First, lemme preface this post with the most important part: I really don't like big stompy robots. I think they're stupid. That's right, I said it. Still with me? Ok, proceed....
So, I've been spending an inordinate amount of time pouring over the rules and the forums trying to figure out the best way to build my Periphery faction, a small high-tech enclave that uses NO mechs whatsoever, but focuses on a solid Warship fleet and very tightly-integrated conventional combined arms. Kinda a tiny, min/maxed version of the AFFS and the US Marine Corps.....but the more time I spend reading, and looking at the weapons tables, and struggling with FASAnomics, the more I find too many infuriating compromises to keep the focus on the big stompy robots. When I first got into Battletech, I was about 12 and picked up the 3rd Edition boxed set, then Battlespace and most importantly, The Succession Wars. I've probably spent 100x as many hours pushing counters of entire Davion regiments across the Inner Sphere as I have filling in armor bubbles from medium laser damage. So I like grand strategy. And if I DO bother to play something tactical, I like some semblance of realism, and my idea of "tactical" is rarely smaller than a company. For reference, the computer games I play are things like Hearts of Iron, Aurora 4X, Distant Worlds, and Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations. I haven't touched Paradox's Battletech game at all yet. I think the BTU is a great backdrop for a humans-only warfare setting, loaded with skullduggery and unparalleled world-building and detail. It's a reasonably-hard Game of Thrones in space. But there's too much inconsistent cruft that has never been ret-conned.
In almost any game I try to craft entire militaries at the grand-strategy level (so long-term production and logistics decisions matter to me) based on my perception of informed decisions of maximizing their tactical successes. This is where my problem with BT comes in: the engineering and weapon systems "balance" just completely shatters my suspension of disbelief. I want ground combat that is closer to 21st-century in nature, but with Gauss rifles on my tanks and power armored infantry. I'm a little more lenient when it comes to realism in my space combat.....but I want giant interstellar capital ships with sensible weapons loadouts (so NOT the canon BT Warships...). Anyways, I'm thinking of doing a wholesale review/alteration of the Inner Sphere's tech and economy fluff, and slapping together an integrated ruleset to support my vision like this:
Strategic Level:
Mix Strategic Operations and Interstellar Operations, and probably bolt on some very granular house rules about economics and production. How much of the interstellar GDP goes into the army's personnel budget? That matters ya know. Might have to cut a company from every line battalion if we want to afford expanding the Navy....
|
|
Operational Level:
Renegade Legion: Prefect (it uses planet maps similar to those in Interstellar Operations or Turning Points series, but uses a much larger and more interesting solar system and interplanetary combat model)
|
|
Tactical Level (space):
Battlespace with all-custom designs, and mostly Warship-focused? I might need to play with the weapon systems here, more emphasis on chucking long-range missiles....maybe some influence from Attack Vector: Tactical or the PC game "Children of a Dead Earth"
Tactical Level (ground):
Epic: Armageddon with custom units and army lists. I consider this game's mechanics some of the best for reasonably realistic yet fast-playing battalion-level combat. It has granularity down to individual vehicles and fire teams/squads, but plays much faster as the weapons are usually grouped down to 2-4 weapon types per unit (usually based on what they are best at killing), and I think 2 rolls for shooting (one to-hit by the attacker, one "armor save" roll by the defender). It handles suppressing fire, morale, leadership, command and control, and initiative with elegance and simplicity.
The construction system would be BT's construction, but I'd need major changes to the weapons list, maybe even trim it down to something much closer to RenLeg: Centurion's (one thing I hate about tabletop game designers is their passion for constantly introducing new weapons and equipment rules, I get it from a "we have to sell products" perspective but most of it would never pass a military review board into serial production outside of maybe Nazi Germany). So I would be designing basically non-nerfed BT vehicles and power armor, then converting them to a slightly-abstracted level for actual gameplay purposes. Sure I could arbitrarily dictate equipment stats at the E:A level, but I think a codified construction system is good for enforcing certain "left and right lateral limits", because I want hard engineering and logistical constraints to what is possible in a combat unit.
Alternatively, I could do the unit design work in GURPS.....I know very little about GURPS right now and the vast array of books for sci-fi/space combat is even more overwhelming to me than BT's rules, so I'm hesitant to take the plunge.
....Or I could sit tight until 2020 and just do all of my world-building in the C# version of Aurora 4X, then write up some BT-style Field Manuals and Technical Readouts afterwards.....
