Technical Readouts: What Would You Like to See?

[StCptMara]

One other issue I would like to see addressed:  While I do not want to see the Record Sheets published inside the TRO's, I  absolutely want to see the Record Sheets published/made available for sale concurrently with the TRO.  There is absolutely no reason why we should have to wait 3/6/9/14 months after the publication of a TRO to have the official canon Record Sheets made available.  Yes, I understand the issues at present with it.  If those issues are going to continue, then TRO's should wait until the Record Sheets for them are available and ready, at least in PDF form.

Frankly, this could be fixed with two things:
 1) A set standard on the crit placing of all gear, such that anyone can use those rules and given stats, and end up with
              canonical sheet.
 2) Listing exactly what location everything that takes up crits is located.

  These would just mean the variants that never actually work out exactly using the stuff in the book would need to wait
for the record sheets PDF.

[FedComGirl]

One other issue I would like to see addressed:  While I do not want to see the Record Sheets published inside the TRO's, I  absolutely want to see the Record Sheets published/made available for sale concurrently with the TRO.  There is absolutely no reason why we should have to wait 3/6/9/14 months after the publication of a TRO to have the official canon Record Sheets made available.  Yes, I understand the issues at present with it.  If those issues are going to continue, then TRO's should wait until the Record Sheets for them are available and ready, at least in PDF form.

Use blank record sheets. That's one of the reasons we have them.

[Charlie Tango]

Use blank record sheets. That's one of the reasons we have them.

Without a canon crit layout, units can't be used in canon/official events.


Now can we get back to the topic please?

[FedComGirl]

Without a canon crit layout, units can't be used in canon/official events.


Now can we get back to the topic please?

You can say the same about minis and they're more critical to have than a pre-printed record sheet.

Of course. : )  Ready made place holders to get the units into the game right away would be nice.

[Kojak]

Content: I am personally for as much content as possible, and yes, I am absolutely willing to pay more for that as a result. My favorite TROs are 3085 and Prototypes: the wide variety of unit types is what really did it for me. Also, I like lots of advanced and experimental technologies, as long as they're applied with a modicum of intelligence.

Writing: I hate fluff that doesn't tell you anything the stat block doesn't. Notable pilots/crews, deployment info, equipment brands, interesting stuff about the history of the design: that's the good stuff.

Stats: I like 'Mechs that are quirky, but not ones that are nigh-useless. More Templar Bs, fewer Targes, please. Also, quirks should be a part of every design.

Rules: I use the vast majority of the TacOps special rules when possible, so I'm all for their inclusion in TROs.

Art: To echo others, more of Mr. Iglesias and Mr. White, please. And I know his stuff is a little more controversial, but I'm a big Matt Plog fan as well.

Layout: I think the layout of 3085 is probably the best way to go, honestly. It's a little complicated but it's very useful too.

[foxbat]

Content - I'd like to see TROs organized by era and type of conflict : surface or space, with ASFs, that span both, in the space section. Actually, I'd like to see an all space assets TRO, regrouping all that was published previously (and adding some new things, of course)

Writing - Notable pilots and deployment : that's what makes the units more tangible for me. Even at the expense of the development history and variants, unless these bits are containing some uncommon bits.

REmainder is fine for me as it is.

[Stormcrow]

You can say the same about minis and they're more critical to have than a pre-printed record sheet.

<snip>

Nope. For gameplay, the proper record sheet is far more important than the mini. Bt is not wysiwyg like some miniatures-based games.

[HABeas2]

Hello,

You can say the same about minis and they're more critical to have than a pre-printed record sheet.

Incorrect. Catalyst Game Labs is NOT a minis company, so we do NOT require minis to play. Proxies have always been acceptable as long as they have a front/back. Meanwhile, we DO require Record Sheets to play.

So, please, stay on topic, and argue elsewhere.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

[Dave Talley]

Content - I'd like to see TROs organized by era and type of conflict : surface or space, with ASFs, that span both, in the space section. Actually, I'd like to see an all space assets TRO, regrouping all that was published previously (and adding some new things, of course)

Writing - Notable pilots and deployment : that's what makes the units more tangible for me. Even at the expense of the development history and variants, unless these bits are containing some uncommon bits.

REmainder is fine for me as it is.

yeah I would love to see one combined TRO for Star League/Reunification wars and another with Age Of War specifically for 2nd/3rd wars

[Diplominator]

Layout:  I think separating units by tech base is a mistake nowadays. Clan and IS factions have integrated enough that the tech base is no longer inherently indicative of which faction is using it, and I expect that trend to continue.

Content: I would love to see an ONN TRO, or just a weekly/monthly online feature, presenting new variants (and QUIRKS!) for older designs. In any case, I think any new TRO should include an ONN section like '85.

Rules: New quirks are tolerable but I think anything past that is more suitable for a dedicated sourcebook on the era of introduction.


And last, please find a way to get record sheets existing. At least get the unabridged versions of Prototypes and '67 in the wild before more stuff comes out. TROs are great but being able to use the stuff in them is better.

[Gideon]

Content -  A variety of units with a relatively even balance, though 'Mechs should have an edge due to the nature of the game.  Concurrent record sheet releases would be nice, but I believe those should be a PDF product only.  Royal segments and ONN segments are nice updates to designs that may feel forgotten; I would like to see an introduction date for that type of entry and a manufacturer listing.

Writing - Introduction and proliferation dates, battle history, design idiosyncrasies, and quirks of the design that give it character beyond what the stats are capable of displaying. 

Stats - TRO: Prototypes style.  Particularly fond of quirks.  Number of crit slots taken by equipment is probably no longer necessary. 

Rules - Limited technology additions would be a decent addition, along with the aforementioned quirks.

Art - Always preferred the engineering style concept art style.  The most recent artwork however has been a good trend, so no real complaints about the current direction.

Layout - No issues with the layout. 

[Jimmyray73]

I've liked most of what I've seen lately, no reason to say anything other than "keep it up" for most of the categories except:

Stats: Speaking as an "old school" fan who still occasionally uses a pen and/or pencil to fill in a blank record sheet using just a TRO book I'd like to see notes about crit placement for heat sinks and other miscellaneous gear like TSM, as well as notes about arm actuator deletions and such. That'd make it easier to get things done with blank sheets, a pen, and a TRO when I don't have access to Heavy Metal or PDF record sheet downloads.

[Ice_Trey]

Content - A Drac zombie Heavy/Assault 'mech would be swell. That's been my biggest complaint with that faction for a long while. So many glass cannons that can't hit the broad side of a barn once you get past that 60-ton mark.

Also, dialing back on the Advanced/Experimental technologies would be nice. Instead, simply having additional "Variants" of the new 'mechs that use TO rules would be nice. TRO 3085 is outstanding, don't get me wrong, but if I want to use anything with rules of a higher level than Tournament Rules (Like that spectacular-looking Orochi on pages 102-103), I have to lug my copy of TacOps to the LGS on top of my dice, rulebooks, maps, miniatures (in a massive Overlord minis bag), recordsheets, hexpacks, so on and forth. My bookbag is bursting at the seams and I weigh an additional 50 pounds* when I step out the front door. There is rarely that additional square inch of space to fit another core book.

This might sound like sacrilege to a lot of players, but I'd honestly like to see a brand new batch of 'mechs made for Succession Wars play. Say, a batch of designs made during the early succession wars? I think that with all the 3025-only people I run into (and myself sick and tired of that era after having to play in it almost exclusively since 2005), it would only make sense to make supplements that they'll actually buy, and something for guys like myself - for whom having to field the same old Jenners and Dragons over and over again gets dry. Plus, a new batch of introbox level 'mechs might make a good foundation for a future boxed set without falling back on artwork from 1985.

Writing
One thing I didn't like about TRO 3075's fluff text for the age of war section is the fluff for the Gladiator. I mean, the fluff itself was alright, but after being presented with these outstanding stats for a 'mech, to find out that the faction it's filed under pretty much never uses it felt like a raw deal. I would like to see more designs that are contracted to multiple factions. That's part of what made the unseen/phoenix mechs so versatile compared to, say, a Fafnir or Komodo. When it's a good design, but anyone can have it, it's popularity will certainly go up.

For the most part, I just breeze through the flavor text to find out who makes it and uses it.

Stats
I'd honestly like to see C-bill costs included in all of the TROs. I think that it feels more at home in a fluffier book like this.



Rules
I honestly prefer seeing rules left in the core rulebooks. The things already weigh a ton, and there's a wealth of options therein that haven't really been effectively explored with the canon designs, yet.

Art
A resounding YES to Mr. Iglecias, White, and Plog. Lewis, however... I'd rather he be removed from TRO duty. I'm sure he's a great guy, but I find his art to be bland and lacks detail - and when you're drawing stuff that's going to be sculpted, effectively making it the face of the franchise, you can't afford to have unappealing designs.

On the topic of my prior mention of making a TRO for the early succession wars, if we could get Loose to do some industrial design inspired 'mechs again, it would be a fantastic nostalgia trip. Some people might speak ill of his artwork, but I, for one, loved the heck out of TROs 3025 and 3058.

Layout -
I think that rather than having deployment listed purely in text format, a quick-glance section on each page showing which factions each design is available to (Using faction logos, most likely) would make this game a lot more approachable for new players.

*This is not an exaggeration. I did a before/after with my bathroom scale.

[DarkSpade]

off the top of my head...

Content:  I've always wished the TROs and record sheets were the same book.  Scenarios.  Especially scenarios that work well with 3 players.  :)

Layout:  sort by I.S. and Clan at most.  3085 was a bit of a mess.

Art:  More of it.  I loved how Project Phoenix had the variant artwork.  Don't need every one, but the more the merrier.

Stats:  Watch the heat.  Not every mech needs to be 100% heat efficient, but what's the point of giving a mech more lasers than it could ever fire without shutting down?


I'd REALLY like an alphabetized index.

[beachhead1985]

Content - some of the most recent stuff from 3085 and prototypes fills my heart with joy because it's so bad my own customs, using mostly only teach available in the old HM programs are still world's better. On the one hand---Kinda neat to see more deliberately flawed designs again, on the other---gods, have we learned nothing? too much like real life, lol.

I'd like to see more support vehicles, dropships and jumpships (especially the leviathan, I'll be your best friend if you stat the Leviathan). I'd also be interested in seeing a kind of Infantry Weapons TRO; something along the lines of "Jane's All the InnerSphere and Periphery's Infantry Weapons and Small Arms"

Writing - the writing is great!

Stats - too many lame duck units in the latest editions, not enough common-sense modifications; like swapping out weapons for different roles, like in TRO 3025 for instance.

Rules - I don't like how infantry are built and handled in game, but that's it.

Art - art is consistantly fine to great. But in general; smaller heads.

Layout - nope, love the layout.

[3rdCrucisLancers]

Content - I'm alone on this, I daresay, but I hate the ONN/Royals/Infantry things we've been seeing, with the caveat that if record sheets are released at the same time as TROs, then I'm okay with ONN or Royals. I have zero use for or interest in infantry. If at all possible, TROs should not repeat not be released without the record sheets.

Writing - I'll go with the flow and say I like to see a story, or an explanation of why X unit was procured with Y weapons, or information about the design phase, or how it fits with existing units for the users.

Stats - I like a good mix of designs, some good, some bad, some mediocre. I'm not a fan of the whole "just make it slower and add IJJs!" trend, but there are in-universe reasons for it, so.

Rules - These have no place in a TRO.

Art - I really love Plog and Dave White. Chris Lewis is more hit or miss for me, but he has done some fine drawings. Art is an essential part of TROs, to my mind, and I really like the standard unit/illustration format.

Layout - I'd prefer the older FASA-style organization, a la TRO 3058. I'm not a fan of the random sections of Star League 'mechs, or Phoenix 'mechs in their own areas. I understand the reasons why that was done, but I wouldn't dig it much for the future.

[Youngblood]

Content - A Drac zombie Heavy/Assault 'mech would be swell. That's been my biggest complaint with that faction for a long while. So many glass cannons that can't hit the broad side of a barn once you get past that 60-ton mark.

Not a fan of the Grasshopper or the Warhammer or the Victor or the Hatamoto-Chi or the Katana or the Naginata or the O-Bakemono or the BattleMaster or the Longbow or the Tai-sho or the Mauler or the Akuma or the Atlas or the Marauder II, I take it?  I can smell a Warlord/Hellstar fan from a million Internet miles away.  Also, check out the Maelstrom as well as new availability of the PPC Catapults, I find them to be quite resilient despite XL Engines.

Broad side of a barn...don't you use C3?  Or are you having Targeting Computer/Clan weapon envy?

Also, dialing back on the Advanced/Experimental technologies would be nice. Instead, simply having additional "Variants" of the new 'mechs that use TO rules would be nice. TRO 3085 is outstanding, don't get me wrong, but if I want to use anything with rules of a higher level than Tournament Rules (Like that spectacular-looking Orochi on pages 102-103), I have to lug my copy of TacOps to the LGS on top of my dice, rulebooks, maps, miniatures (in a massive Overlord minis bag), recordsheets, hexpacks, so on and forth. My bookbag is bursting at the seams and I weigh an additional 50 pounds* when I step out the front door. There is rarely that additional square inch of space to fit another core book.

A new edition of Total Warfare with the rules for the weapons that became Tourney Legal as of 3090 would be nice.

[MadCapellan]

Content - I also love ONN, and I think there's an opportunity to use it to update units that don't warrant a full TRO entry with upgraded technology.  DropShips haven't seen any upgrades in forever, Aerospace Fighters and moreso conventional fighters rarely get the number of variants 'Mechs do, and similar. 

Writing - More of that snappy MadCapellan fellow. 

Stats - A few tweaks I'd like to see to the stat-blocks in TROs:
Quickstrike/BattleForce stats.

The placement of heat sinks on non-Omni BattleMechs

Make sure that the stat block specifies what type of armor or structure is being used.  Generally this is done, but occasionally it's omitted in a frustrating way.

As far as stats are concerned, I feel like the game is up to its proverbial ears in big, slow heavy and assault 'Mechs slathered in the big gun du jour.  I feel like the game has a severe lack of good, jumpy skirmishing units in the medium and light weight class at this point, and I'd like to see more designs of that nature.

Rules - I don't see a problem with introducing rules with a TRO, per se.  We've been doing it since TRO: 2750.  The problem does become that when you do this, you have to eventually reprint it in a rulebook.

Art - My favorite BattleMech designs have always been the sleek, fast, humanoid looking ones like the Phoenix Hawk, Valkyrie, Wraith, Incubus, Dola and Goshawk.  I believe Big scary walking tanks have pride of place in this game, but I'd really like the fast skirmishers to look as fast and flexible as they are.

David White's art is mind-blowing.  Alex Iglesias and Steve Huda also do a bang-up job.  I feel like Matt Plog is Battletech's best artist, but I also feel like his best work is of existing designs, as sometimes his original ones seem overly abstract. 

Layout - TRO: 3085 was my ideal.  We could keep that format forever and I'd never complain.

[spacewolflord]

Content - How about some stuff that would work well in the RPG and the table top.  Like Exo Armor and Ultra Light Mechs.  But otherwise I think more variants of existing Mechs and other Vehicles since there just so many out there people just got to be using old designs just updating them a bit.  And Record sheets of the new goodies would be nice.

Rules - Unless its a Quirk, like Jettison-Capable Weapon, for a mech then I say no.  There are already a lot of rules to work with so just stay with in them until a new Main Rule Book 

[GULAG]

You asked for short and sweet....

Content - Lots of new, beastly mechs. 

Writing - Fluff with variants, canon quirks, and notable pilots.

Stats - Variants stats, era/time of availability, quirk stats.

Rules -  No rules.  Put those where they belong.  In a rule book.

Art - No more PokeMechs please.  Use 3025/3026 as your guide.  That's the gold standard.  Art is key to bringing the game to life.  Many of us bought our first box set because of art.  See avatar.  See 25th anniv. box set.  See Citytech, 1st Edition box art.

Layout - current is fine.  An easy way to determine availability for each house/state would be nice.  An example would be...

Zeus:  Steiner - common, Davion - uncommon, Liao - rare

Finally, an uber tech readout, PDF, including stats for everything from Battledroids to present.  That should keep you busy for a while.

[William J. Pennington]

Content - I like semi-mixed content. Ground unit (Mechs, Armor, battle armor). Aerospace Fighters, Warships, Dropships, I'd prefer in seperate ones...mainly because I'd probably delay or skip  some of those. Warships and most dropships are just filler that I'll never use, qand likely not read more than once.

I'm torn on the next issue: sometimes,  I'd be willing to have fewer units if TRO's were reformatted to include page write up for variants,artwork for the variant and the record sheets for the unit and variants in the TRO, or at least instructions in the TRO to produce the record sheet.  Other times, I waver back to the current TRO book / Record Sheet format.

Writing - Eliminate useless stuff, like the names of components or systems, or limiting descriptions of where the 'mech is made beyond the corporate producer or faction level.   Who makes a medium laser or a targeting system is completely unimportant.

Stats - Quickstrike/ Battleforce stats, and BV (or BV's replacement) numbers.  Suggested positive and negative quirks.

Rules - No rules in a TRO.

Art - I enjoy it as it is, wouldn't mind variant artwork

Layout -
I may be a heretic, but I'd be happy with a deviation from traditional layout from the 'landscape' ortientation to match up with all other sourcebooks for ease of shelf arrangement.

[martian]

Content
- More 'Mechs (and combat vehicles), less aerospace units and less infantry (I feel that CBT has more than enough of these not-so-important unit types). Less historical types, more current ones.

Writing
- It's okay.
- One thing: I like "Notable pilots" section, but please - stop doing such blatant fan-servicing such as those tiring advertisements of BattleCorps legion, especially how excellent and magnificent those mercenaries are.

Stats
- Okay

Rules
- Rules belong into rulebooks. The purpose of TW, TechManual, TacOps and StratOps was to keep all rules in one place. If you are tossing additional rules, quirks, etc. around in various TROs and sourcebooks, then the situation is becoming very similar to what old FASA did.

Art
- Duane Loose, Matthew Plog (but keep him on a short leash, he has a bad habit to turn his pictures into very/too ornated mess), David White and Brent Evans.
- I liked variant guide as it was in TRO: Project Phoenix.
- Also, I like technical drawings style (with some dynamics), not album of entries for contest "Who will paint BattleMech in more outrageous pose."

Layout
- use precise A4 format.
!!! Please, use clean white background for text, no ornaments, no grey background, no wrapped paper as background. Just plain white will suffice, thank you.

One generic remark
 - please, do not print TROs that will make reader sad/pissed off that his faction was omitted and that other factions got all those cool toys. I mean TRO: 3058 specifically. It was more or less TRO: Federated Commonwealth, with one quarter given to Draconis Combine OmniMechs. But 3/4 of said TRO were for FedSuns -  almost all Star League 'Mechs and tanks were for FedSuns, and almost all new 'Mechs and vehicles were earmarked as for AFFS/LAAF. Of all dozens of entries just "one" was for FWL - and it was damned Galleon tank.

[HABeas2]

Hello,

One generic remark
 - please, do not print TROs that will make reader sad/pissed off that his faction was omitted and that other factions got all those cool toys. I mean TRO: 3058 specifically. It was more or less TRO: Federated Commonwealth, with one quarter given to Draconis Combine OmniMechs. But 3/4 of said TRO were for FedSuns -  almost all Star League 'Mechs and tanks were for FedSuns, and almost all new 'Mechs and vehicles were earmarked as for AFFS/LAAF. Of all dozens of entries just "one" was for FWL - and it was damned Galleon tank.

Congratulations. You just killed the series entirely. After all, the Niops fans are ALWAYS being left out...

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

[martian]

Hello,

Congratulations. You just killed the series entirely. After all, the Niops fans are ALWAYS being left out...

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

Okay, okay.  O0

My bad.

[BirdofPrey]

We could use a few general (ie. not limited to a few or single faction) designs per TRO.

[Rainbow 6]

I'm basing my responses on TRO:Prototypes as that's the latest TRO.

Content - The current content meets all of my requirements although i feel the TRO's should only show new equipment with newer variants of older equipment only appearing in an ONN section.

Writing - I would like to see notable pilots come back and the ONN section continued.

Stats - Show heat sink locations and armour types.

Rules - I'm not a big fan of rules appearing in a TRO.

Art - I would prefer the art to be on a clean white background.

Layout - I feel there is now no need to separate clan and IS tech, just splitting the equipment by unit type and weight is sufficient.

[Jaim Magnus]

Like Rainbow 6, I'm basing my comments off of TRO Prototypes.  It's most recent and probably the template for future TROs.

Content - I prefer seeing 'Mechs, that's what the game is really about.  Some BA and vehicles.  Please no more ProtoMechs.  And stick to tech that is readily available to a faction.  All well and good to have a specialized 'Mech written up, but less fun if there's only five of them.  Just saying.

Writing - Notable pilots are fun.  But spread them out faction wise.

Stats - I don't see the need for any changes here.

Rules - Not what the TRO is about.  That's what the Rule Books are for.

Art - Well done pen and ink or computer drafted art.  David White or artists with similar quality.

Layout - That very busy square background in Prototypes has got to go away.  A proper font for 'Mech names on the page.  No need to separate Clan and IS... that would be covered in deployment.  I like the landscape layout.

[trboturtle]

[- One thing: I like "Notable pilots" section, but please - stop doing such blatant fan-servicing such as those tiring advertisements of BattleCorps legion, especially how excellent and magnificent those mercenaries are.

I know of only two references to BattleCorps Legion pilots in the notable pilots section of TRO 3085, and only one of them (Colonel Joey Nicole) was named. I don't see how that can be considered "those tiring advertisements." Where else are BattleCorps Legion pilots named?

The BattleCorps Legion is Battlecorps.com own cannonized unit, and are fair game as every other cannonized unit. They're a "Good guy" unit, white knight, help get kittens out of trees sort of people. There are a few of them out there.....

Craig

[Fatebringer]

I don't own a lot of the TRO's, so my comments may seem irrelavant to some.

Content - Maybe a page for abbreviations? I know when I try to abreviate long vehicle names to some simple things like the Svantovit IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle). I remember picking up 3085 and going, what's a WIGE? The picture explained alot, but I was still curious to the actual meaning.

Writing - I love to see some example of a tactic the unit used, whether it was a success or failure, or just sat in a hanger because people refused to use it for that reason. I like to get a feel of the machine's purpose.

Stats - I liked the charts in the back of the TRO record sheets, at least the one I saw for 3068 where it recaps the machine, adding a few pages quick strike stats in that section would be nice.

Rules - Also as I saw stated before, a TRO really doesn't need them.

Art - "Pretty!" - I leave art to the artists. For a game like this, it's nice to have.

Layout - The flipbook format is pretty classic. I like it.

[Mastergunz]

Content - Keep it to Mechs, Vehicles and Battle Armor. Over the last 20 years and numerous gaming groups I have seen ASF's used 1 time. Keep it with the Aerotech fans and give ASF, Dropships and Jumpship/Warships their own book.  Record sheets for included units would be helpful too.

Writing - No complaints.

Stats - No more 'makes' of weapons and systems. Leave that stuff for the fiction and RPG. Add better discriptions of variants instead of the the small write-ups they get now. QS stats.

If a new weapon or technology is debuting on a featured unit then a brief write up with some art would be cool (ala; the Solaris 7 book).

Rules - No rules, keep those in the rulebooks.

Art - Multiple views would be cool. Both from an in-game standpoint and possible miniture standpoint. No complaint about the current quality of the art.

Layout - No more Landscape layout. They fit wonky on shelves.  #P No faction specific sections. Simply label on the sheet what faction has access to that design. Organize by tonnage and unit type.

-Gunz