is that, no, they're not core products, but they do have value and offer something. The problem is, their successor was baked into a "core" book and I think really didn't need to be.

As far as marketing, it just goes back to what we're calling a core book. BMM has proven so popular--and we certainly have the sales numbers to prove it--because its goal was to be the book that 90+ percent of people need for 90+ percent of games. It was a success exactly because it didn't try to be all things to all people. It had a purpose in mind, and thus had some guardrails as to what it was and was not going to be. That's what we need.

Because truthfully, when I say "new-core," that might even be overstating it. I've seen other posters on this thread float their breakdowns, up to a "book four," "book five."

You know how many books I'd like to see in the new core lineup?

One.

Just one.

With a set of supplements, clear in their purpose, easy to understand and market, and useful to build onto that book to take your game in the direction(s) you want it to go.

[ColBosch]

Thanks, Cubby. I appreciate the transparency.

[Daemion]

One Core Book to rule them all...

[Charistoph]

I'll have to disagree. Either you keep all rules together in one book, or keep the rules together in BOTH books. Splitting them up becomes a headache.

Even with your idea, you still have to have SOME of the Aerospace rules or rules for flying into-off of the battlefield...

Not really.  That's the idea behind Total Warfare.  How well has that turned out?

There are rules for reinforcements now.  That handles for Flying on to the field.  Flying off the field means they have exited the game like any other unit unless the game already is including an Altitude interface.  Real simple.

... and construction rules for LAMs (including internal structure in ASF mode and all that.)

95% of construction rules for LAMs are for Battlemechs.  What is different are the limits on mass and materials, and the requirements for Jump Jets and Conversion equipment.  That's it.

The only exception then I'd say is having a 5th book for "Non-Standard" vehicles or something like that, for units that actually don't fit into just ONE category.

If I'm going to have a 5th book, it would purely be for the updated Tech Manual that has everything missing from Alternate Eras and Advanced Aerospace.

[Hellraiser]

Hmm, 

I'm trying to figure out a way to split up the books based on "how deep you want to go" for a game.

For Example:
When the game came out, you had Battletech, Citytech, Aerotech, Battle Force, & Succession Wars

The new BMM, which I still don't own, was a really great idea from what I know.

It basically qualifies as "Battletech/Advanced".
In that it gives you all the rules for mechs & terrain & some new future weapons.   At least that is what I think it has.

I'm thinking, Total Warfare is a great book, but, if you took TW, TM, TO, & SO,  you could probably come up with 3 replacement books that are both More & Less inclusive but create definitive breaks in how you play the game.

For instance, the idea of putting Tanks, Infantry, Buildings, & Asphalt (Citytech Stuff) along with a lot of the Tac Ops stuff for "Advanced Movement/Weather" into a single book along with construction rules for Vees, Infantry, BA, Protos, Support Vees, & Buildings/Forts, etc etc. seems like a good way to have companion to the BMM that you could call something like "Advanced Ground Warfare". 

Meanwhile, I'm a huge fan of putting ANYTHING & EVERYTHING that has to do w/ Aerospace into a single book.
From the Boomerang Support Flyer to the Leviathan-III Battleship & everything in between.
I don't need Strafing Runs to be in w/ my ground combat frankly, I'm fine w/ that all being in with my Black Navy Deep Space stuff.

I feel like Battleforce, Succession Wars, & "Campaign Tracking" rules, like Maintenance Costs & other Logistics could in theory all be in 1 book even if they aren't completely similar.

[Cannonshop]

First off, why?  In most tournament cases, you can't even USE custom builds.

Second, do you know how big a book that would be? 

Total Warfare is 291 pages before the Index.  Even taking out the fluff (54 pages), we're still looking at 237 pages before the Index and Tables for Total Warfare alone.  Aerospace is another 19 pages for movement and 18 pages for combat, for 37 pages that could be potentially left out, so down to 200.  Leaving out painting would save us another 19, so we're down to 181 pages of rules, 3 pages of Index, and 10 pages of tables.

Tech Manual has 311 pages before its index.  Taking out fluff (50 pages) leave us with 261 pages.  If we leave out the support units like IndustrialMechs and Support Vehicles, we can save another 12 and 14 pages respectively.  We can probably leave out Aerospace, too, if we're leaving out their rules, so that's another 20 pages.  That's a final total of 215 pages for the rules of construction, cost and BV included, 4 pages of Index (which could mix a little with Total Warfare's, but not by much), 17 pages of Record Sheets, and 14 more pages of tables outside of the 215.

So, that's a grand "tournament total" of 427 pages, and that's not including the table of contents and other legal pages that precedes everything else.  That's bigger than the old Tactical Operations or Interstellar Operations books before they were split.

There's a reason that the BMR wasn't duplicated when they did Total Warfare.  Battletech has simply gotten too big, and construction rules aren't needed for a tournament atmosphere.

Teh reason is because of accessibility.  You don't need MOST of what's in those two books for your centerline, baseline, "this is the rules everyone from campaign to tourney needs to know".

Imagine you're in a gamestore environment, and you have to sell the game to players who've never even HEARD of Battletech.  Imagine you have limited shelf-space, meaning you can't stock the literally dozens of TRO's that have ever been in print, and imagine your target market has limited, but decently substantial, disposable income and time.

Now, which do you think, is going to sell better; A game you can't play without another book, or a core book that addresses most of the basic rules of the game that can lead to interested players buying the supplementals.

MOST of what was added to TW was unnecessary-they only needed the baseline  (This is how you build a 'mech, Tank, or Aerofighter, this is a list of the most common tech and parts, this is how you do initiative, this is how you do movement, this is how you resolve firing phases and physical attacks, this is how indirect fire works.)

Total Warfare stacked on a bunch of things players almost never use, or see, along with a lot of disorder and cross-referencing that makes for a situation where you have whole pages worth of text to explain something that should only take a paragraph.

Lots of Bloat in that page count.  your first volume should be written in simple, clear, unambiguous language and it should cover the basics of every function to set up a game using ONLY THAT BOOK, (Plus some hex maps, a notebook, and some dice and pencils).

Why? because your tournaments should cover only BASELINE rules (with specific event changes if you're selling the supplement this year).

aka the book EVERYBODY HAS.

A lot of the disorder in the TW series came from porting material with only a lick of editing from supplementals and unofficial sources, mixed with injecting things nobody has used, or will use (Airships? really?) outside of very narrowly specific events in specific campaign products.

The advanced (read: Rarely Used) rules can go into a follow-on book or supplement.  In the case of things like Big Wet-naval ships or Warships, that supplement would be the upscaling, because I'm sorry, but your tank scale units aren't even going to be directly fighting the USS Missouri on a water map.

[Charistoph]

Teh reason is because of accessibility.  You don't need MOST of what's in those two books for your centerline, baseline, "this is the rules everyone from campaign to tourney needs to know".

All that, and you didn't answer the questions I asked, you went off on a completely different topic.

Why do you need the Tech Manual included?  In most tournament cases, you cannot even USE custom builds.

Second, do you know how big a book combining the equivalent of Total Warfare and Tech Manual would be?  It wouldn't be as small as the Alpha Strike Commander's Edition or Battlemech Manual.

Nothing you said addressed constructing custom units.  It was all about the new player experience out of the box.  Unit construction tends to be complex, and I while I do point it out as an advantage of the game, I usually encourage people to use what is considered "canon" designs till they get a feel for the game and what they like to use because construction is a HUGE rabbit hole to fall in to.

[Cannonshop]

All that, and you didn't answer the questions I asked, you went off on a completely different topic.

Why do you need the Tech Manual included?  In most tournament cases, you cannot even USE custom builds.

Second, do you know how big a book combining the equivalent of Total Warfare and Tech Manual would be?  It wouldn't be as small as the Alpha Strike Commander's Edition or Battlemech Manual.

Nothing you said addressed constructing custom units.  It was all about the new player experience out of the box.  Unit construction tends to be complex, and I while I do point it out as an advantage of the game, I usually encourage people to use what is considered "canon" designs till they get a feel for the game and what they like to use because construction is a HUGE rabbit hole to fall in to.

You're focusing about 'Custom units', and missing the point.  Basic Generation Rules, Basic Combat Rules, basically the BASICS to play the whole game.

Does that make customizing possible? sure.  Tournament play is usually boiled down to the most baseline ruleset, even if you're confiining to no custom builds, the most basic ruleset includes basic generation, because not all your books are going to be bought for a tournament, but, if the tourney rules are the basic book rules, you'll sell more books, to a broader audience, and RETAIN IT BETTER.

The 'base book' is almost always the basis of evry game tournament in almost every tabletop game out there.  TW was bloated heavily with stuff NOBODY IS LIKELY TO SEE, nevermind USE...and it's the tournament book right now.  (when was the last time you took an Airship into a tourney?  like, on purpose?)

[Sartris]

there's a cap on what can be combined. the entire point of splitting TO and IO was to keep books to a reasonable size. so it's less of philosophical issue and more of clown car capacity issue.

[Charistoph]

You're focusing about 'Custom units', and missing the point.  Basic Generation Rules, Basic Combat Rules, basically the BASICS to play the whole game.

That's because that is all The Tech Manual is.  It is not needed to use the Record Sheets that come in AGAoC, Clan Invasion, the ones that can be downloaded for free from the Downloads page, the ones that can be purchased as part of whole packs, or those that can be printed from design programs like MML or SSW.

The one exception is what is now the last page or two of the Errata: Force BV calculation which talks about the relationship with TAG, C3, and Skill modifications.  That part should be included, for sure.  It's effectively free right now, anyway, though.

Does that make customizing possible? sure.  Tournament play is usually boiled down to the most baseline ruleset, even if you're confiining to no custom builds, the most basic ruleset includes basic generation, because not all your books are going to be bought for a tournament, but, if the tourney rules are the basic book rules, you'll sell more books, to a broader audience, and RETAIN IT BETTER.

The 'base book' is almost always the basis of evry game tournament in almost every tabletop game out there.  TW was bloated heavily with stuff NOBODY IS LIKELY TO SEE, nevermind USE...and it's the tournament book right now.  (when was the last time you took an Airship into a tourney?  like, on purpose?)

And you're proposing to put even more in to it that people will not use in a tournament because the intricacies of individual unit generation are not used in tournaments or basic play, either.  As I've already laid out, the ASF sections are outnumbered by the Tech Manual's construction rules by a factor of 5 or more.

The only thing I haven't used from TW is Void, Interface, and Altitude Map Movement and Combat, along with Fragmentation Missiles and Flechette Ammo.  Never saw the use for the latter, and the Simplified Radar Map is better for the former.  I've used Vehicles, Protomechs, Infantry, and Battle Armor besides the Mechs.

So if you want the basics of PLAY, the Tech Manual is NOT needed, aside from what has been already mentioned for Force Generation.

[RifleMech]

Intro rules are the easiest to get into but they shouldn't be tied to a specific time period. Tying the intro rules to 3025 make it feel like you have to start playing in 3025. Intro rules should be playable in as many eras as possible. That includes the current era.

You can play Battletech without knowing a thing about the universe. To play the universe though it helps to have rules.

To be blunt; how often are you actually going to USE Airships?
 
I favor to believe somewhat less often than a player's campaign or pick up game is going to incorporate minefields or field artillery.

I would use them more if they used vehicle rules but they use aerospace.  :( 

The point here, is that TW's first and most pressing need, is REORGANIZATION to make it less of a chore to look anything up (and less reliant on PDF search function to be useful or reliable).

So agree.

That's because that is all The Tech Manual is.  It is not needed to use the Record Sheets that come in AGAoC, Clan Invasion, the ones that can be downloaded for free from the Downloads page, the ones that can be purchased as part of whole packs, or those that can be printed from design programs like MML or SSW.

Not everyone gets into Battletech through a boxed set. Nor do they automatically look online or in programs for blank record sheets that should be in the main rule book. Blank record sheets should be in the main book. There should also be a blank mapsheet in the book. You can play Battletech without minis. You can't play without RS and MS. Having to look elsewhere for items required to play is as bad or worse than having to flip through multiple books just to find all the rules. Players shouldn't have to that.

[Greatclub]

Not everyone gets into Battletech through a boxed set. Nor do they automatically look online or in programs for blank record sheets that should be in the main rule book. Blank record sheets should be in the main book. There should also be a blank mapsheet in the book. You can play Battletech without minis. You can't play without RS and MS. Having to look elsewhere for items required to play is as bad or worse than having to flip through multiple books just to find all the rules. Players shouldn't have to that.

I'll second this. A map in the back, a simple modernized copy of the map that came with battletech. Blank record sheet near the back.

[Charistoph]

Not everyone gets into Battletech through a boxed set. Nor do they automatically look online or in programs for blank record sheets that should be in the main rule book. Blank record sheets should be in the main book. There should also be a blank mapsheet in the book. You can play Battletech without minis. You can't play without RS and MS. Having to look elsewhere for items required to play is as bad or worse than having to flip through multiple books just to find all the rules. Players shouldn't have to that.

Way to miss context.  Again.

The quote you were responding to was talking about a new person starting with what's on the wall.  This is not 1980 or 1990 where finding pre-prepared Record Sheets for free is any real difficulty.  Even if you're stuck with a phone (which a few in my group are), you can get PDFs off of several websites which can be transmitted to a local printer.

And "finding all the rules" for Battletech in one book is pretty much impossible without carrying a massive tomb that will crack your back.  As it is, they've had to split up books precisely because they were getting too big for the binding they had access to.  And that's beside the point when you don't NEED The Tech Manual to play the game.

[abou]

And "finding all the rules" for Battletech in one book is pretty much impossible without carrying a massive tomb that will crack your back.  As it is, they've had to split up books precisely because they were getting too big for the binding they had access to.  And that's beside the point when you don't NEED The Tech Manual to play the game.

Let me tell you, man, carrying around Total Warfare, Campaign Operations (for SPAs), BattleMech manual (for quirks), TacOps (for advanced combat options), and printed out sheets from StratOps is not fun for my campaign

Why the printed sheets from StratOps? Because the two volume version I have doesn't have the repair rules in it. Those were moved to CampOps after I bought the first version. That was about as infuriating as buying the two volume version of TacOps only to find they didn't update the index or much of the body text with updated page numbers. Talk about dropping the ball.

[LAMFAN]

Not really.  That's the idea behind Total Warfare.  How well has that turned out?

There are rules for reinforcements now.  That handles for Flying on to the field.  Flying off the field means they have exited the game like any other unit unless the game already is including an Altitude interface.  Real simple.

95% of construction rules for LAMs are for Battlemechs.  What is different are the limits on mass and materials, and the requirements for Jump Jets and Conversion equipment.  That's it.

If I'm going to have a 5th book, it would purely be for the updated Tech Manual that has everything missing from Alternate Eras and Advanced Aerospace.

You know what, I take back what I said. You do have a point there friend. If you want to fly with the LAM ASF, then those rules being in Aerospace actually is a good simplification. You'd still have AirMech and Battlemech modes in the BMM, and flying transformation is either entering or exiting the field.

Ok, I like it! 

The current "core" rulebook line's issues are ones of organization and marketing. We cannot have nine "core" rulebooks. Go count your spine art, that's what we're up to now from splitting TO and IO. (And if you think that those splits don't really count, remember that they're separate SKUs and separate things for store owners and distributors to try to make heads or tails of and have to stock.)

Fair fair. As long as its reorganization of things into a few or one "core" with smaller supplements, that's reasonable.

But no, it's not a new "edition" of BattleTech. There will be rules tweaks, as some others upthread have described. And I get that for some long-enfranchised folks, some of those tweaks are tantamount to editioning. I respect that, but objectively--they're tweaks.

I suppose that all depends on what's being tweaked and how far. For example, If it's something like tweaking the AC/2's optional Rapid Fire rules so you can clear jams, then something like that's small and sensible tweak. So far, they've done well. We'll wait and see what they come up with.

(PleasedearGodletitbetweakstoLAMrulestobelessjank)

I also get that there are folks who would go far the other way, and want to nuke Classic BT and build CBT 2.0 from the ground up. I respect that too, but there have been pitches like that to management over the years, none have landed, and if they weren't going to rebuild during the lean times of 2014-2018, they're not going to do it now.

Good, that sillyness should always be shot down without hesitation. Management is being sensible here.

Classic BT should remain as it is; its the reason people are flocking to it and have remained with it for so long. The minute a CBT 2.0 with ground up rules rebuilding is approved, it's the beginning of a long and winding death for the franchise, and the beginning of Codex Creep that will NEVER stop.

Yes I am paranoid about that, and yes I have good reason for it. >.> <.< 

[ColBosch]

The nice thing is that we do have BattleTech 2.0, it's called Alpha Strike, and it's being marketed as an optional fast-play rules set instead of a replacement.

[LAMFAN]

The nice thing is that we do have BattleTech 2.0, it's called Alpha Strike, and it's being marketed as an optional fast-play rules set instead of a replacement.

I was just in the middle of editing my post for this very reason, but you beat me to it!

Solid Agree.

[Charistoph]

Let me tell you, man, carrying around Total Warfare, Campaign Operations (for SPAs), BattleMech manual (for quirks), TacOps (for advanced combat options), and printed out sheets from StratOps is not fun for my campaign

And that's not even ALL the rules.  If you have Total Warfare, the Tech Manual, both Tactical Operations, both Interstellar Operations, both Strategic Operations, Alpha Strike Commander's Edition, Campaign Operations, Mechwarrior: Destiny, and A Time of War and its Companion, you'll have all the rules you could need except for research. 

That's 13 books, not including TROs/Record Sheet compilations.  But you would only need 1, maybe 2 for a tournament game, and that's Total Warfare, with MAYBE TacOps: Advanced Rules.

The BattleMech Manual is a mixture of Total Warfare, Tactical Operations, and Campaign Operations (where the Design Quirks first come in to play).  It's all you need (plus a bit more) for a tournament game and you're only play Battlemechs.

You know what, I take back what I said. You do have a point there friend. If you want to fly with the LAM ASF, then those rules being in Aerospace actually is a good simplification. You'd still have AirMech and Battlemech modes in the BMM, and flying transformation is either entering or exiting the field.

Ok, I like it! 

 

Classic BT should remain as it is; its the reason people are flocking to it and have remained with it for so long. The minute a CBT 2.0 with ground up rules rebuilding is approved, it's the beginning of a long and winding death for the franchise, and the beginning of Codex Creep that will NEVER stop.

Technically, we're in like version 3.11.01 right now, I think.  BattleDroids being v1 and the Compendium through BMR being version 2.  A lot of people say there have been no changes to CBT since then, and that's mostly true for Battlemechs, but everything else has seen notable changes with the original release of Total Warfare.

And Alpha Strike is NOT Classic Battletech (CBT) any more than Mechwarrior: Dark Age (MechClix) was.  It's a separate game all on its own.

[ColBosch]

So here's what I'd like to see in a new version of "Total Warfare:"
- Short introduction, including where players can find "advanced" and optional rules or a lore overview
- Basic unit types: BattleMechs, combat vehicles (wheeled, tracked, VTOL, water, WiGE), ProtoMechs, battle armor, infantry
- Variant unit types: IndustrialMechs, support vehicles (wheeled, track, VTOL, WiGE), Superheavy 'Mechs, multi-modal 'Mechs (LAMs, QuadVees) but not multiple-hex units
- All current weapons aside from artillery, WMDs, capital/sub-capital weapons, and the like
- Terrain and buildings, anything seen on a current mapsheet
- Battlefield Support to cover artillery, aerospace, and simplified vehicles/infantry
- Quirks and SPAs
- DropShips as battlefield strongpoints (because it looks like the models may enter general release)
- Basic scenario creation
 - 'Mech, combat vehicle, and ProtoMech design rules

So this is your one-stop source for actually playing BattleTech. My criteria for unit inclusion is the motive type: if it walks, drives, or uses MP (not Thrust), then it's in here. Anything that uses Thrust - aerospace fighters, LAMs in fighter mode, DropShips in flight, conventional aircraft and dirigibles, and all other space vehicles - goes into the future "AeroTech" and/or "BattleSpace" games. Multiple-hex units (large watercraft and mobile structures) require special attention, so I'd put them in a companion volume.

Speaking of that companion volume, here's what I'd put in a new "Tactical Operations:"
- Multi-hex units (large naval support vehicles, mobile structures)
- Radar map aerospace rules and basic interception rules
- Rules for WMDs, construction info for subcapital weapons (for large naval, etc.)
- Construction rules for support vehicles, battle armor, infantry, mobile structures, and large naval units
- More terrain types, if there are any leftover
- Advanced combat rules (alternate weapon firing modes, ECCM, etc.)
- Force creation and special unit abilities
- Pick one set of campaign rules and include it; only support this rules set in the future!

The idea is that the basic rulebook should cover 99% of standard gameplay and 90% of unit construction, with the companion covering the remaining 1%/10% respectively. Support vehicle construction could be in the basic game, but stuff like BAR and custom-sized engines requires a decent level of player knowledge and word count.  The radar map rules would not really be an aerospace rules set, more of an expansion of the play space, and could use Alpha Strike cards. I'm also putting force creation here, because I want to keep "faction purity" as strictly optional. Special unit abilities can be found, but are also prone to abuse if there's an imbalance in the players' skill levels. The same goes for quirks and SPAs.

Unlike the core rulebooks, I believe that anything else should be their own games. A "BattleSpace" rules set should stand on its own. Same with planetary invasions or grand-level strategy (which is actually already under development, woo). So in my plan, we've gone from eight-ish core books to just two, eliminating everything that's not a) playing BattleTech and b) making units that are used in BattleTech.

[Charistoph]

So here's what I'd like to see in a new version of "Total Warfare:"
- Short introduction, including where players can find "advanced" and optional rules or a lore overview
- Basic unit types: BattleMechs, combat vehicles (wheeled, tracked, VTOL, water, WiGE), ProtoMechs, battle armor, infantry
- Variant unit types: IndustrialMechs, support vehicles (wheeled, track, VTOL, WiGE), Superheavy 'Mechs, multi-modal 'Mechs (LAMs, QuadVees) but not multiple-hex units
- All current weapons aside from artillery, WMDs, capital/sub-capital weapons, and the like
- Terrain and buildings, anything seen on a current mapsheet
- Battlefield Support to cover artillery, aerospace, and simplified vehicles/infantry
- Quirks and SPAs
- DropShips as battlefield strongpoints (because it looks like the models may enter general release)
- Basic scenario creation
 - 'Mech, combat vehicle, and ProtoMech design rules

Too big. 

Unit Construction is what would make it too big by far.  It's not even in the BMM, even though it pretty much has everything in from TacOps: Advanced Equipment (but not Interstellar Operations which adds 2 more sub-types of units and a whole host of equipment, much of which is "extinct").  Not to mention, unit construction (not to be confused with Force Construction) is not needed to play the game.

Mech Quirks run about 14 pages on their own, including the MUL in it, with the BMM.  Campaign Operations Quirks run about 10 pages without a MUL.  Campaign Operations SPAs run 13 pages, not including the ones in the latest sourcebooks (like Tamar Rising or Dominions Divided), or the Command Abilities.

Quirks and SPAs will need to be set up to be incorporated BV.  This is not a bad thing, though, in my opinion, just a necessary step which will take up even more space in both unit (Quirks) and force (SPAs) creation.

[ColBosch]

As I said later in that post, I could move Quirks and SPAs to the companion (and, on further thought, probably would). I assure you, I can fit the construction rules - with examples - in the page count freed up by cutting the fiction and aerospace stuff. Remember, I'd only be including 'Mechs, combat vehicles, and ProtoMechs. I wouldn't have to go into the same detail on equipment as in the current TechManual; there's a lot of fluff in there, too.

[Charistoph]

As I said later in that post, I could move Quirks and SPAs to the companion (and, on further thought, probably would). I assure you, I can fit the construction rules - with examples - in the page count freed up by cutting the fiction and aerospace stuff. Remember, I'd only be including 'Mechs, combat vehicles, and ProtoMechs. I wouldn't have to go into the same detail on equipment as in the current TechManual; there's a lot of fluff in there, too.

I understand.  However, what you would free up from all that would be taken up by all the construction and game rules of all the equipment in TacOps and Interstellar Ops, if they don't take up even more than what you pulled out.  There is a LOT of stuff in there.

[ColBosch]

I understand.  However, what you would free up from all that would be taken up by all the construction and game rules of all the equipment in TacOps and Interstellar Ops, if they don't take up even more than what you pulled out.  There is a LOT of stuff in there.

I am confident that it can be done.

[Charistoph]

I am confident that it can be done.

Considering they couldn't put it all in one book for one unit type (i.e. The Battlemech Manual), you are confident they can be do it effectively for 6 and their sub-types (or sub-sub-types in most cases), and alternate versions for 5 (i.e. Battlefield Support units)?

Even the BMR(r) didn't do that.  It left a lot for the Tactical Handbook and Maximum Tech to handle.  And the ruleset has gotten much bigger since then.

You MIGHT be able to handle the rest if you left unit construction out, but that's still pretty much Total Warfare + TacOps + Interstellar Ops Game Rules in terms of capacity.

[ColBosch]

That's an incredibly disingenuous question. The BattleMech Manual is literally half the length of Total Warfare.

[Charistoph]

That's an incredibly disingenuous question. The BattleMech Manual is literally half the length of Total Warfare.

It's not a disingenuous question because the BMM still doesn't have all your asking for the central unit type of Battletech, even as small as it is.  It's lacking Construction rules.  It's lacking rules for the Tripod and Quad-Vee.  It's lacking all the equipment from Interstellar Ops that isn't classified as extinct.  I'm not even considering if LAMs or Super-Heavies are being brought in to the question.  Then you want to multiply that burden by a factor of 3 (there's a lot of overlap, but a lot that is not) when adding in these 5 other unit types (Ground Vehicles, Air Vehicles, PBI, Battle Armor, and Protomechs) and their equipment that Battlemechs don't install, as well as all the tables they require, and we haven't even gotten to the Record Sheets (which the BMM is missing all 3).

I mean, you can try it right now if you have PDFs of the BMM (for reference and base rules), Total Warfare, Tech Manual, TacOps: AU&E, Interstellar Ops: Alternate Eras by copying and pasting in to a Word file or Google Sheet (don't forget to put it in to columns).  Don't forget all Errata updates, and how you want any new changes to the other unit types that need to be addressed, too.  That's only about, what, 800-1000 pages to parse through, if not more?

[ColBosch]

Again, I am confident that I can fit what I suggested in 300 pages.

[Greatclub]

Again, I am confident that I can fit what I suggested in 300 pages.

And how much will that cost? Piazo can do core books like that due to econamy of scale - they sell a lot of them. They had to dial splatbook size back years ago to keep cost under control. BT core range can afford maybe one book that size, expansions would have to be smaller

Assuming I understand what the market is doing, which is dubious.

[ColBosch]

And how much will that cost? Piazo can do core books like that due to econamy of scale - they sell a lot of them. They had to dial splatbook size back years ago to keep cost under control. BT core range can afford maybe one book that size, expansions would have to be smaller

Assuming I understand what the market is doing, which is dubious.

Total Warfare has had something like nine or ten printings. While I am not claiming to know CGL's marketing research, I do feel safe in assuming a similarly-sized book will do just fine, especially if it means players won't have to buy a second book just to build the most-common units.

[Greatclub]

... I thought TW was smaller than 300 for some reason.