More critical hits!

[Fear Factory]

I feel the same about having raw damage determine a critical hit.  I know for Alpha Strike we rarely run custom mechs, but there are ways to break it and having crits this way would break it more.  This is coming from a guy who made a 6/6/0 OV1 Fire Moth by using 13 ER Small Lasers.  IMO, and I've said it, it would be a lot better if it was an ability certain weapons got.

[sadlerbw]

There are two thing we could be simulating with more crits while a unit still has armor: units taking crits because a single component is stripped of armor, but other components are still protected, or units taking crits from TACs. This only really matters in terms of how it feels. TACs can feel a bit random and capricious, but give the feeling that armor isn’t magical and perfect. I think #1 has a very TAC-esque feel to it. The feeling of a robot with half its armor blown off starting to accumulate crits is different. That is more of a feeling that the less total armor you have, the more vulnerable you become. I don’t think any of the sub rations really captures that feeling that you get more vulnerable to crits the less armor you have.

I have some thoughts about how to accomplish that, but it would involve changing the AS card format a little, so it is probably a non-starter. In case someone has a way to do the same thing without card changes, here is what I am thinking. Instead of two rows of pips, one for armor and one for structure, make three rows of pips (maybe four.) armor stays on the top row and structure is split between the two lower rows. All the rows stay left-aligned like they are now. When marking off damage you start with the rightmost column and when you have filled up a column, you move to the next one to the left. Here is what this does. With armor on one line and structure on two or three, most mechs will be able to loose 50-60% of their armor in a normal fashion. Once you reach a column which includes structure bubbles, you would have to mark them off to complete the column. Hey, you just took structure damage, so the rules already say you need to roll for a crit. Easy peasy...except for the whole invalidating all existing AS cards thing!

If you can change the way in which we mark off armor and structure, you can potentially keep the idea, and the rules text, of damage to structure requiring a crit roll. You just need a reason to mark off structure before all the armor bubbles are gone. Going 2D with the armor and structure pip layout is one way to deal with it. I’m not sure if we could accomplish the same thing without changing the AS cards or not, but I think that is a good ‘feel’ to aim for: the more damaged you are, the more likely you are to take crits, even if you still have some armor.

[JadedFalcon]

Respectfully, Alpha Strike needs to stop trying to be Battletech Lite! and focus more on being a compelling tabletop miniatures game. The answer may not lie with looking at the many years worth of well-worn FASA gameplay and trying to bash it into the mold of faster gameplay, but considering what will make Alpha Strike a more successful game in the contemporary market.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man. :P

[ActionButler]

Respectfully, Alpha Strike needs to stop trying to be Battletech Lite! and focus more on being a compelling tabletop miniatures game. The answer may not lie with looking at the many years worth of well-worn FASA gameplay and trying to bash it into the mold of faster gameplay, but considering what will make Alpha Strike a more successful game in the contemporary market.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man. :P

I agree with this completely.  These days, I use the published Alpha Strike rules and MUL cards more as guides for my own homebrew, family games night miniatures game than I do as proper Alpha Strike (while proper Alpha Strike, itself, has replaced Total WarFare/CBT as my proper Battletech).

To keep it balanced and unique, I would recommend only having the ability for Autocannons, Gauss Rifles, and PPC's, that get past the math.  Don't give it to lasers (Clan lasers, I'm looking at you), missiles, and SRM's.  I would still round down for Ultra AC's so they would offer the same type of crit chance as the basics, however they still add more damage to the units damage value.

In Alpha Strike, your Hollander would have CRIT1 (round down) or CRIT2 (round up).

Annnnnnd, I'll be adding THAT awesome idea to those homebrew rules  :)

[RoundTop]

Exactly!  It really adds flavor to the game without too much change.

To keep it balanced and unique, I would recommend only having the ability for Autocannons, Gauss Rifles, and PPC's, that get past the math.  Don't give it to lasers (Clan lasers, I'm looking at you), missiles, and SRM's.  I would still round down for Ultra AC's so they would offer the same type of crit chance as the basics, however they still add more damage to the units damage value.

In Alpha Strike, your Hollander would have CRIT1 (round down) or CRIT2 (round up).

Add Heavy Large Lasers. Where do HAGs fall? Do Light PPCs get it? Artillery?

[sadlerbw]

Respectfully, Alpha Strike needs to stop trying to be Battletech Lite! and focus more on being a compelling tabletop miniatures game. The answer may not lie with looking at the many years worth of well-worn FASA gameplay and trying to bash it into the mold of faster gameplay, but considering what will make Alpha Strike a more successful game in the contemporary market.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man. :P

I understand what you are saying. It isn’t that I think AS needs to be TW abridged, but that there are some fun and iconic elements that give TW a certain feel that people have enjoyed or been drawn to over the years. Trying to replicate elements of TW that players found memorable, in a good way, is more about taking what works and tweaking it rather than starting all over.

In my opinion, one of the iconic things missing from AS is the feel that these giant robots are slowly getting blown apart. That feel that they don’t just explode in a ball of fire all at once, but that things start breaking and getting blown off before you finally put one down. The crit rules often don’t do enough to make a mech with a decent amount of health feel like it is taking as much punishment as the little circles seem to show. I feel like that is one of the things that sets BattleTech apart from other games, and it’s worth keeping in AS.

As for TACs...well, they are iconic, but frustrating as hell. The idea that even a pristine mech can take critical damage from a lucky first shot is something that not many games are willing to allow. Losing an Atlas to a random LBX pellet smashing through the cockpit may be pretty rare, but holy hell is it memorable when it happens. So, is that something we want players to experience in AS as well? The boxcars rule certainly will do that. Right now, a spider isn’t ever going to one-shot an Atlas in standard rules play. It can’t happen. Add in the boxcars rule, and now it can. It’s still a really low probability, but it is possible.

So, it isn’t about adding things just because they were in TW. It’s about looking at what made TW fun, and seeing if we can roll any of that into AS. Sure, we could just look at AS in a vacuum as it’s own thing with no history. However, why not take the lessons that have been learned from working on TW for decades and try to cherry pick what worked from it? Pulling good ideas from TW isn’t about nostalgia, it’s about taking less of a risk because you already have years and years of people saying, ‘this was cool’ or ‘this sucked’.

Sorry, I’m feeling wordy this morning!

[Fear Factory]

Add Heavy Large Lasers. Where do HAGs fall? Do Light PPCs get it? Artillery?

This is where BattleTech needs to change.  Ballistics always have to answer to energy weapons and it needs to be the other way around.  Clan weapons are just way too powerful.  I would opt out of throwing most energy weapons into this category.  They still boost up raw damage, leave the crits for high-impact ballistics.

No for HAG's because they do cluster damage.  No for Light PPC's because they only do 5 damage.  No for Artillery because, again, they do cluster damage.

I would still stick with Ballistics/PPC's that do high impact damage.  Take their damage, divide by 10...  Example:

Code: [Select]

Type                  Round Down   Round Normally

Light Gauss Rifle     CRIT1/1/1*   CRIT1/1/1
Gauss Rifle           CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/2/2
Heavy Gauss Rifle     CRIT2/2/1    CRIT2/2/1
Autocannon 10         CRIT1/1/-    CRIT1/1/-
Ultra Autocannon 10   CRIT1/1/1    CRIT2/2/2
LB10X Autocannon      CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/1/1
Autocannon 20         CRIT2/2/-    CRIT2/2/-
Ultra Autocannon 20   CRIT2/2/-    CRIT3/3/-
LB20X Autocannon      CRIT2/2/-    CRIT2/2/-             
PPC                   CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/1/1
ER PPC                CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/1/1
Heavy PPC             CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/2/2
Snub Nose PPC         CRIT1/1/-*   CRIT1/1/-
Clan ER PPC           CRIT1/1/1    CRIT2/2/2

*CRIT1 minimum on round down

The problem with applying this to laser and pulse weapons is that you can really break the rules on the Clan side.  Like, way too broken to even nerf.  Imagine giving that crit rating to Clan lasers (Nova PRIME or H).  Honestly, leave it in raw damage, most designs that use multiple beam weapons would not need a crit boost.  Even on the table I made, Ultra AC's only get a slight boost in the rating while double tapping.  I prefer round down because it fits nicely between the benefit of taking a high impact weapon (that IMO should exist in BattleTech, but that's another topic) AND using raw damage to boost the damage rating.  I think it is fair, and if applied, it wouldn't break the game but offer some unique variants.

So, I'm saying NO for Heavy Lasers.  Let them get their payoff in the damage calculation, not an ability they can break.

EDIT:

I guess, if you have to, the Heavy Large Laser would be fine.

Code: [Select]

Type                  Round Down   Round Normally
Clan Heavy Large Las. CRIT1/1/-    CRIT2/2/-

I guess there are other weapons could fall in this category too:

Code: [Select]

Type                  Round Down   Round Normally
Thunderbolt 10        CRIT1/1/1*   CRIT1/1/1
Thunderbolt 15        CRIT1/1/1    CRIT1/2/2
Thunderbolt 20        CRIT1/2/2    CRIT2/2/2
Clan Proto AC/8       CRIT1/1/-*   CRIT1/1/-

*CRIT1 minimum on round down


[JadedFalcon]

I understand what you are saying. It isn’t that I think AS needs to be TW abridged, but that there are some fun and iconic elements that give TW a certain feel that people have enjoyed or been drawn to over the years. Trying to replicate elements of TW that players found memorable, in a good way, is more about taking what works and tweaking it rather than starting all over.

In my opinion, one of the iconic things missing from AS is the feel that these giant robots are slowly getting blown apart. That feel that they don’t just explode in a ball of fire all at once, but that things start breaking and getting blown off before you finally put one down. The crit rules often don’t do enough to make a mech with a decent amount of health feel like it is taking as much punishment as the little circles seem to show. I feel like that is one of the things that sets BattleTech apart from other games, and it’s worth keeping in AS.

As for TACs...well, they are iconic, but frustrating as hell. The idea that even a pristine mech can take critical damage from a lucky first shot is something that not many games are willing to allow. Losing an Atlas to a random LBX pellet smashing through the cockpit may be pretty rare, but holy hell is it memorable when it happens. So, is that something we want players to experience in AS as well? The boxcars rule certainly will do that. Right now, a spider isn’t ever going to one-shot an Atlas in standard rules play. It can’t happen. Add in the boxcars rule, and now it can. It’s still a really low probability, but it is possible.

So, it isn’t about adding things just because they were in TW. It’s about looking at what made TW fun, and seeing if we can roll any of that into AS. Sure, we could just look at AS in a vacuum as it’s own thing with no history. However, why not take the lessons that have been learned from working on TW for decades and try to cherry pick what worked from it? Pulling good ideas from TW isn’t about nostalgia, it’s about taking less of a risk because you already have years and years of people saying, ‘this was cool’ or ‘this sucked’.

Sorry, I’m feeling wordy this morning!

Thank you for the glass half-full response and the quite valid arguments outlined above.

I am still concerned about loss of speed and simplicity, increasing the bookkeeping part of the game, and once again making random dice rolls more important than strategy. Is there a better, more elegant way to achieve the same result?

An absurd example may be the following: What if instead of rolling for a crit result from a boxcars roll, the player of the damaged mech has to choose a result, provided that they can't choose a No Result or to lower a stat below zero.

[sadlerbw]

I agree on keeping the bookkeeping to a minimum and play speed up. So, while I may like slightly fancier options, I won’t be mad about a change that mucks with the balance a bit, but is really fast and simple and it makes crits more important.

Oh, and letting folks pick what crit they want is probably over powered, but it is an interesting idea.

In my ideal world, a mech with less than 6 or 7 total health probably shouldn’t end up with more than one crit before it blows up, on average. Between 7 and about 12 I would like to see two crits on average when it finally dies.more than 12 and I would like to see three when it pops. I don’t think we want stuff picking up more than three crits regularly, because it tends to be utterly crippled at that point and is basically a bullet sponge. There is no science behind those numbers, just what feels about right to me. Anything that gets us generally close to those numbers will probably make me happier, regardless of how we get there.

[JadedFalcon]

I agree on keeping the bookkeeping to a minimum and play speed up. So, while I may like slightly fancier options, I won’t be mad about a change that mucks with the balance a bit, but is really fast and simple and it makes crits more important.

Oh, and letting folks pick what crit they want is probably over powered, but it is an interesting idea.

In my ideal world, a mech with less than 6 or 7 total health probably shouldn’t end up with more than one crit before it blows up, on average. Between 7 and about 12 I would like to see two crits on average when it finally dies.more than 12 and I would like to see three when it pops. I don’t think we want stuff picking up more than three crits regularly, because it tends to be utterly crippled at that point and is basically a bullet sponge. There is no science behind those numbers, just what feels about right to me. Anything that gets us generally close to those numbers will probably make me happier, regardless of how we get there.

Choosing which crit is more an example of solutions outside the typical Battletech mindset. The TW Battletech player in me wants to jump on board with having a Crit special for headcappers, but I don't think that resolves the actual issue with the gameplay.

So let's say your Locust hits my Atlas by rolling a 12 and now I have to fill in one of the crit dots in addition to the armor damage. I have to choose an engine hit, fire control, mp, or weapons. I'm still losing something and I still have to no control on crits rolled by damaging the structure points. It creates the same proposed result without having to roll dice and look at a table. Not saying it's a good idea, just trying to look at things from a different direction.

[Son of Kerenski]

In my opinion, one of the iconic things missing from AS is the feel that these giant robots are slowly getting blown apart. That feel that they don’t just explode in a ball of fire all at once, but that things start breaking and getting blown off before you finally put one down. The crit rules often don’t do enough to make a mech with a decent amount of health feel like it is taking as much punishment as the little circles seem to show. I feel like that is one of the things that sets BattleTech apart from other games, and it’s worth keeping in AS.

This paragraph seems somewhat counter intuitive to the whole critical hit on a 12 thing.

You say you want mechs to slowly fall apart but what if a mech that does one point to an Atlas gets a crit then gets a 2 or a 12?

That doesnt speak "slowly disintergrate' to me. If anything that makes it faster and more frustrating as the recipient.

[sadlerbw]

This paragraph seems somewhat counter intuitive to the whole critical hit on a 12 thing.

You say you want mechs to slowly fall apart but what if a mech that does one point to an Atlas gets a crit then gets a 2 or a 12?

That doesnt speak "slowly disintergrate' to me. If anything that makes it faster and more frustrating as the recipient.

You are absolutely correct. I don’t think the 12 rule will get things to feel the way I would like. It just makes AS feel like it has TACs.

The reason I would still support it is that it does at least add SOME possibility for crits while you still have armor, and is super duper simple to add rules for and to execute. So, it at least moves the needle in the right direction and keeps things light and fast. That is enough of a win that I’d support it, even if it doesn’t totally do what I want. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good and all that.

[SC_Dave]

As noted elsewhere in this thread, a mech with a crit likely only has one more turn on the tabletop. Looking at the issue of crits from another perspective I don't think it is the means in which they are generated that causes any perceived lack of mechs with crits on the tabletop.

The Alpha Strike game mechanics encourage units to gang up. You concentrate fire on a unit until it is destroyed, then move onto the next. In my experience units will typically take critical hits during play, but they are usually destroyed by further units firing at them before the next turn. If there's a mech on the field suffering crits at the end of a turn it is usually only because the player "shooting" at it ran out of firepower before they could finish it off.

I have had occasions where it was more tactically expedient to leave a mech with crits alone and finish it off later, but these are rare.

Perhaps if you want more mechs on your tabletop with crits go clan style and play with Zellbrigen?

I don't think adding a mechanism such as a to-hit roll of 12 also gets a crit roll will result in more "walking wounded" on the tabletop because in general it will probably still make more sense to keep picking on the unit until it is taken out. A crit with a 12 would likely just reward lucky dice rolls, hit a unit with 12, then follow it up with another 12 and you get to start ganging up on the next target quicker.

While rewarding luck can be memorable, it doesn't always mean in a good way. In my early days of playing Battletech I one shotted a friend's mech in his first game. It put an immediate end to his interest in Battletech.

Again I would suggest leaving things as they are, or placing any changes such as a crit chance with a 12 in the optional rules.   

[sadlerbw]

Good point. Focused fire is certainly much more of a thing with more units on the board, and AS is supposed to see units die pretty fast.

However, here is my totally un-scientific theory why accruing more crits may still help: it changes the value of totally finishing off a unit all at once. Lets say you get an Atlas with a Move crit move and two Fire Control crits, and it has four or five pips of structure left. Is it really worth throwing more damage at it right now, or would it be better to start peeling the armor off the next mech? Sure, it might manage to land a really lucky hit and still do some damage, but with that same 5 damage you might be able to erase the Locust or Cicada standing next to it that is setting up for a back-shot next turn. It's like blowing the AC/20 off a Hunchback. Once that is gone, it's often a better idea to shoot something else with more firepower rather than finishing it off right away.

I think anything with less than around 7 total health is still going to end up getting blasted into dust. If we do manage to make crits more common I think it could absolutely change the value of finishing off a unit entirely with Focus Fire rather than leaving it to be the walking dead and shooting something else instead. Is having wounded mechs stick around for an extra turn or two a good thing? I don't know, maybe? All I know for sure is, at this point, crits don't often factor into the games I've played if they are only coming once armor has been stripped. If you can get them on earlier through stuff like anti-mech attacks or motive crits on vehicles, then they can actually do something you notice.

[ColBosch]

I've been thinking on this a lot, and even discussed it with some folks away from here, and I'm going to do a 180 here. Alpha Strike doesn't need more crits, it needs the entire mechanic taken out. The game should reward tactics, not random dice rolls.

[ActionButler]

I've been thinking on this a lot, and even discussed it with some folks away from here, and I'm going to do a 180 here. Alpha Strike doesn't need more crits, it needs the entire mechanic taken out. The game should reward tactics, not random dice rolls.

I am not opposed to removing crits completely, but what is your rationale for removing them from Alpha Strike but not CBT?  If it is an issue of the shorter health bars in Alpha Strike, what about shrinking the critical hit table so that they are less likely to happen?

[Weirdo]

That sounds like a good idea. I love how in Alpha Strike critical hits are truly critical, while in Total War, often times they're more like Annoying Hits or Concerning Hits. The converse of this is that the vast majority of the time, structural hits means crits are almost automatic, unless you get lucky on the 5 or 9.

[ColBosch]

I am not opposed to removing crits completely, but what is your rationale for removing them from Alpha Strike but not CBT?

Because this is the Alpha Strike sub-forum, so I saved my thoughts on crits in CBT. ;)

[Maingunnery]

What about a margin of success for a possible critical hit? I don't know what the number would be, but for example:

MoS of +5 gives the chance for a critical hit. So with a to-hit of 6, player roles an 11 or 12, and therefore gets to roll for a potential critical.

An MoS mechanic would be best, as it can be a good representation of the target presenting an easy target that allows the attacker to aim at a weak spot.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

A MoS mechanic for crit eligibility would also be a huge boost in the power of C3 networks.

[RoundTop]

A MoS mechanic for crit eligibility would also be a huge boost in the power of C3 networks.

Good. we already have to pre-pay the PV for those even if we don't use it. (it is cheaper in company C3, but a lot of units mount slaves and pay a penalty)

[GoldBishop]

Sorry I'm late for this party; saw the mention in the facebook group and thought I should probably chime in here as well (not that my voice has any weight here, but I am being encouraged to post on behalf of my peers)

Alpha Strike players: Thoughts?

1) if you roll a natural 12 on your to-hit roll, you roll once on the critical hit table (in addition to any other critical hit checks).

2) Any hit of damage from one source of 3 or more grants a roll on the critical hit table (in addition to any other critical hit checks).

3) Any hit from one source of 7 or more grants  a critical hit check (cumulative with the above for 2 checks)

4) 12 damage, another crit check. Etc. as above.

5) Critical hit table, swap 4 and 5, and 9 and 10.

1) I think automatic hits should come before crit chances.  Crack shots are impressive enough but no where near as fair to players who have payed for lower skills or maneuvered cleverly enough to earn a better shot or penalize their opponent's ability to hit them more effectively.
My Suggestion: "Natch-12" should mean a "success" for those impossible shots [damage only]... and for nearly impossible shots, perhaps a 2nd roll to using the same target numbers (to confirm the attack, ala D&D) to net a critical result. 

2 through 4) Multiple crits sounds tempting, but the higher damage trees turns into outright destruction in most cases.  Against Mediums, 7 will often break armor and already damaging Structure in most cases; same goes for Heavies and Assaults at 12.
My suggestion-- and I haven't playtested it yet -- but I have been considering the following as a sort of "threshold" for Ground units:

"If a target takes more than half its starting armor from a single attack, that attacker may roll a critical hit against that target."
and
"Against targets that were partially damaged, if the attack also damages structure, the attacker may roll twice on the Critical Chart, (once for [threshold] and once for damaging Structure)."

Essentially this represents the chance that most or all of an attack went through a single location on a given target, and has a chance to cripple or destroy a given unit.  (On paper, clans have an edge with their higher damage output, so its not exactly fair to InnerSphere players... but I'm still working on that).

5) Leave "No Crits" on 5 and 9; it's fine as is.
I've found that players who cross-play or transition from Classic/TotalWarfare to AlphaStrike will recognize 5 and 9 as the "No damage" leg hits from Partial Cover.

[Descronan]

Someone noted that mechs with a lot of armor should not be affected by random crits. I can see that to a degree. One solution that is really simple to implement would be to say if your unit has four or more points of armor then no random crit is possible. For example:

"Any roll of 12 on a standard attack will cause a Critical Hit if the target has less than four points of armor remaining and the To Hit number was 10 or less."

I think this is a pretty good compromise so your brand new assault mechs aren't crippled by a lucky shot from a 1 point infantry or locust. Remember that 1 point of armor damage is equal to 30 points of damage in CBT. With 4 points of armor remaining, that's roughly 120 points of armor, which most likely is enough to protect the mech.