New Blog from Randall 9-13-11

[Chunga]

Randall looks at the outline for Interstellar Operations here.

If you have some comments about the Outline, please let Randall know in this thread.

[Wrangler]

Interesting stuff! I'm looking forward to seeing how the campaigning is going to work with large forces.

I hope the full LAM rules got in there, i didn't see a logical section for them to be in.

[Greyhind]

TBH I'm a bit nervous. This is some pretty important stuff from a universe perspective and if it gets screwed up...

The other books were all retreading and smoothing out old ground to some extent but I would be very surprised if this one reused a lot of material in, say, the economic/infrastructure section given how atrocious some of the old stuff is.

[Kit deSummersville]

I hope the full LAM rules got in there, i didn't see a logical section for them to be in.

Perhaps Alterante Eras (sic)?

[PeripheryPirate]

Perhaps Alterante Eras (sic)?

I would think so. They've been touted as one of a few "era-specific" rule sets, so it makes sense to put them there.

[Grave]

That thing is going to be a bloody phonebook, lol.

[Neko_Bijin]

Does Catalyst have a stylesheet entry for use of alternate vs. alternative?  Because the universe at large appears not to. :-\

[Hawktel]

I had some idea in my head it was further along than that. I don't know why.

[Kojak]

I've been waiting for Interstellar Operations to come out for about 3 years now, but I'm willing to wait as long as the final product is just as good as the prior core books have been.

[StCptMara]

Why are Maintainence, Salvage, and Customization rules in IO when they are already in SO?

[JPArbiter]

Alternate eras?  does that mean there will be a complete section in I/O to guide players on what would be feasable timeline changes to the Btech Universe?

[Maelwys]

Alternate eras?  does that mean there will be a complete section in I/O to guide players on what would be feasable timeline changes to the Btech Universe?

Alternate Eras meaning Eras usually meaning products that are set in a different era than the current focus. So since we're in the Jihad/Republic transition, anything that's not set in this era, would be an alternate era (like Op:KLONDIKE, or Reunification Wars, for instance).

[Istal_Devalis]

They've mentioned that IO (And specifically Alternate Eras) is going to be the book that showcases 'extinct' technology. So this is where stuff like LAMs, the Manei Domini, and Prototype weapon rules would go. Maybe a list of when weapons went from Experimental to Advanced/Standard. I think this will also be where they'll add stuff that showed up post StratOps in terms of new tech, like QuadVees and Collosal class mechs.

[Talz]

Looking forward to seeing more.

[verybad]

 What the heck is a Quad Vee? Don't need rules, just...waht is it?

Would like to see some rules for stuff that's part of the universe but isn't covered, plus some options for going a bit outside. (eg jumpcollar capable space stations, Monitors.)

The strategic game is also something I'm very interested in.

[Wrangler]

What the heck is a Quad Vee? Don't need rules, just...waht is it?

Quad Vee was (if i remember right) a Clan unit mentioned in WizKid's MechWarrior: Technology of Destruction which was suppose to be hybrid of vehicle and protoMech.   I don't think that would make into SO since were not that far into the Dark Age right now.

[Dread Moores]

Why are Maintainence, Salvage, and Customization rules in IO when they are already in SO?

That's one I still don't quite understand.

[Bad_Syntax]

That's one I still don't quite understand.

Because they would be at a company, battalion, or regimental scale, not individual or lance.  Using the SO rules in planetary assault would, well, make that aspect of the game overly complex at that scale.  I'm sure if you wanted to use SO rules you could, but you better have a HUGE amount of free time on your hands ;)

[Fireangel]

I just hope the Ares Conventions section speaks of neutral shipping and hospital ships.

[roosterboy]

Quad Vee was (if i remember right) a Clan unit mentioned in WizKid's MechWarrior: Technology of Destruction which was suppose to be hybrid of vehicle and protoMech.

quad 'Mech + vehicle, not ProtoMech + vehicle

The newest entry, believed to still be in the experimental stage, is being developed by Clan Hell’s Horses. Called a QuadVee, it takes the concept of a four-legged ’Mech and fuses it with a vehicle, creating a multi-legged tank. Only time will tell whether this unit finds its place, or disappears into the annals of history along with the jumping vehicle.

[Talz]

IMO QuadVee is a goofy name and in several ways a goofy concept.  Having said that I've always thought that Quads would make a LOT more sense as something closer to a real four legged walking tank, turret and all, so I'm interested to see what comes of this and hoping that any such rules include a better name for the unit type.

[Wrangler]

IMO QuadVee is a goofy name and in several ways a goofy concept.  Having said that I've always thought that Quads would make a LOT more sense as something closer to a real four legged walking tank, turret and all, so I'm interested to see what comes of this and hoping that any such rules include a better name for the unit type.

Least its material to Experimental 'Mech like the fanmade Huntress, except with four legs.

Expanding construction rules for alternate eras will be interesting, but tricky i would think.  Some things will come up and some will go away again.  I remember struggling Mercenaries in Wolf Hunters novel having to pull high grade equipment from their 'Mech for Succession War era parts to keep cost low.  That something would be useful in IO's scheme of eras to play big nations or factions.

[verybad]

quad 'Mech + vehicle, not ProtoMech + vehicle



The newest entry, believed to still be in the experimental stage, is being developed by Clan Hell’s Horses. Called a QuadVee, it takes the concept of a four-legged ’Mech and fuses it with a vehicle, creating a multi-legged tank. Only time will tell whether this unit finds its place, or disappears into the annals of history along with the jumping vehicle.

Oh god, a rollerblading quadmech. FAIL.

What possible advantage could this bring? Maybe no piloting rolls when it's in "vee" mode? Would obviously take some tonnage and crit spaces. I don't see any maneuverability advantages (mech=tank in speed for engine size) Would let it walk where a mech can go but a tank can't. Presumably mech armor limitations.

It's essentially a boring jump the shark tank bit of technology. It seems like something new just to be new rather than something that makes a lot of sense.  They might be somewhat effective, but it just doesn't seem like it's filling a niche rather than probably being poor at covering two niches that are already filled.

There are already rules for putting turrets on quads, (and THAT is a useful bit of tech)

[roosterboy]

That seems an awfully strong and harsh opinion for something we haven't even seen yet. Or even gotten a decent description of.

And how do you get from "multi-legged tank" to "rollerblading quadmech", anyway?

Plus, it's "believed to still be in the experimental stage", meaning it's untried and possibly dead-end tech. Wouldn't be the first time (in BattleTech or the real world) someone came up with an idea that "doesn't seem like it's filling a niche rather than probably being poor at covering two niches that are already filled."

[Bad_Syntax]

I can accept quad mechs that fold their legs in and run on treads/wheels on the bottom of their main hull before I could accept Air'Mechs protomechs with a WIGE movement mode, and we have those ;)

[glitterboy2098]

hey, i'll take rollerblading quads if that means i can make a Kenbishi industries think tank :)

[Kendo]

I've been wondering about self policing of military units recently as I ponder rules for large forces over multiple systems. I believe Wolf's Dragoons had an internal police force, but I can't recall any other units that had such a force. At what point do you think a military force would need to integrate rules for internal policing options as part of campaign play, and how would it be handled? Are there rules for merc self policing beyond the rules for desertion that I seem to recall?

 Edit: Moved to own thread for fear of thread derailment. My bad.

[Fireangel]

I've been wondering about self policing of military units recently as I ponder rules for large forces over multiple systems. I believe Wolf's Dragoons had an internal police force, but I can't recall any other units that had such a force. At what point do you think a military force would need to integrate rules for internal policing options as part of campaign play, and how would it be handled? Are there rules for merc self policing beyond the rules for desertion that I seem to recall?

This would be an excellent subject for a thread.  ;)
I won't reply here so as to not threadjack this one.  8)

[PeripheryPirate]

I can accept quad mechs that fold their legs in and run on treads/wheels on the bottom of their main hull *snip*

Just wanted to say that this is what I pictured when I heard QuadVee.

Bizarre concept, sure, but it might give you a little more speed in a city, and it would reduce your target profile. Imagine going hull down with a quad 'Mech and still being able to move... that would actually be kinda cool.

[verybad]

That seems an awfully strong and harsh opinion for something we haven't even seen yet. Or even gotten a decent description of.

And how do you get from "multi-legged tank" to "rollerblading quadmech", anyway?

Plus, it's "believed to still be in the experimental stage", meaning it's untried and possibly dead-end tech. Wouldn't be the first time (in BattleTech or the real world) someone came up with an idea that "doesn't seem like it's filling a niche rather than probably being poor at covering two niches that are already filled."

Sorry, but I'm not going to pretend to be impressed or excited with something that's simply a bad idea. I don't see much advantage from combining a quad mech with treads on it's feet.

How do you NOT get from multilegged tank to rollerblading quadmech? It's an obvious comparison. If they're legs, then they bend at the knees and the feet aren't always on the ground. If it's also a tank, then it's got treads. It's rollerblading. Might be bigger, but it's essentially the same thing.

I presume it can actually only perform one movement type at a time (ie be a tank or a mech per turn) It can't gain much from either (a tank is more stable, a mech is more durable) and will obviously have to sacrifice something in order to have two movement systems.

ie Can't do the job of either unit type as well. It's born to be mediocre.

At least LAMs give a decent ability that's much different from either base unit, Mechs and tanks aren't different enough to make this a useful compromise, you get a bad mech and a bad tank *yeah*

I've been wrong many times, and I'm only stating my own opinion re this. With good enough art I would probably even eat my own words. Currently, it just sounds flat out stupid.