Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4

[pheonixstorm]

Different set of rules. In Total Warfare you can't unload cargo during gameplay I believe

[Random]

Only Scout and Fight can reinforce.

Yeah, sometimes I forget that I house rule some things.
Basically, I allow my defense lances a chance to reinforce in combats where I'm the defender. 

   

[scJazz]

You can edit the units you want in MML. Remove the Cargo Equipment and use the space for Troop Storage.

[arlith]

Is there anyway to, like in Alpha Strike, treat cargo space as room for infantry in Megamek? I have all these awesome things I use as infantry transports in my Alpha Strike games, but they cannot be used in Megamek. I am just wondering if there is a setting I am missing or if its something that is not possible at the moment.

Are there rules in TW/TO for this?  I'm not aware of any such rules.  As it is now, I think the only way units can transport units is via "troop space."

[Bongfu]

You can edit the units you want in MML. Remove the Cargo Equipment and use the space for Troop Storage.

That is a great idea! :P However, I cannot seem to find "Troop Storage" listed anywhere in the lab.

Are there rules in TW/TO for this?  I'm not aware of any such rules.  As it is now, I think the only way units can transport units is via "troop space."

I remember now that was a house-rule of ours from back in the day. It being in the errata for AS made me think it was now in TW as well.

[scJazz]

Cause it is on the first page LHS middle.

[Mukaikubo]

Woof. Well, thanks to my work, that was a good few months vacation from any ATB or MHQ fun. Anyone either put in more of the ATB rules to MHQ yet? Failing that, is there a newer version of MHQ that's actually stable to run a good-sized ATB campaign without crippling crashbugs?  :)) I barely code, but even I can see what a nightmare getting all that stuff to play together in a release is.

[scJazz]

3.25 is running pretty fine right now. Just remember to turn on Allow Illegal Units.

[BLOODWOLF]

Had a new idea for toughness; add a line in their log when they start out "Toughness +0: 0/3" and every time they come back injured and after recovery they will get 1xp towards the next level of toughness.  Going off the "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" idea.  So, when they get 3/3xp they will now have +1 in Toughness and for +2 they will need 9xp, +3 18xp, etc.  At least that way its a lot harder/slower to level in toughness and not everybody will have it.  Edge I'm still using the 1xp for every month of active service on a 2D6 of 12 or higher will also net an edge point.  Anyone have another idea for determining toughness and edge?  Other than the AtB 10xp for an edge point.

[scJazz]

Had a new idea for toughness; add a line in their log when they start out "Toughness +0: 0/3" and every time they come back injured and after recovery they will get 1xp towards the next level of toughness.  Going off the "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" idea.  So, when they get 3/3xp they will now have +1 in Toughness and for +2 they will need 9xp, +3 18xp, etc.  At least that way its a lot harder/slower to level in toughness and not everybody will have it.  Edge I'm still using the 1xp for every month of active service on a 2D6 of 12 or higher will also net an edge point.  Anyone have another idea for determining toughness and edge?  Other than the AtB 10xp for an edge point.

Not sure I like this idea. People who suffer repeated injuries tend to be weaker not stronger.

As for Toughness I'd handle it just like AtB handles Edge. Maybe lower the XP requirement to 5/10/15, since it only really applies to KO rolls.

However, I may be getting ahead of myself. Could one of the Devs look over the Code and tell us what effect Toughness has right now? What rules is it using? aTow? MW 2nd?

[Akjosch]

However, I may be getting ahead of myself. Could one of the Devs look over the Code and tell us what effect Toughness has right now? What rules is it using? aTow? MW 2nd?

Unless I'm mistaken, about the same effect as the biography - at least as far as MekHQ is concerned.

In MegaMek, it modifies the target number for staying conscious when taking a hit.

[scJazz]

Unless I'm mistaken, about the same effect as the biography - at least as far as MekHQ is concerned.

In MegaMek, it modifies the target number for staying conscious when taking a hit.

By what? MW 2nd Edition Rules = best 2 of 3d6. aToW rules = almost certainly not used. Some special unofficial Rules?

[Akjosch]

By what? MW 2nd Edition Rules = best 2 of 3d6. aToW rules = almost certainly not used. Some special unofficial Rules?

Roughly as per the AToW BOD attribute: Toughness shifts the target to roll to stay conscious by one point down per point of Toughness (... or one point up per point of negative Toughness).

[scJazz]

Roughly as per the AToW BOD attribute: Toughness shifts the target to roll to stay conscious by one point down per point of Toughness (... or one point up per point of negative Toughness).

OK so unofficial stuff then.

[PurpleDragon]

I can use toughness as is.  My only problem is that no character is ever generated with either toughness or edge. 

[pheonixstorm]

And you never will if it isn't a skill or SPA. Would probably be fairly easy to add but I think both of those should remain out of the equation for now.

[Akjosch]

I can use toughness as is.  My only problem is that no character is ever generated with either toughness or edge.

I'm pretty sure you can at least get characters generated with Pain Resistance, which functions almost exactly the same as Toughness 1 (it modifies the roll by one to a maximum of 12 and not the target number, but that only matters when your target number is 13 ...).

[Battleclad]

Out of interest has anyone ever tried to create a preferred weight distribution table for the Clans?

[pheonixstorm]

The spreadsheet is going to need an update for new SPAs some time soon.

[Heretic]

Anyone have the current ruleset? The link in the thread OP gives me a 404.

[Towtow59]

The first post on page 2 has a working download link.

[Akjosch]

So, let me see if I get the company creation rules right:

You start off with 88 people.

1 CO (rank: OF-2, Captain?), -1 Gunnery, -1 Piloting, 2 skill points randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy (those that don't have a skill point are skill level 0, not "missing", right?), set the "Commander" flag

3 officers (rank: OF-1, Lieutenant?), -1 Gunnery or -1 Piloting, whichever is higher, 1 skill point randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy. Since we're talking three lances here, I set up two as Lieutenants SG in charge of one lance each (Bravo and Charlie) and the third as Lieutenant LG in the commandant's (Alpha) lance.

9 enlisted MechWarriors (rank: OR-6, Sergeant?)

10 'Mech technicians (rank?). I set up the head technician as OR-8, Master Sergeant, two as OR-4, Corporal, and the remainder as OR-2, Private. The OR-8 and the two OR-4 are in charge of one "support" infantry platoon each.

1 doctor and 1 admin (random type: command, transport, logistics or HR). Right now they are all OR-2, but I have the feeling the medical corps should have higher ranks ... possibly officer ranks even, I typically see them as OF-2 level, but then MekHQ puts them in charge of the "support personnel" infantry platoon instead of the OR-8/OR-4 technician. I'll probably need to reconfigure it so that the medical staff has its own five-person squad ...

60 astechs (rank?), 4 paramedics (rank?), possibly all OR-1, Recruit.

All grouped in 3 'Mech lances and 3 (support) infantry platoons (and possibly a medical "infantry" squad).

So - is that about what such a company looks like as-written? How are you interpreting the current AtB rules?

[scJazz]

When you say OR-NN do you mean E-NN? Enlisted?

[Zellbringen]

So, let me see if I get the company creation rules right:

You start off with 88 people.

1 CO (rank: OF-2, Captain?), -1 Gunnery, -1 Piloting, 2 skill points randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy (those that don't have a skill point are skill level 0, not "missing", right?), set the "Commander" flag

3 officers (rank: OF-1, Lieutenant?), -1 Gunnery or -1 Piloting, whichever is higher, 1 skill point randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy. Since we're talking three lances here, I set up two as Lieutenants SG in charge of one lance each (Bravo and Charlie) and the third as Lieutenant LG in the commandant's (Alpha) lance.

9 enlisted MechWarriors (rank: OR-6, Sergeant?)

So - is that about what such a company looks like as-written? How are you interpreting the current AtB rules?

Its 12 MechWarriors total.  1 Commander, 3 officers and 8 Enlisted.  That's how I read it.  Ranks are up to you personally.  But I use custom ranks with a Captain, 3 Lieutenants and 8 MechWarriors.

[scJazz]

The 60 AsTechs and Medics don't actually count towards the total number of bodies in AtB. Otherwise... yeah that is an AtB 2.31 version Start.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.

[BLOODWOLF]

The 60 AsTechs and Medics don't actually count towards the total number of bodies in AtB. Otherwise... yeah that is an AtB 2.31 version Start.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.

Like this guy :D. 

[Akjosch]

The "OR-N" ranks are NATO "other ranks" designations, since most people should be familiar with those as opposed to the US-specific E/W/O trio.

And yeah, it should be 8 enlisted MechWarriors, not 9.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.

I need to start somewhere if I want to understand how those rules work and where MekHQ is lacking. And best to start with the beginning ...

[scJazz]

Sorry, just figured out you are in Germany. And, my bad, remembered that OR-NN thing a bit to late and didn't have time to repost.

Forgive me Neoancient...
There are a hell of a lot of bugs and features already ticketed in Git and SF.

This one for instance has been out there for about a year and a half...
https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/issues/45

Most of the XP related fields seem limited to 100 or less...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/354/

This one is coming up on a year and a half as well...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/119/

Speaking from experience... the Standard Start section of AtB is rarely used. Quality of Life and bug fixes for AtB are well over due. Heck just getting the code up to AtB 2.31 would be neat.

[Akjosch]

Most of the XP related fields seem limited to 100 or less...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/354/

That one's ... actually fixed in v0.3.26 (and I marked it as such). I just didn't realise there was a Feature Request for it as well.

[BLOODWOLF]

I think its pretty good currently, its customizable and flexible which is good.  Those company creation rules are not rigidly enforced on the player which I think is a good thing since everyone will have a different idea about how a unit will be made up and whos in charge of who.  Especially compared to players from a US military background to Canadian, German, etc will all have different ideas based on what they are used to.  The "save presets" for the campaign options doesn't save your custom ranks but, its easy enough just to make and save a template campaign file.  Would be nice though if (and I'm not the only one) you could start out at lance level and have AtB adapt its forces to your # and skill level.  Which is what all my crap is about in my excel file to try to make AtB more flexible and adaptive allowing you to have a lance, or company, or however big you want.