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

[RifleMech]

As for content, I want a rewrite of the BTC. No fluff, no fiction, just the rules. All the rules. BattleTech, including artillery, combat vehicle, infantry, and LAM rules. AeroTech, again, with all the rules. And construction rules for everything. Baselined to either 3025 or, more usefully, 3050 with additional era supplements. The idea that the "current time" for the game is the latest era available and an expectation that absolutely everything published will be showing up on the same battlefield is overwhelming chaos.

If BMM is a model of what well have going forward, I expect a comprehensive ground combat book with all of the other rules for ground combat systems is needed. Then a new edition of AeroTech. All baselined to one era and all construction rules included. And then era books for the era updates.

The problem with baselining for a specific time period is that time marches on. We see that with Total Warfare. It's baselined for a specific time period but the current time period is almost a hundred years later. I can see an intro that was time specific to introduce new players to the universe. It can be changed out with new printings/editions but the whole thing shouldn't be stuck in one time period.

Also one of the best things about Battletech is that anything and everything can pop up on the battlefield. That shouldn't be made harder to do.

 

Something else unlikely to happen. Stop printing on glossies. (This is one thing I despise AD&D2e for introducing to game publishing.) Game books are technical manuals. I need to be able to mark them up in pencil because notes will both be needed and will likely change. If I want an art book, I'll buy an art book.

Agreed!

[abou]

The move away from glossy paper would be interesting. On the one hand it would achieve a couple of things: easier to read without glare, easier to mark and make notes, and potentially decreased production costs. However, on the other we have modern presentation of rulebooks as they have been for the past 25 years, and likely costs that are not as expensive as they used to be.

Several comic book fans have argued for a return to newsprint away from glossy paper to reduce the costs of modern comic books; yet, publishers continue to use glossy paper. I imagine CGL is making a similar calculus.

[Cannonshop]

The move away from glossy paper would be interesting. On the one hand it would achieve a couple of things: easier to read without glare, easier to mark and make notes, and potentially decreased production costs. However, on the other we have modern presentation of rulebooks as they have been for the past 25 years, and likely costs that are not as expensive as they used to be.

Several comic book fans have argued for a return to newsprint away from glossy paper to reduce the costs of modern comic books; yet, publishers continue to use glossy paper. I imagine CGL is making a similar calculus.

It may be that the difference in costs between the paper types isn't enough in the case of comic books, but the difference in costs between changing suppliers IS. 

for the Comics companies.

But that also means the difference in pricing might not be that great because the demand's lower for 'newsprint' quality paper, making it less profitable, therefore less produced, less produced means less volume means per unit pricing goes up....but the difference may be fractional at the level of a small to mid-size publisher, while the price of securing a new supplier, with all the attendant risks?
might well be not worth it, particularly as a good percentage  of 'pulp' production has moved overseas  since the late 1990s.

There are other suppliers to deal with as well-bookbinders because almost nobody is willing to put newsprint behind hardbacks, and sofcover books aren't prestigious, which might sound like good news, but only if the softcover version is significantly less expensive than hardbacks.

which there's no guarantee it would be.  The soft-cover is more likely to CAP what a distributor can charge, and if it's a low enough cap, then the product becomes unprofitable.

Lots of 'if' and that doesn't even get into quality assurance prices.  part of what makes 'shiny' paper shiny, also prevetns the ink from bleeding between pages or smudging over time, (or worse, leaving 'ink trace' on a reader/user's fingers.)

Pulp paper (coarse pulp) tends to also be more sensitive to skin oils.

yeah.  there's a reason Comics collectors wear gloves, and it's not MERELY to look pretentious.

IOW it may be a business reason that prevents moving from the cosmetically more expensive, to the cosmetically cheaper media form.

[ColBosch]

On the topic of paper stock, it's more complicated than you think. The cost is less about the treatments the paper undergoes and more about what is available in bulk. For some time now, glossy paper has been less expensive than matte. I don't know why this is, but it's been a known issue in the self-publishing scene for as long as I've been involved.

[abou]

Makes me feel like that episode of The Simpsons when Jasper gets stuck in the Kiwk-E-Mart freezer:

Cheap gloss paper... What a time to be alive.

[Mostro Joe]

Yes. Already in development.

When we could have some news about that? Some details? Some ideas to talk about? 

[paladin2019]

The problem with baselining for a specific time period is that time marches on. We see that with Total Warfare. It's baselined for a specific time period but the current time period is almost a hundred years later. I can see an intro that was time specific to introduce new players to the universe. It can be changed out with new printings/editions but the whole thing shouldn't be stuck in one time period.

This is exactly why it should be done, otherwise your base book gets obsoleted with each new era. It allows expansion via supplements rather than new editions (looking at you, Shadowrun.)

[YingJanshi]

to put it in perspective

1987-2006 19 years: The BattleMech Manual ('87), BattleTech Compendium ('90), BattleTech Compendium: The Rules of Warfare ('94), BattleTech Master Rules ('98), BattleTech Master Rules, Revised ('01)

2006-2024 18 years: Total Warfare

Holy crap. 
Hadn't realized it had been that long. Just seems like yesterday when the Jihad books were released... (man, I'm getting old...)


But to the main point, I would also chime in and agree that TW needs a major update. And frankly, a slimming down of the number of core rulebooks (we're now up to what, 8 rulebooks? 10 if you count both RPGs). Personally, I'd keep the BattleMech Manual as the primary rulebook seeing as how the majority of games seem to be 'Mech only. But I would do a ground unit rulebook with all of the ground rules from TW and TO for players that want to expand to other unit options. Then an Aero rulebook with all of the aero rules from TW, TO, & SO. (And I'd fold IO Alternate Eras into both of those where appropriate.) A Construction Manual with all unit types. Then a Campaign book for the various flavors of campaign play. (Not sure where I'd put the abstract strategic level play at though.) That cuts it down to say, 5 books in total?

[RifleMech]

This is exactly why it should be done, otherwise your base book gets obsoleted with each new era. It allows expansion via supplements rather than new editions (looking at you, Shadowrun.)

The base rules don't become obsoleted with a new era unless that new era expands the base. A rule book based on era would be obsoleted every time "new" old tech item was introduced or has an errata. Newer eras shouldn't change the base rules, only higher rule levels.

The question would be what are the base rules? I'm pretty sure that'd be Into Tech. I can't remember when the last time something was added to it and it's available from the end of the Age of War to now. That's why I think rule books should be based on tech/rules level. A player can use an introtech Mech from 2500 to now. A higher tech one can't.

And rule books should be updated every now and then to include items from sourcebooks. Sourcebooks aren't always available and keeping things condensed helps reduce the number of books that need to be flipped through. Having the rule book tied to a specific era would make that more difficult. Besides, a player doesn't really need universe information to play. They just need the rules.

[Greatclub]

Total Warfare desperately needs to be redone. Whether it's a stand-alone or expansion to the BMM...

keep fiction but reduce to one page per chapter. Make sure it's topical.

delete industrial mechs, WiGE, support-sized vees. Probably keep protomechs, but I wouldn't cry to see them punted among the other non-core unit types.

Massive edit and organization pass. The book is a PITA without a find function, and still irritating with one.

[Mostro Joe]

Hadn't realized it had been that long. Just seems like yesterday when the Jihad books were released... (man, I'm getting old...)

Me too! It seems yesterday I opened my firts two boxes. I bought together Aerotech and Battletech. One month later I bought Citytech. Great times.
The Jihad is the editorial moment that I lost the grip with the storyline and I left active playing for years.

(Not sure where I'd put the abstract strategic level play at though.)?

IMHO, Strategic Battleforce should be merged with some ideas of the "linked scenarios" chapter of Campaign Operations, removing the big problems that are there in CO. Perhaps They should create an "abstract" campaign system (one purely without maps), that today is badly mixed in CO, and develop the Chaos System that seems well written. I don't know what they are going to do in the Mech Commander Handbook about this matter.

[LAMFAN]

The base rules don't become obsoleted with a new era unless that new era expands the base. A rule book based on era would be obsoleted every time "new" old tech item was introduced or has an errata. Newer eras shouldn't change the base rules, only higher rule levels.

This right here. If you're talking about reformatting the rules so that its easier to read, better organized, or anything in that vein, then thats fine and would make sense so the main book is easier to puruse and find what you need.

Personally I like having a lot of the rules in one place, instead of having to buy several books for the different rules on the different units (unless their individual prices are also lowered so its not as expensive to get all the rules you need, but I don't trust that's going to be well managed so it's something I rather not risk). That being said, having the base BMM rules, and then Supplements for All other Vehicle combat, for Aerospace, for Clans, for certain era's of weaponry, etc, is not inherently a BAD idea, just a one that is risky of being mismanaged OR exploited.

Moving the "time period" of the core rule books, however, I would disagree with. IntroTech rules (3025 Era) are the easiest rules to get into, and should always be the base and forefront in terms of basic rule books. You shouldn't move the "time period" of the main rules forward, because then you'll have the more intricate options of the "current era" and might fall victim to the infamous "codex creep" ala 40K, and many people shifted over to BT to avoid such sillyness.

So my suggestion would be one of two in such a case:
(1) Keep it the way it is, where you have rules for multiple eras in the same book but just have the tech and eras separated. All the rules, all the eras, all in one place.

(2) Make the base introtech Era Rules (3025), and just have the individual supplements for the different Eras that you can buy separately (personally not a fan of this one, again, because of the risk of it becoming more expensive to get into the hobby.

The question would be what are the base rules? I'm pretty sure that'd be Into Tech. I can't remember when the last time something was added to it and it's available from the end of the Age of War to now. That's why I think rule books should be based on tech/rules level. A player can use an introtech Mech from 2500 to now. A higher tech one can't.

And rule books should be updated every now and then to include items from sourcebooks. Sourcebooks aren't always available and keeping things condensed helps reduce the number of books that need to be flipped through. Having the rule book tied to a specific era would make that more difficult. Besides, a player doesn't really need universe information to play. They just need the rules.

Rifle also has a point here too, however I'd add a caveat; make sure the new items and or rules are SEPARATED so people know where the updates are and came from, so they don't get mixed in with previous rules updates.

My suggestion would be to separate by ERA first, then by Tech Level within that ERA.

[shopsmart]

As someone who played 40k for abit and figured out how wasteful book spenditure every 4 years, i jumped from that ship.  Decade later come back to bt 30 years later and practically same rule set, awesome.  Now read this and hiss like a cat.  Better just be organization rewrite.  If complete over haul then your just going to scare away the new former 40k players and alienate the regular players.  BT is the way it is for a reason.

[Sartris]

There used to be a tweak of the rules every 3-5 years with a new set of core rules. Someone recently pointed out that the changes in TW constitute at least one of those tweaks if not two or three. Changes to the rules have always been part of the game and that will continue going forward

[paladin2019]

There used to be a tweak of the rules every 3-5 years with a new set of core rules. Someone recently pointed out that the changes in TW constitute at least one of those tweaks if not two or three. Changes to the rules have always been part of the game and that will continue going forward

To be fair, the tweaks were either a) someone didn't like they and FASA had both licensed some image, 2) the timeline advanced and stuff had to be added or rejiggered for the new hotness, or  ) something really didn't work right.

[BrianDavion]

yeah the BMR, which was the last rule book before TW came out, was really more just adding the field manual tech into the core rule book.

[Sartris]

There are three pages of rules tweaks at the end of bmr.

Compendium has stars around the headers where the rules were altered. There are several.

[Cannonshop]

yeah the BMR, which was the last rule book before TW came out, was really more just adding the field manual tech into the core rule book.

There used to be a tweak of the rules every 3-5 years with a new set of core rules. Someone recently pointed out that the changes in TW constitute at least one of those tweaks if not two or three. Changes to the rules have always been part of the game and that will continue going forward

Speaking from my limited perspective, BMR(r) was better organized and 'tighter' than TW or the rest of the TW hardback series.  The difference was even more significant when you consider what was cut from TW for "length reasons" that was integral to BMR(r), and what was added that is not, and was not, something players would use outside of very narrow and specific campaigns.

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.

There are three pages of rules tweaks at the end of bmr.

Compendium has stars around the headers where the rules were altered. There are several.

and even more on the BMR(r), BMR, and Compendium:Rules of Warfare.

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).

Let me lay it out for you from way-back-in-the-day...

Before Total warfare I could hand someone a copy of BMR(r) who's never played the game in their life, and within an hour or so of answering a few simple questions in front of a group in Ye Olde Game Store, I could have a table going, and people would be having fun.

I couldn't do this with Total Warfare.  With Total Warfare, handing it to an EXPERIENCED player for the first time is an exercise in confusion and searching.

Information is worthless if you can't implement it, or if it's so difficult that "Let's go watch Sportsball on the telly" becomes a viable option.

Are there rules tweaks I'd love to see? You Betcha.  But first, fix the layout and organization so that the book is useful without needing a PDF copy on your laptop with the 'search' function open.

A Core Rulebook should be organized logically, so that when you hand it to someone who's barely heard of the game and never played it, they don't drop it in disgust to go do literally anything else.  Your ideal "Playtester" for this, isn't an experienced Battletech player or even an experienced RPG player-your ideal tester for layout, is someone's girlfriend or boyfriend who isn't a gamer, but is keen on participating with their significant other.

You know, someone who's going to get frustrated or bored if it's overcomplicated to find the answer to a rules question.

THAT is your target, because if THAT person can use the book without much effort, or with only a minimum of questions? then it's going to be greased lightning for experienced players and a genuine asset.

In short, cousin dumbass shouldn't have to look through three chapters and two short stories to find understand how to use any given bit of gear in the setting.  It should be compact, clear, and above all other things, simple.

[Daemion]

The big reason to do multiple volumes would be to keep the cost down. I'm not normally in a position to drop 30+ dollars on a book, let alone 40 or 60.  If I can get a book for 20-25, I could slowly piece the rules together as I can afford. 

It was one of the reasons I was excited about the idea of a plethora of starter level box sets.  I could slowly collect minis with record sheets and some maps and other little odds and ends that way.  The core box is a once-a-year at best type of purchase.  A core rulebook of TW caliber and size is also largely out of the question.

[DevianID]

For the starter box analogy, they did kinda start to do this.  AGOAC has intro tech, Clan Invasion has the tech update and rules for elementals.  In the past, the box set that added vehicles and infantry was city tech, so while 'Mercenaries' is kinda a side step, before we knew what was in it I just assumed it would have the full tank and infantry rules.  Thus with AGOAC, CI, and Mercs rules books youd have all the mech, BA, vee, and inf rules.

However, from the bits and bobs I have seen for the mercenary box set, you need to buy total warfare with all its issues to play with the 4 vees in the new main Mercenaries box set.  (without using the BSP rules, which serve a different function).  If the full vee rules ARE in mercenaries, those can hold us over.  If not, lots of people will be directed to total warfare, and its layout isnt great if you are trying to play 'out of the box set' games.

Like, because of all the new tech that got expanded on post Total Warfare's release, there is no resolution to a vehicle with a Fuel Cell taking a Fuel Tank crit.  TW only talks about ICE and Fusion, and lists the engine types specifically by name, not all the other engine types.  Fusion gets immobilized, ICE explodes, but the other types of engines are unlisted.  Batteries/Fuel Cell/Solar?  I think there are more engines types added then this too, but fuel cell vees are the big one in Ilclan, and total warfare is missing tons of Ilclan equipment and interactions.  Tac Ops and Int Ops are both needed to play with the Rec Guide mechs and tanks that are otherwise standard tech for the 'current' era.

[Daemion]

And rule books should be updated every now and then to include items from sourcebooks. Sourcebooks aren't always available and keeping things condensed helps reduce the number of books that need to be flipped through. Having the rule book tied to a specific era would make that more difficult. Besides, a player doesn't really need universe information to play. They just need the rules.

Kind of like how Rocket Launchers were introduced late 3060s, but could have been around all through the Succession Wars on Vehicles?

This would be a good reason to introduce Tech Card Packs, if you ask me.  You have your Core Rulebook with basic/intro tech items.  Then you can add tech card packs for other eras for the different items that might appear in other eras to add to it.  And, if something comes along that could have been in a prior era, you don't need a new book.  You just add a tech card and show what eras it's valid in. 

Let's face it, when you look at the list of advanced weapon and equipment and the rules associated with them, they don't take up a lot of space.  The rules for a Gauss Rifle simply include the fact that the ammo doesn't explode when hit with a crit, but the Gauss gun does, and for how much.  LB-X Autocannons have an alternate munition to work with that imparts a to-hit bonus modifier and rolls for damage on the cluster chart and applies all that damage in individual points rolled on the hit location table. 

And, card packs can be relatively cheep to purchase, let alone make.



 

[Daemion]

I find it ironic that a lot of people are advocating for the original breakdown of BattleTech when it first got started:
BattleTech -> BattleMech Combat along with some things like smoke and terrain modification
CityTech    -> Other general ground combat introducing Vehicles and Infantry and buildings.
AeroTech   -> Fighter and Space Ship combat, along with rules for AirMech transformable hybrid designs.

Coming full circle does not bother me one bit.

[Charistoph]

Let me ask a question regarding organization.

Which would be better?
Total Warfare, 2 Tactical Operations, 1 Tech Manual, 1 Interstellar Operations, and 1 Strategic Operations (6 books)

OR

1 Battlemech Manual, 1 Combined Arms Manual, 1 Aerospace Manual, 1 Fleet Manual (4 books).

Because for standard Tabletop Battletech play (i.e. not Alpha Strike, BattleForce, Campaign, or RPG), that's what we're looking at.

[ColBosch]

As someone who played 40k for abit and figured out how wasteful book spenditure every 4 years, i jumped from that ship.  Decade later come back to bt 30 years later and practically same rule set, awesome.  Now read this and hiss like a cat.  Better just be organization rewrite.  If complete over haul then your just going to scare away the new former 40k players and alienate the regular players.  BT is the way it is for a reason.

Since nobody else really addressed this: don't worry, BattleTech's ground combat rules will not be changing in any substantial way. There might be a rewrite of the aerospace rules, but per the devs that hasn't even started and is well down the road.

[SCC]

The problem with breaking the ground combat rules up like people are advocating is that on their own the rules for things like tanks aren't that long, even if you grouped them all together I don't think the rules would be all that long unless they where supposed to be a separate game, and I don't think people are really into that, after all you'd be paying twice for the same content.

[thedancingjoker]

Let me ask a question regarding organization.

Which would be better?
Total Warfare, 2 Tactical Operations, 1 Tech Manual, 1 Interstellar Operations, and 1 Strategic Operations (6 books)

OR

1 Battlemech Manual, 1 Combined Arms Manual, 1 Aerospace Manual, 1 Fleet Manual (4 books).

Because for standard Tabletop Battletech play (i.e. not Alpha Strike, BattleForce, Campaign, or RPG), that's what we're looking at.

I do really like that breakdown, 4 books that are easy to understand what is in it.  The one change I would make is that I would tie the combined arms one into the nameing scheme of the packs and call it "Battlefield Support Manual" and include rules for Airstrikes on the ground.  Let Aerospace Manual cover Air-to-Air and full Aerospace construction, but I personally feel that having two books cover absoltely everything you need for the ground game is better than splitting that one thing off into a third book.

[LAMFAN]

There used to be a tweak of the rules every 3-5 years with a new set of core rules. Someone recently pointed out that the changes in TW constitute at least one of those tweaks if not two or three. Changes to the rules have always been part of the game and that will continue going forward

That's not changes to the rules though, that's TWEAKING. That's things like the Battle value, piloting/gunnery multipliers, how certain vehicle types are balanced, optional rules, clarification on certain rules in specific cases, etc.

When you say "Changes to the rules" what comes to mind is the main rules of the game, the ranges and stats of weapons and mechs, turn orders, heat, how the record sheets are structured, etc. And THAT is what people who play this game enjoy; no CHANGES to the rules, but small and necessary TWEAKS to outlying specific issues.

Let me ask a question regarding organization.

Which would be better?
Total Warfare, 2 Tactical Operations, 1 Tech Manual, 1 Interstellar Operations, and 1 Strategic Operations (6 books)

OR

1 Battlemech Manual, 1 Combined Arms Manual, 1 Aerospace Manual, 1 Fleet Manual (4 books).

Because for standard Tabletop Battletech play (i.e. not Alpha Strike, BattleForce, Campaign, or RPG), that's what we're looking at.

With the caveatt that they each hold construction rules and calculations for BV2 (Battlemech construction for BMM, Vehicle construction and types for Combined Arms, ASF/VTOL construction for Aerospace Manual, etc) AND all weapon profiles of course....

Definitely the 4 books.

Would have to figure out if LAM's go into Battlemech Manual or Aerospace Manual though.

[Cannonshop]

Let me ask a question regarding organization.

Which would be better?
Total Warfare, 2 Tactical Operations, 1 Tech Manual, 1 Interstellar Operations, and 1 Strategic Operations (6 books)

OR

1 Battlemech Manual, 1 Combined Arms Manual, 1 Aerospace Manual, 1 Fleet Manual (4 books).

Because for standard Tabletop Battletech play (i.e. not Alpha Strike, BattleForce, Campaign, or RPG), that's what we're looking at.

Techmanual should be compiled with your tournament rules, and just don't include the advanced options you can't use in a Tournament. Those can go in the next book up.

Basically, the BMR(r) should be the model for your central core book, because it lets players play with all the of the SYSTEMS in the game without being burdened by exceptions like quirks, or weird shit players won't use like Airships.

SINGLE rulesets.  Only one scatter method or diagram for indirect fire, for example-anyone who wants a simulationist version can buy the optional book and find players who'll accept doing that much extra math. One tweak I'd recommend for TOURNAMENT rules, is that air-dropped ordnance be balanced against ARTILLERY IN THE SAME RULESET, as in cutting out the weird ass situation where one ton of air drop munitions does less blast damage than a fraction of 200 kilos of artillery shell.

(if you can streamline a long tom round that much, you can do even better with a dropped bomb that has five times the mass fraction and occupies a lot more space.)

You don't put things players aren't likely to see a whole lot in the Tournament book.  So LAMs go in the next book, (or a later book) same with Warships, mobile structures, Blimps (what are we, Steampunk? come on...) and so on.  Your tournament book should be basic enough you can hand it to a newbie and they can use and comprehend it.  Suggested: Sixth Grade Reading Level, because that makes it easy to teach.

Second book should include the harder to calculate stuff, like Infantry construction, some of the variations on scatter, mobile structures and support vees.

Book 3 is your strategic warfare book and focuses on Warships and strategic scale assets.  This is a redress of Battlespace.  Include weirder stuff like large wet-naval and Alpha Strike rules here.  Book 3 should let players plan out and carry out Planetary Assaults. and invasions.

You know the kind of battles that can't be won by a single lone heavy equipment operator in a man-shaped giant exoskeleton, but actually hinge on logistics, strategy, and all that stuff that can't be solved in a skirmish.

Three books, not four.  Going from Skirmish to small battle to Large battle.

A hypothetical 'Book four' would be a campaign builder for outright WARS.  Think "Risk, but with Battlemechs" or similar vein, Starcraft on the table top, maybe, but influenced by, and influencing, the use of the prior three volumes.  (aka the rules logically and consistently progress from the tournament level to the battlefield, from the Battlefield to the War Zone.)

Basically Book One should have enough about your BV system to let players build up a Battalion.  Book Two should include enough campaign rules to build a regiment or Regimental Combat Team, book Three should be a guide to arming a periphery state or province, and hypothetical book 4 should be sufficient to play out the clash of nations across a few years.

Then for your Traveller/completionists out there, a "Fire Fusion and steel" equivalent that goes in-depth on other eras, *Primitive tech, how to advance tech, how to change the price of it based on volume and resources.

Yes, that's five books but they're five books where if you only wanna play at Battalion or lower? you only need ONE book  the others progress it in terms of SCALE and Campaign DETAIL.

but you can hand out the first book at ye olde gaming store, and with a pad of paper and some pencils, you can have a game going even if nobody has a tech readout, or nobody has the right one.

[Charistoph]

I do really like that breakdown, 4 books that are easy to understand what is in it.  The one change I would make is that I would tie the combined arms one into the nameing scheme of the packs and call it "Battlefield Support Manual" and include rules for Airstrikes on the ground.  Let Aerospace Manual cover Air-to-Air and full Aerospace construction, but I personally feel that having two books cover absoltely everything you need for the ground game is better than splitting that one thing off into a third book.

I don't think it should be "Battlefield Support Manual" because it's going to be delivering the rules for full up Vehicles, Infantry, and Protomechs, and "Battlefield Support" involves the quick and dirty rules of Artillery, Aerospace attacks, Vehicles, and Infantry.

With the caveatt that they each hold construction rules and calculations for BV2 (Battlemech construction for BMM, Vehicle construction and types for Combined Arms, ASF/VTOL construction for Aerospace Manual, etc) AND all weapon profiles of course....

Definitely the 4 books.

Would have to figure out if LAM's go into Battlemech Manual or Aerospace Manual though.

That would be part of the system, yes.  The biggest would be the Combined Arms Manual, because we're looking at 5 different Construction systems (4 if we somehow combine Support and Combat Vehicles).

Of course, gameplay doesn't actually NEED the Tech Manual construction rules, as those are things that address systems away from the table itself.

LAMs are a troubling piece.  All things considered, they should be in The Battlemech Manual, but only address the Mech and AirMech Modes.

Techmanual should be compiled with your tournament rules, and just don't include the advanced options you can't use in a Tournament. Those can go in the next book up.

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.

[LAMFAN]

LAMs are a troubling piece.  All things considered, they should be in The Battlemech Manual, but only address the Mech and AirMech Modes.

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

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.