Combat Manual: Mercenaries Beta fan input thread

[jairb]

Having played with false flag once, and admittedly incorrectly at that, my feedback is this:  False Flag is pretty powerful, even when "failing" the roll.  I'd suggest keeping success at 8+.

Could the discovery of the False Flag be tied somehow to the opponent's Force Experience Level?  Shouldn't higher quality Forces be more likely to spot the ruse than lower quality Forces?

[ColBosch]

From a discussion in another thread, it was suggested that - if space can be found or made - that a box or other section be included in the Force Creation rules detailing what types of Alternate Ammunition are available to mercenary forces in the eras covered, as this is not a subject covered in the main rules or the Companion.

[Von Ether]

I like the idea, but my tweaks would be for it to be in future printings of core rules. Regardless, I suggest just using an Era icon in the entry.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Experience Level: The average Skill of each Unit; see Point Value Skill Rating table (p. 167, Alpha Strike)

I think there should be a clear statement as to whether this is a suggestion or a requirement for a force built under the CM rules.

EDIT: NM, I see it is addressed on page 79. Maybe for clarity's sake add a "see page 79" reference to the line as well :)

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Tactical Experts (Engineers): During setup, this controlling
player of the Force with this ability may place two light buildings
on the table per full company (2” or 1 hex). These may be used
for cover (as a fortification) or as a bridge.

Personal perspective here, but since it's a Beta and all I figure such opinions and perspectives are implicitly being elicited ;)

Tactical Experts (engineers) seems weak in relation to some of the other abilities.  As written, it seems like a sort of compensation ability you should get for free if you actually pay to include an Engineering vehicle in your company.  (especially since they're not on the merc faction list... you're soaking FPs you might have spent elsewhere anyway just to have one in the first place)

Being able to place some strategically placed strips of manufactured terrain like rough, rubble, or trenches in addition to (or even instead of) buildings would make the ability stronger.

Another idea: perhaps the ability would allow the player to remove some cover-granting terrain to the opponent after table sides have been picked.

Yet another idea: Maybe the SCA grants the ability to place minefields?

[Karasu]

I just came across a bit of a weird juxtaposition on the pg 39 sidebar.

No one considered it likely that he would try another tack and attack the Draconis Combine.
Among those who were not surprised

I think that I'd prefer something like "Very few considered it likely" rather than the "No one" which is immediately contradicted by the next sentence.

[RomulusDC]

I am not sure if it was intentional, but here is a lack of continuity with the headings Combat Commands.
In the Table of Contents its called Combat Commands, in the "How to use this book' side bar the section is called Mercenary Combat Commands, and in the actual section the title is Mercenary Combat Commands while in the text it is referred to as Combat Commands.
The 15th Dracon actually starts on page 34, not 35
The Eridani lighthorde starts on 36, not 37 and is missing reference to Seventy first light horse and 1515 Lighthorse darkhorse in the ToC
On page 52, There is a subheading for Lindon's Regiment that does not appear on the table of contents. The Airwing is mentioned in the table of contents.

There are force composition headings that are not present for every command. I can't determine the reasoning behind why some have this heading and others dont'.

In the force building section, it appears that heading using bold font are also listed in the ToC, yet on page 79 unlisted mercenaries and force composition are bolded and not mentioned.
Factions points heading on page 82 is also not on the ToC.
It took me a lot of reading to find an actual observation so that I could offer more of a commentary.
The colour art is nice, though there is quite a bit of recycled art.
There are piles of missed opportunites to provide more character art with each of the pilots or even of their mechs. I miss the days days when Laubenstien and Dietrick offered us images that really enriched the BT universe with illustrations and paintings of characters. I find many  of the modern character art that looks like photoshopped people to be dull and detract from the overall quality of the book. Love him or hate him ( I love him), Jeff Laubenstein's characters were unique looking and contained background elements like alien bugs and plants, or even uniforms and T shirts with Band Names from the 31rst century, that really made the BT universe feel special.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

I'd like to expand a little on a previous comment I made upthread, specifically with regards to the company-by-company approach to the Faction Point system.

Should "companies" that are not 12 units strong still get 12 FPs?  There was the example of a company of infantry and APCs, but company sizes other than 12 can happen easily enough in other ways, even for mercs.

Namely, Aerospace squadrons.

I think the FP system ought to have a dedicated rule saying what to do with non-12 unit sized companies, even if the rule is to just keep using 12 FPs.   Although I anticipate the intention is you get 1 FP per unit in a company.  If that's the case, that being explicitly said would not only help clarify this, it'd help set up games vs Clans and their binaries/trinaries before their CM comes out.

[Karasu]

Akin to the False Flag problem, there is a problem with ranges for Lindon's Company (pg 52)

1 medium ’Mech company (pre-3028), 1 medium ’Mech battalion (3029-3042), 1 medium ’Mech regiment (post-3042)

How big was it during 3028?  This either needs to be either

(pre-3029) ... (3029 - 3042)

or

(pre-3028) ... (3028 - 3042)

A quick perusal of Sarna doesn't give any way to tell which is correct.

[Adrian Gideon]

Although I anticipate the intention is you get 1 FP per unit in a company.  If that's the case, that being explicitly said would not only help clarify this, it'd help set up games vs Clans and their binaries/trinaries before their CM comes out.

It's explicitly stated. Page 82, second sentence under Faction Points (FPS), "A player receives 1 FP per Unit in the company, up to 12 FPs."

[Rom Precentor]

Where are Hansen's Roughriders? They are the the only one of the core 5 not present.  Why the oversight? 

[BirdofPrey]

On page 25, the Comstar sidebar says

To that end, in 2786 he cajoled the Great Houses to recognize the creation of ComStar, a neutral, independent entity to maintain the HPG communication network and its HPG stations would free from attack by any Great House.

Should probably say

its HPG stations would remain free from attack

===
Page 88

in deciding whether or not a given map counts for the
terrain. For example, a single tree does not constitute not Woods,

delete the not before woods.

[Weirdo]

Where are Hansen's Roughriders? They are the the only one of the core 5 not present.  Why the oversight?

I strongly doubt this is an oversight, but you do raise a very good question. I wonder if they're in the same situation as the Big Mac, and considered so close to a House that they'll be in that CM instead. Who were they working for in this era?

[Frabby]

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, the Roughriders are mentioned in the sidebar that gives a rundown of numerous other famous commands, though they are misspelled there as "Rough Riders".

[BirdofPrey]

Looking at the camouflage special ability on page 89, I think you guys may have the modifier backwards.

It says it replaces the -0 TMM of a standstill unit with a -2 TMM.  That would make units standing still easier to hit, which kind of conflicts with the whole camouflage thing.

[lrose]

The history for the Crescent Hawks doesn't match up with earlier references.  Per the Kell Hound book, Jeremiah Youngblood was part of the Kell Hounds in 3011- per p. 6 he commanded the LRRP Lance on Nestor. He is also listed on the TO&E for the Kell Hounds in 3016 (p. 27 2nd Battalion- 3rd Company)

[lrose]

The Wylie's Coyotes entry is a bit more mysterious then it needs to be.  In both the Mercenaries Supplement and Mercenaries Supplement II entry for Blanc's Coyotes it makes it seem pretty clear that their contract ended and it was known that they were headed to the Magistracy of Canopus for their next contract. 

[RomulusDC]

I think I figured out what it is that bugs me about the unit descriptions. Take the Crescent Hawks for example. In the small section that describes Common allies and enemies, it does not mention special command abilities. That rule is found under the section containing rules for expereince level and force composition. In the Fuchida's Fussiliers entry, the special command rules are in the first box, yet both units only have a single subsequent box describing their foce composition. Comparing other single force composition units, the Crescent Hawks seem to be the abnormality.
Aslo, Common enemies of the Fuchida's Fussiliers is not bolded.

[Bongfu]

Using the FP system you could allow players to actually do one of the few non-lore breaking things in the game and create a DIY Mercenary Command. As it stands, the random generation of a non-aligned mercenary command is kind of silly. Why would I start a mercenary company and not actually have control of how they work on the battlefield? Not every mercenary unit, outside of the big commands, is run like the Lone Wolves.

While some of the arguments against will undoubtedly culminate into, "This allows players to powergame" believe me when I say, you don't need rules from a Combat Manual to power game in Alpha Strike. If players abuse these rules like they can abuse other rules work that out among yourselves. The possible deeds of the few should not punish the many.

All in all though, I am really excited to see where the Combat Manuals take us. This is something I have wanted to see in Battletech for a very, very long time. If done right, this could help get more people interested in Alpha Strike and breath new life into our beloved universe.

[nckestrel]

The random rolls was meant for non-player opposing forces, not player character forces.  So you don't fight the same thing over and over.  We're looking at the feedback to have a player "create your own" option though.

[Bongfu]

The random rolls was meant for non-player opposing forces, not player character forces.  So you don't fight the same thing over and over.  We're looking at the feedback to have a player "create your own" option though.

Fair enough, it is the only "create a force" section in the book so I assumed that was it. I am glad you are looking into a create your own idea.

Honestly if you just created a template for players to use like the one you have for all the merc commands in the book that would be awesome. Give them something similar to Faction Points called Command Points(CP).

For the creation rules (maybe on a point system? Negative quirks would be good here to balance them out), you just follow a format like the following:

1)Pick your origin: So you should have several options here. They can all cost CP, but all should have some benefits and negatives. Did the unit break away from their former faction? If so they now gain an extra enemy (that faction). Are they the personal guard of some rich, pompous noble? They have fancy equipment, but cannot get the espirit du corps ability.

2)Pick your friends and enemies: limit it to one each. This means you can pick up some equipment from your friends for FP as per the rules.

3)Force composition: This is where things get a bit hairy, but hear me out. Everyone should start with a light rated company/battalion/regiment (the size should not matter for the purpose of building). This can be a vehicle, infantry, aerospace, or Battlemech unit. You can pay CP to add additional subunits, i.e. add a vehicle company. You can pay CP to upgrade those subunits to higher tonnage ratings. So I could pay points to make my Light Battlemech battalion a Heavy Battlemech Battalion, as well as purchasing a light vehicle company to go along with it.

4) Commands and subcommands: Generally player-made units should be limited to one command. However, paying a hefty CP cost can allow players to break their unit up into smaller commands under a general umbrella.

5)Command and subcommand abilities: This is pretty straight forward. Using the CP system, allow players to buy command abilities for their unit as well as paying points to up the skill rating of their various subunits so that they can add more abilities to said units. Also, remember the origins? That and force composition should dictate what command abilities you can and cannot buy for your units. For example, a company made up of Assault weights is not going to be able to gain "Hit and Run".

All in all, it should be realistic. If you want to play a legendary mercenary unit, play one of the canon units. Mercenaries are a dime a dozen, but that doesn't mean your unit cannot be fantastic as well.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

I'm not sure if this was said upthread already.. but page 80 has an error:

The Standard Mercenary Aerospace Organization chart lists an Aerospace Lance as having 4 fighters.   In the event this is not in error and is instead new canon, then the squadron size is in error (3x lances = 6 fighters, as current canon recognizes).

[nckestrel]

Fair enough, it is the only "create a force" section in the book so I assumed that was it. I am glad you are looking into a create your own idea.

Also, I didn't write back cover text, so they may have had a different idea of what those rules were for than I had.  The use of rules is always more open to opinion :).

[Pat Payne]

The random rolls was meant for non-player opposing forces, not player character forces.  So you don't fight the same thing over and over.  We're looking at the feedback to have a player "create your own" option though.

I'd like to second a more explicit "create your own Merc command" section.

[lrose]

The write up for Smithson's Chinese Bandits does not match earlier source material.  Per the House Liao SB P.47 the unit fought for the FWL against the CapCon during the 2790. 

[lrose]

12th Star Guards-
The force composition for Paget's War Ponies seems questionable- Paget's War Ponies was originally the 42nd Striker regiment (per House Steiner SB p. 73).  While it is possible the unit switched to heavier mechs over the course of the SWs it seems more likely they would have light to medium mechs.  By the same logic, Ohell's Heavy should be mostly heavy and assault mechs given it's history as the 10th Heavy Assault Regiment.

The 7th Regiment should also have 4 mech battalions- per the same source 2 Battalions of the 6th Regiment defected to the DC during the 3rd SW and the remaining battalion was absorbed by the 7th Regiment.

[lrose]

Unaffiliated Mechwarriors-
Charles Bear- he was a member of the GDL for over 20 years, joining the unit after Verthandi.  He might of been a member of the Ceti Rangers (per SBs- unknown merc unit, Tau Ceti Rangers or Ceti Hussars??) and the 21st Centauri Lancers but he mainly identified with the GDL. He seems an odd choice for an unaffiliated mechwarrior. 

[Adrian Gideon]

The force composition for Paget's War Ponies seems questionable- Paget's War Ponies was originally the 42nd Striker regiment (per House Steiner SB p. 73).  While it is possible the unit switched to heavier mechs over the course of the SWs it seems more likely they would have light to medium mechs.

That's exactly the case. As a Striker regiment they maybe have been a light-medium regiment in 2765—but their composition by the time of their employment with the Capellan Confederation (let alone by the two and half centuries later of the Combat Manual listing) is debatable.

By the same logic, Ohell's Heavy should be mostly heavy and assault mechs given it's history as the 10th Heavy Assault Regiment.

Similar logic can be used here, however this entry should be listed as a heavy 'Mech regiment, you're correct.

The 7th Regiment should also have 4 mech battalions

Not necessarily 'Mech battalions—but yes you are correct, the total should be four, three of which should be 'Mech battalions.

[lrose]

That's exactly the case. As a Striker regiment they maybe have been a light-medium regiment in 2765—but their composition by the time of their employment with the Capellan Confederation (let alone by the two and half centuries later of the Combat Manual listing) is debatable.

The 12th is said to have an overall weight of medium in the House Steiner book. If Ohell's Heavies is a heavy unit it seems more likely that Paget's War Ponies should be lighter, unless the 1st & 7th regiments are really light to balance everything out.

Not necessarily 'Mech battalions—but yes you are correct, the total should be four, three of which should be 'Mech battalions.

Given the the original source (House Steiner SB) and how they tended to ignore conventional forces at the time, it seems unlikely that the entry refers to anything other then mech forces.  The entry specifically mentions the 3 Battalions of the 6th Regiment, 2 of which defected to the DC and 1 which merged with the 7th Regiment.

Also remove the reference to the 7th Regiment being relatively new- it's existence dates back to the 2nd SW- the unit reached 7 regiments during the 2nd SW.  Further the 7th gained it's 4th battalion sometime between 2863 and 2967. 

[Von Ether]

Make your own Mech Command:
I thought that's what the ASC was for. Unless there's going to be a mini ASC section in each CM.