BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

Other BattleTech Games => MechWarrior and BattleTech Computer | Console Games => MegaMek Games => Topic started by: Snimm on 08 April 2015, 22:49:17

Title: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 April 2015, 22:49:17
Restarting this thread for the Against the Bot (AtB) campaign ruleset using MekHQ and its bundled programs (MegaMekLab [MML] and MegaMek [MM]) and questions ideally regarding the Against the Bot campaign in general.

Please refrain from asking general MHQ or MM questions that don't pertain to the AtB campaign rules.  Those should go in a general MHQ or MM thread (and I will admit to being guilty a few times of violating this guideline).

Finally, please remember the forum rules.  We (the players and developers involved) would appreciate not having another thread locked because of flared tempers and language.  Keep it cordial and friendly while debating, and remember that it's easy to misread a poster's tone when you're just reading text.

Link to the 2.31 AtB rules here:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/megamek-games/campaign-rules-against-the-bot-thread-4/?action=dlattach;attach=29623
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 11 April 2015, 13:13:05
Say, anyone know why I only get a maximum of one recruit a week even though I'm playing a combined arms regiment?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 11 April 2015, 14:08:26
Say, anyone know why I only get a maximum of one recruit a week even though I'm playing a combined arms regiment?

Infantry recruits are the entire platoon so there is that. Vee Crews are 1d6 of them according to 2.29 rules.

2.29 specifies 1 (None) recruits a week with the above modifiers. Seems like everything is working correctly.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dogstar34 on 12 April 2015, 05:58:06
Will AtB scenarios end on their own or do I have to input the /victory or /defeat command?

I have a Probe scenario where I must destroy 1/4 of enemy forces and keep 1/4 of starting forces operational.  It is Turn 13, I have killed 5 vehicles out of 16 and all 4 of my mechs are alive.  However, 8 vees are from one opponent and 8 vees are from a separate player on the same team (reinforcements).  Do I have to destroy 1/4 of each opponents?  Should I end it manually?  First time using AtB rules with the new MHQ version, really impressing how most everything is automated!

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: HerrFlex on 12 April 2015, 06:35:02
You have to do /victory and /defeat manually, since using the victory conditions mechanic of Megamek puts both forces on the same conditions, which becomes problematic when one force has to destroy half of the enemy and the other only needs a 3rd destroyed.

So your scenario would be a win at this point, it's a total force amount on map if i'm not mistaken, at least that's how i do it when reinforcements are involved, i try to get the necessary amount of destruction done before reinforcements arrive.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 12 April 2015, 08:09:56
When you meet victory conditions, you CAN declare /victory (and yes, you'll have to do it manually).  You can also push your luck and try to wreck more stuff if you dare, though of course you can risk stupid crits that you wouldn't otherwise have gained had you ended immediately when you won. :)

The AtB rules do assume you're looking at unit count, but if you feel it's more realistic, you can use BV destroyed instead.  That might make for some interesting results in terms of how many units actually survive, albeit barely.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 12 April 2015, 11:18:54
What I do is /kick the bot (or bot's) and replace with another one set for Escape.  I find it MUCH more realistic as no battle ends with both sides just suddenly calling it quits and walking away from each other.  The Escape bot is usually pretty good (at least the new version of Princess that Ral has) at making tactical withdraws. 

You can push your luck and fight it till the map edge, picking off any units along the way or pull back yourself and just pot shot at each other until you're out of range or map edge reached.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Vampire_Seraphin on 12 April 2015, 13:01:42
Chase maps are where you deploy your longtoms.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: krazzyharry on 12 April 2015, 13:54:43
What I do is /kick the bot (or bot's) and replace with another one set for Escape.  I find it MUCH more realistic as no battle ends with both sides just suddenly calling it quits and walking away from each other.  The Escape bot is usually pretty good (at least the new version of Princess that Ral has) at making tactical withdraws. 

You can push your luck and fight it till the map edge, picking off any units along the way or pull back yourself and just pot shot at each other until you're out of range or map edge reached.

How do you set the new bot for escape?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 13 April 2015, 02:44:38
/who (gives you the list of players including bots).
/kick (The player number, most likely 1, it'll be the number right after 'Server')
'File' (top left corner)  - Game - Replace player

That'll bring up the dialog for what ever players you've kicked.  You can adjust the settings there or just choose predetermined settings in the drop down dialog.

If the bot has reinforcements, those are a separate bot client.  You'll have to replace that one as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: krazzyharry on 13 April 2015, 18:58:00
Thanks!  Here I have been typing commands in all this time
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 13 April 2015, 19:49:43
Thanks!  Here I have been typing commands in all this time

The GUI part is fairly new.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 13 April 2015, 20:27:05
The GUI part is fairly new.

Can a GUI have a FIRM update?

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!

EDIT:  This was meant as a coding joke, not in the more vulgar way that my fiance just let me know about.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 13 April 2015, 20:38:55
You should have played dumb and asked her to demonstrate what she meant. ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 13 April 2015, 21:33:23
You should have played dumb and asked her to demonstrate what she meant. ;)

 O0
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 14 April 2015, 12:38:45
What I do is /kick the bot (or bot's) and replace with another one set for Escape.  I find it MUCH more realistic as no battle ends with both sides just suddenly calling it quits and walking away from each other.  The Escape bot is usually pretty good (at least the new version of Princess that Ral has) at making tactical withdraws. 

You can push your luck and fight it till the map edge, picking off any units along the way or pull back yourself and just pot shot at each other until you're out of range or map edge reached.

While it is more realistic to play this way it feels like it unbalances things, at least in my Campaigns. The typical result is a situation where I'm just racking up extra kills and salvage. I use the BV method as well as killing off a Locust and leaving a Warhammer undamaged is just too easy. I calculate the full BV of the enemy so main plus reinforcements.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 16 April 2015, 02:43:48
While it is more realistic to play this way it feels like it unbalances things, at least in my Campaigns. The typical result is a situation where I'm just racking up extra kills and salvage. I use the BV method as well as killing off a Locust and leaving a Warhammer undamaged is just too easy. I calculate the full BV of the enemy so main plus reinforcements.

It does unbalance things a bit, but like you said, more realistic.  I strive for as much realism as possible (why I have vehicles and crews that never see combat).

As for when to do it, I usually stick around the listed number, though BV does have a play in my head about it.  If it was a matter of just taking out Lights and the other half being Heavies, I wouldn't make that call.  Balanced is probably the best case to use.  I've had 'sandpaper' battles where both sides had severely reduced BV's but few actual kills.  I've also had battles where I was bull rushed by hovers and paper-armored lights who died in droves yet barely made a dent in the enemy BV.  Obviously, battles like those skew the system.

I also tend to 'put myself in the enemies head'.  Would I be worried about accomplishing the mission if that were my force?  If you take them down to 49% but you're at 51% and in a bad spot (out of ammo, blew initiative, etc) Would they just automatically give up?  Don't shackle yourself with one hard, fast rule.  Look at each one separately.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 16 April 2015, 03:48:15
quick question atb using mq 3.12 i do not have a problem with the hq but come across a problem during missions
MM portion on occasion forces me to use /skip command during deployment. as game progresses i am forced to repeat /skip for units that had been used on during deployment.
funny enough i can finish the game with no problem and the goals for the mission and collect whatever reward i get.
it mostly occurs during time when i have an allied forces present during mission and enemy is deploying its forces problem usually starts after the allied force is deployed
and yes i am using latest java problem seems to travel to different machines as well also regardless of windows build (i use 7)
i was able to reproduce same problem with different machines 2 laptops running win 7 ultimate on quad pentium processors 2 with 4gbram desktop machines using i3 and additional machines using i5 and i7 processors with 12 gb of ram on all desktop machines all machines have latest updates of java. as a bonus i ran some of the games not only off the machines themselves but from usb mem sticks same results and each machine has different campaign on them
the problem does not impact the outcome as far as i can tell but it is annoying

or had i set the atb settings wrong that cause this?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 16 April 2015, 08:22:04
Using Individual Initiative can make a big difference to the processing times.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ironboot on 16 April 2015, 08:37:52
quick question atb using mq 3.12 i do not have a problem with the hq but come across a problem during missions
MM portion on occasion forces me to use /skip command during deployment. as game progresses i am forced to repeat /skip for units that had been used on during deployment.
funny enough i can finish the game with no problem and the goals for the mission and collect whatever reward i get.
it mostly occurs during time when i have an allied forces present during mission and enemy is deploying its forces problem usually starts after the allied force is deployed
and yes i am using latest java problem seems to travel to different machines as well also regardless of windows build (i use 7)
i was able to reproduce same problem with different machines 2 laptops running win 7 ultimate on quad pentium processors 2 with 4gbram desktop machines using i3 and additional machines using i5 and i7 processors with 12 gb of ram on all desktop machines all machines have latest updates of java. as a bonus i ran some of the games not only off the machines themselves but from usb mem sticks same results and each machine has different campaign on them
the problem does not impact the outcome as far as i can tell but it is annoying

or had i set the atb settings wrong that cause this?

1) Be very careful using the latest java.  The latest java does not mean it will work better.

2) Look at the *.l4j files for Megamek and MekHQ.  Open them in text editor.  How much memory is allocated to them?  By default its -Xmx512m.  I use -Xmx1400m which seems to help speed up the games faster.

3) I do notice a slow down when reinforcements get deployed later in the game.  It takes the computer several minutes to deploy them.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 16 April 2015, 08:50:09
.l4j uses 1024m or all versions and copies
its the very first thing i do
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 16 April 2015, 22:08:34
another question how many mechs can a mech tech handle in their maintanance rotation?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 17 April 2015, 17:19:07
All techs have up to 480 minutes they can spend.  You CAN burn all that up on Mech maintenance for as many Mechs as you wish.  It just means that tech will not be performing any repairs, ever.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: calamity on 17 April 2015, 18:21:49
I just got into my first contract against the clans, and the number of vehicles seems to be doubled, despite the "Double enemy vehicles" option being disabled.  Does this not apply to clan forces? (I do have the "Clan OpFors use vehicles" option selected.)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 17 April 2015, 19:55:33
A star is five points, and there are two points in a star. So a Clan vehicle star has ten vehicles without any doubling.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: calamity on 17 April 2015, 20:07:51
You mean two vehicles or one mech makes a point, and each star has five points?  That's probably what was confusing me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Miekael on 17 April 2015, 20:09:55
A star is five points, and there are two points in a star. So a Clan vehicle star has ten vehicles without any doubling.

I think what neoancient meant to say is a star is five points, and it takes two vehicles to form a point.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 17 April 2015, 20:18:04
Yes, that's what I meant. I'm not sure how it came out like that. There is a separate option to disable vehicle use for Clans, but you probably knew that since Clan vehicle use is not enabled by default.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 19 April 2015, 16:39:37
can not figure out why the maintnance techs cause more damadge than a mission...
it seems that every day some twit wrecks more equipment and mechs between missions than the mission itself any way to change that?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 19 April 2015, 18:16:40
You can play without maintenance.  If you do play with maintenance, take a -1 modifier, set maintenance cycle to 30 days, and only damage parts at "A" quality.  Do not play with era mods.  You will still often find that your Veteran and Elite techs are the only ones that maintain fairly well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 20 April 2015, 08:31:45
You can play without maintenance.  If you do play with maintenance, take a -1 modifier, set maintenance cycle to 30 days, and only damage parts at "A" quality.  Do not play with era mods.  You will still often find that your Veteran and Elite techs are the only ones that maintain fairly well.

For AtB, the correct modifier is 0 (G282 Campaign_System sheet), you can also work without the maintenance cycles, but still needs to assign a tech for each mech (a good use for Green Techs).

Now a small update: Against the Bot version 2.31

This update is exactly like 2.30, except that i added a new sheet called "Dev" where new rules will be put before being added to the main AtB rules - all rules on the "Dev" are in development and can receive changes before being added to the main rules, or may be even discarded as too cumbersome. Currently i have only a Life Modules recruitment option that i´m testing for the starting company mechwarriors.

I want all suggestions for rule changes/additions to go in the Dev section first so players can playtest them and suggest modifications... so any house rules the players want to share i will be happy to add them to Dev for others to see.

AtB 2.31:
- Added "Dev" sheet
- Life Modules recruitment added to Dev


Snimm: can you add the file to the first post too? Thanks.

Neoancient: can you point to me what exactly are the availability ratings that MekHQ AtB is using for parts? I want to change the table for the next update to use the same.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 20 April 2015, 13:21:20
Suggestions:

1)  The Life path system looks good, but clans, WoB, and solaris need some love in there.
2)  Origins for all troops done automatically.  Especially important when dealing with clans.
3)  Modifiers for unit size (based on number of combat units, not lances).  It just doesn't make sense that my regiment would attract the same amount of new hires that a company would.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Vampire_Seraphin on 22 April 2015, 13:32:40
When the MekHq code gets written the AtB codes should call up the random planet generator used by the contract generator to assign pilots a random home world.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 22 April 2015, 21:14:22
When the MekHq code gets written the AtB codes should call up the random planet generator used by the contract generator to assign pilots a random home world.

I like this idea, and it really should not be that hard to implement.  Where it might get tricky is where planets change hands during mechwarriors lifetimes.  So along the Draconis Combine (and similar other stretches of the IS/Clanspace) where planets have changed hands within the same year.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 22 April 2015, 21:34:12
When the MekHq code gets written the AtB codes should call up the random planet generator used by the contract generator to assign pilots a random home world.
The contract generator selects planets from the border area between the two factions, but it would not be a hard thing to build a list of planets controlled by the character's faction on the date of birth then select one.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 22 April 2015, 21:45:58
How would you factor in Mercs and the occasional Solaris VII player?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 23 April 2015, 08:26:37
Add a percentage chance for Mercenaries and Solarians... Maybe with a higher chance the closer to a merc hall / Solaris VII
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 23 April 2015, 08:54:14
I would also suggest that it work for all 'jobs'.  That way you could pick up a Clan Mech Tech.  Get rid of the penalty if you have some clan tech in your unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 23 April 2015, 15:28:29
How would you factor in Mercs and the occasional Solaris VII player?

Well Mercs would be randomly chosen with a lesser chance for DC mercs, and Solaris VII you could just randomly choose a faction and then select a planet from that faction.  Neither one should be a problem really.  I would think the real problem would come from Clanners, is every Jaguar born on Huntress?... and for those clans that only own part of a planet?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 23 April 2015, 15:43:47
A Clanner could be freeborn, too, so that could place them anywhere.  Trueborns probably should have a more restricted set of potential home planets.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 23 April 2015, 17:19:54
A Clanner could also be abtakha originating in another Clan (or in very rare instances in the Inner Sphere). The Bloodname generator takes this into account with a 1/20 chance of changing Clans before selecting.

Is there any benefit to determining home planet other than a nice bit of background detail? If that's the only reason to do it then I see no reason to get too detailed with the method as long as we can be sure the results pass a sanity check.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 23 April 2015, 18:13:01
Well, technically according to the rules, it affects the starting unit (if there is one).  Former Solaris VII players get customized units as well (more reason to have an origin planet before S7).  Clanners get bonuses and penalties and Clan technicians don't have the penalty in dealing with clan tech.  Early on in the 50's and past Comstar (and later WoB) have a higher chance of coming with IS2 level equipment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 23 April 2015, 21:34:58
Well, technically according to the rules, it affects the starting unit (if there is one).  Former Solaris VII players get customized units as well (more reason to have an origin planet before S7).  Clanners get bonuses and penalties and Clan technicians don't have the penalty in dealing with clan tech.  Early on in the 50's and past Comstar (and later WoB) have a higher chance of coming with IS2 level equipment.
MHQ already accounts for this in the personnel market when generating a recruit's unit. It doesn' account for this when generating the recruit, but ought to. Adding an entry to the personnel log would also be a way to account for the possibility of Solaris VII players, which I left out of the possibilities because I couldn't come up with an elegant way of presenting the player with the option to customize. What I don't see is what advantage it would be to go beyond the faction and determine the specific planet of origin.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Vampire_Seraphin on 23 April 2015, 21:41:33
MHQ already accounts for this in the personnel market when generating a recruit's unit. It doesn' account for this when generating the recruit, but ought to. Adding an entry to the personnel log would also be a way to account for the possibility of Solaris VII players, which I left out of the possibilities because I couldn't come up with an elegant way of presenting the player with the option to customize. What I don't see is what advantage it would be to go beyond the faction and determine the specific planet of origin.

From a story perspective its an interesting bit to add for someone running a lore/rp heavy campaign and using MekHq to do the accounting. It also shouldn't be to hard to do since there is already a database of planets names and a random call function.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 23 April 2015, 22:24:35
Oh, specific planet?  Other than just getting a quasi realistic mix of recruits (Liao should provide much less recruits than Kurita just from a pure size point of view), I don't see much help other than a role play POV.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: calamity on 25 April 2015, 01:31:47
I agree with pfarland, this seems neat and useful for RP purposes, but is purely fluff.  (Not that I mind fluff.  Most of my campaigns are quite fluffy. O0 In fact, I think I'll call my next unit the Fleecing Fusiliers  ;D)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 25 April 2015, 11:44:09
I agree with pfarland, this seems neat and useful for RP purposes, but is purely fluff.  (Not that I mind fluff.  Most of my campaigns are quite fluffy. O0 In fact, I think I'll call my next unit the Fleecing Fusiliers  ;D)
got you beat...my unit is called Fluffy Bunnies. mechs sport playboy bunnies paint scheme and pilots are required to wear bunny ears during in and out of their mechs...male and female..and they are really mean.
 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 25 April 2015, 12:06:02
Ah.  So mock their unit outfits at our peril, eh?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: calamity on 25 April 2015, 15:45:10
My last campaign was the Killer Bunnies.  Pastel Pink paint job and all 'Mechs had to have jump jets.  ;)

On a different note, is there a way to set up a noble landhold style game without rolling all the battle specifics out of the spreadsheet?  Would probably be alot of work, but it would be nice to be able to roll specifics for a manually added scenerio.  Maybe add a dropdown for mission type and a "Roll scenerio" button to the new/edit scenerio dialog.  I inevitably end up forgetting to change one of the weather settings or something if I do it manually.  :P
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 25 April 2015, 22:22:38
On a different note, is there a way to set up a noble landhold style game without rolling all the battle specifics out of the spreadsheet?  Would probably be alot of work, but it would be nice to be able to roll specifics for a manually added scenerio.  Maybe add a dropdown for mission type and a "Roll scenerio" button to the new/edit scenerio dialog.  I inevitably end up forgetting to change one of the weather settings or something if I do it manually.  :P
That's way down on the list of priorities.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dogstar34 on 26 April 2015, 07:32:01
I am at the end of my contract.  I processed it, my personnel is squared away, and now I need a new contract.  None were offered at the beginning of the month, should I just wait out a month where I am (Fellanin II, on the DC/FS border where my previous assignment took place) or should I be returning to a hiring hall (e.g. Northwind, Galatea, etc) to get a new contract?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 26 April 2015, 09:30:50
Depends.  At the hall you have better chances and better luck with personnel.  You don't HAVE to though.  My last one I found the 'right' contract .   
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 07 May 2015, 23:10:31
In one game I was on my way back to a hiring hall when at the beginning of the month a decent contract generated.  I accepted and changed my "jump plan". 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ironboot on 08 May 2015, 07:17:30
Question about contract generation... 

Does everyone hire the Astech/medic pools and then roll for a contract?   I noticed my Dragoons rating goes from D (with out them) to a C (with them).

Also when not in a contract and on a planet does everyone still hire Astechs to help with repairs?

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 08 May 2015, 10:09:58
@ Purple Dragon - Done that myself.

@ Ironboot - I can't speak for everyone, but I do.  I make sure my whole unit is in the TOE and all teams topped off.  That will ALL effect your rating.  Some positively, some negatively.  You could game it by watching what has a negative effect, but I don't.

As for keeping Astechs/hiring outside of contracts, I do as well.  Though I'm constantly customizing units and repairing damage to units I couldn't get to during the contract.  By the time I get everything finished (if I'm lucky) it's time for the next contract.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 08 May 2015, 10:49:32
Yes, if you release your astechs between contracts, you will hurt the tech portion of your unit rating. So, if you release them there's a chance it will drop your overall rating enough that your contract options/terms will be worse.

I wouldn't consider that gaming the system so much as knowing that you can either pay some minimal salaries or take potentially worse/fewer contracts.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 08 May 2015, 14:20:23
The ruleset assumes that you keep astech and medic pools always topped off....

I noticed that MekHQ is not doing the contract generation exactly right, as in faction capitals it should generate, at a minimum, 1 contract with the faction as the employer, even if the normal roll for contract results in 0 contracts... both in Atreus and Tharkad (did not test other capitals), sometimes i get no contracts... when that happens i generate contracts until one with the faction as employer shows up...

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ironboot on 08 May 2015, 18:35:21
Thank you for the feed back guys! :)

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 09 May 2015, 20:34:23
Yes, if you release your astechs between contracts, you will hurt the tech portion of your unit rating. So, if you release them there's a chance it will drop your overall rating enough that your contract options/terms will be worse.

I wouldn't consider that gaming the system so much as knowing that you can either pay some minimal salaries or take potentially worse/fewer contracts.

I was talking about gaming the system in the regards that by taking certain units out of the TOE you can raise your rating.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 09 May 2015, 23:31:00
ok question is it better to hire astechs in bulk or as individuals?
i mean over all quality of their work not money you pay for them
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 10 May 2015, 00:07:01
The Astechs (and medics) don't actually DO anything roll wise.  They help out the regular Techs, they are the ones doing the rolls.  So, hire them in bulk.  Occationally as you play, you'll gain dependents, who then work as Astechs.  Those you keep, the rest are just Temp labour.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 10 May 2015, 09:54:19
ok question is it better to hire astechs in bulk or as individuals?
i mean over all quality of their work not money you pay for them

There is literally no difference. Astechs support your tech. There's an astech skill but it does not progress, so in game terms, all astechs are the exact same. For pay as well (you can modify their pay by assigning them different ranks or if they have other skills / professions)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 10 May 2015, 22:01:53
I noticed that MekHQ is not doing the contract generation exactly right, as in faction capitals it should generate, at a minimum, 1 contract with the faction as the employer, even if the normal roll for contract results in 0 contracts... both in Atreus and Tharkad (did not test other capitals), sometimes i get no contracts... when that happens i generate contracts until one with the faction as employer shows up...
I just fixed that for the next release, but Tharkad presents a bit of a problem. The code determines whether you're in a faction's capital by checking whether you're on the starting planet for the faction that controls the world you're on. During the FedCom era (3040-3057), Tharkad is considered to be part of the Federated Commonwealth, which has New Avalon as its starting planet. As far as I know that's the only situation where a faction has two capitals, but it's significant enough that I probably need to figure out how to accommodate it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 11 May 2015, 09:16:06
IF (Home Planet) = Tharkad THEN roll FEDCOM.
IF (Home Planet) = New Avalon THEN roll FEDCOM.

Just direct the contract script to the same place for the period?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 11 May 2015, 09:45:15
IF (Home Planet) = Tharkad THEN roll FEDCOM.
IF (Home Planet) = New Avalon THEN roll FEDCOM.

Just direct the contract script to the same place for the period?

For his issue it would be more like this:
if (HiringFaction.StartingPlanet == New Avalon && Location == Tharkad) {
// use FedCom tables
}
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 11 May 2015, 10:33:00
I can think of all sorts of ways to do it and have it work. Not all of them are good practice.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 11 May 2015, 15:34:46
I can think of all sorts of ways to do it and have it work. Not all of them are good practice.

Agreed. Something that would be good would be to have all capitals actually flagged as such, so you're not basing it on starting planet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 12 May 2015, 14:35:06
question about ECM
does the unit mounted with one automaticaly has it on or it has to be turned on?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 12 May 2015, 17:36:50
Automatically, but if you want to shift into ECCM or Ghost Targets, you have to set that yourself.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 13 May 2015, 07:55:08
Hi, I've been playing around with the AtB rules a bit now and I have a question:

How does random capture of pilots work in conjunction with the game option that makes ejected pilots automatically flee?

I've switched on 'Vehicles can be abandoned', but I then found that the mini-platoons that jump out of them somehow end up getting hired by my unit after each battle (there are recruitment payments in the finance tab and they clutter up my roster, but aren't marked 'prisoner'). So I switched on 'Ejected pilots automatically flee' to prevent those mini platoons from getting spawned. Now I'm basically not ever getting prisoners, and no one gets added to my roster after a battle, but I'm still paying recruitment payments to all enemies after each battle where I get the salvage screen.

And a note that should be in the starting guide: Make sure to set your faction to 'Mercenary' when you start a campaign. I've found that if you set it to something else (I thought it didn't matter) and then take a contract from that faction, the liason/integrated/house units are never created. As soon as I fixed that, I started getting those lemmings in my missions.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 May 2015, 21:26:11
Hi, I've been playing around with the AtB rules a bit now and I have a question:

How does random capture of pilots work in conjunction with the game option that makes ejected pilots automatically flee?

I've switched on 'Vehicles can be abandoned', but I then found that the mini-platoons that jump out of them somehow end up getting hired by my unit after each battle (there are recruitment payments in the finance tab and they clutter up my roster, but aren't marked 'prisoner'). So I switched on 'Ejected pilots automatically flee' to prevent those mini platoons from getting spawned. Now I'm basically not ever getting prisoners, and no one gets added to my roster after a battle, but I'm still paying recruitment payments to all enemies after each battle where I get the salvage screen.

And a note that should be in the starting guide: Make sure to set your faction to 'Mercenary' when you start a campaign. I've found that if you set it to something else (I thought it didn't matter) and then take a contract from that faction, the liason/integrated/house units are never created. As soon as I fixed that, I started getting those lemmings in my missions.

Ejected Pilots automatically flee is the correct option for AtB as Princess doesn't know how to hunt pilots down.

There is a bug in the current version that is preventing the Prisoner Code from working correctly. You will just have to work around it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 13 May 2015, 21:34:11
Thanks for the reply :)

I had been getting some prisoners when I turned off 'pilots autoflee' and 'vehicles can be abandoned', but not since then, so I thought there might be something connected there.

Any idea what I broke that's causing me to pay hiring fees for all the enemy personnel after a battle?

I actually like that Princess doesn't hunt down pilots anymore. I always facepalmed when a bot assault mech unleashed everything into one unarmed pilot even when actually threatening targets with low numbers to hit were around.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 May 2015, 21:52:20
Thanks for the reply :)

I had been getting some prisoners when I turned off 'pilots autoflee' and 'vehicles can be abandoned', but not since then, so I thought there might be something connected there.

Any idea what I broke that's causing me to pay hiring fees for all the enemy personnel after a battle?

I actually like that Princess doesn't hunt down pilots anymore. I always facepalmed when a bot assault mech unleashed everything into one unarmed pilot even when actually threatening targets with low numbers to hit were around.

Pilots should autoflee
Vees should abandon

the recruitment part is a bug

You will have to manually fudge Prisoners in the Resolution Windows. Killed pilots will still show up as Salvage, just ignore them.

Otherwise just use the 2.31 AtB Rules for determining who is a prisoner (many 1d6 rolls). Or use your own House Rules. If you mark your prisoners in the Resolution Window they will behave correctly for Finances, etc.

If anything looks stupid just delete the Finance Transaction :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 14 May 2015, 04:28:51
Cool, thanks :)

I'd do the transaction deletion if the program would let me do more than one at a time...ah well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 01 June 2015, 22:30:00
A few questions; I can't seem to find the answers to and they're driving me nuts!

On my first contract, I had Transport Terms of 35%, which was added into the contract amount. But my transit was free. How do I get MekHQ to actually charge me for my transit costs? Do I have to use the Unit Market to buy a Jump/DropShip?

Second, MegaMek crashed in the middle of a battle; how do I go about safely resuming it? Or do I have the start the battle over?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 01 June 2015, 22:47:10
Second, MegaMek crashed in the middle of a battle; how do I go about safely resuming it? Or do I have the start the battle over?

Few things on this guy.  What version are you using?  What was happening when the crash happened?  In the logs folder will be a mekhqlog.txt file.  If you post that here it can help us trouble shoot things.

Also welcome to the forums.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 01 June 2015, 22:48:17
A few questions; I can't seem to find the answers to and they're driving me nuts!

On my first contract, I had Transport Terms of 35%, which was added into the contract amount. But my transit was free. How do I get MekHQ to actually charge me for my transit costs? Do I have to use the Unit Market to buy a Jump/DropShip?

Second, MegaMek crashed in the middle of a battle; how do I go about safely resuming it? Or do I have the start the battle over?

Thanks!

One of the MekHQ options is to pay for travel expenses, make sure it's on.

If you have a save prior to the crash, from MHQ you can load your save and launch roughly the normal way. Otherwise, you'll need to restart.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 02 June 2015, 00:25:19
So apparently if you mothball your units, they get transported for free? Is that right?

If so, why wouldn't you always mothball them, at least once they're in good repair, and pocket your employer's transport cash? What am I missing?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 02 June 2015, 03:15:55
Even if you mothball them you still have to have the cargo space for them. The only freebie is no maintenance payments.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 02 June 2015, 07:34:33
Also, what if we added a rule for a delay in unmothballing? Is there anything on the canon rules for this? I thought about a delay for the unmothballing of 1 week for each weight level, so an Assault mech would take 4 weeks to unmothball, while a Light would take a single week. Maybe with additional time for IS Level 2 and Clan Units?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 02 June 2015, 10:54:59
Okay, so maybe I need to back up a step. Because I have no transport capability, but was able to move to my contract destination, so I'm clearly missing something.

As a fresh, brand-new mercenary company, after I get my initial warriors, techs, and meks, what are the steps I take to get my company to the target planet. Looking at my file, I have no transport capability. Do I have to sit there and hope for a JumpShip roll to succeed before I can go out?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 02 June 2015, 12:33:14
Few things on this guy.  What version are you using?  What was happening when the crash happened?  In the logs folder will be a mekhqlog.txt file.  If you post that here it can help us trouble shoot things.

Also welcome to the forums.

I was using MHQ 0.3.12, MM 0.41.2

Looking at things, it was a memory setting. I'd accidentally set my memory too low, which caused Princess to hang when attempting to deploy her barrel full of reinforcements. Since I was mostly withdrawn at that point (Recon Raid mission which had already been successful) as I didn't have a chance of holding the field for salvage, I just "/victoryed" out of another reload. But I'd hate to have it happen in the middle of something NOT quite resolved!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 02 June 2015, 13:00:15
Also, what if we added a rule for a delay in unmothballing? Is there anything on the canon rules for this? I thought about a delay for the unmothballing of 1 week for each weight level, so an Assault mech would take 4 weeks to unmothball, while a Light would take a single week. Maybe with additional time for IS Level 2 and Clan Units?

Quoting from SO pg 166
Unless agreed otherwise (or dictated by the conditions of a specific
scenario), players have eight hours between each scenario
during which they can carry out maintenance and repairs. If players
are tracking time across days, weeks, months and so on, then
each day provides eight hours of productive work. This is referred
to as the Maintenance/Repair Cycle.

Later in the rules it states 2 maintenance cycles are required to mothball and 1 to unmothball a Mech, etc. Large vessels have different rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Sylterix on 02 June 2015, 13:18:39
Okay, so maybe I need to back up a step. Because I have no transport capability, but was able to move to my contract destination, so I'm clearly missing something.

As a fresh, brand-new mercenary company, after I get my initial warriors, techs, and meks, what are the steps I take to get my company to the target planet. Looking at my file, I have no transport capability. Do I have to sit there and hope for a JumpShip roll to succeed before I can go out?

I recommend just skipping the need for dropships/jumpships. Just travel to the destination and blow things up. :) I simply assume that on a Hiring Hall and capital there are many opportunites to hire a dropship/jumpship short term. It may not be canon, but it works for me.

Otherwise you simply have to wait, spending 100k a week til you run out of cash.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 02 June 2015, 14:08:55
Okay, so maybe I need to back up a step. Because I have no transport capability, but was able to move to my contract destination, so I'm clearly missing something.

As a fresh, brand-new mercenary company, after I get my initial warriors, techs, and meks, what are the steps I take to get my company to the target planet. Looking at my file, I have no transport capability. Do I have to sit there and hope for a JumpShip roll to succeed before I can go out?

Otherwise you simply have to wait, spending 100k a week til you run out of cash.

This part is so wrong.

Once you have everyone organized in the ToE and then get a contract. Go to Interstellar Map, Find your destination, click on it and choose Calculate Jump Path, then click Begin Transit... it is assumed that you have hired enough transport to move your force and the fee for that transport is calculated automatically. After that just start clicking Advance Day until you arrive on the Target Planet. Once you are there and the Contract start date passes you will start finding missions in the Briefing Room.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 03 June 2015, 01:28:37
Yeah it is assumed you have the transport capacity but HQ does not track this and as the options states, the cost for hiring said transport is a total hack. So, best thing to do if you want to hire the transport is look up the costs for all the transport you need and just go to the finances tab and each month deduct it from your funds.

Until such time as ralgith has time for it or someone makes a patch for it you have to figures these things out manually.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 05 June 2015, 16:00:37
Or take a contract that pays 100% of transport costs so it's all a wash?  Of course, you don't always have that option...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 09 June 2015, 15:03:12
What's the "generally accepted" way to setup and change lances? From the AtB rules, I gather that at the start of each week you:


As there's no way to stop MekHQ after Step 1 to reassign pilots, do you just change your lances on Mondays and fix the XP (as neccessary) it grants to Training Lances? Is that just the nature of the beast?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 09 June 2015, 19:24:29
I suggest training lances should yield their XP on sundays, if that's possible to implement? That would allow you to then un/reassign them in time for the coming week if you want to, without any manual fiddling. There is a chance that means they get their XP before their battle for the week (if it's on sunday), but I think that's acceptable if it makes the game less fiddly overall. They did train 6 of the 7 days at that point already, after all.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 15 June 2015, 07:15:44
What's the "generally accepted" way to setup and change lances? From the AtB rules, I gather that at the start of each week you:
  • Give XP to eligible pilots in Training lances.
  • Assign pilots to lances.
  • Assign lances to activities (Fight, Scout, Defend, Training).
  • Roll for battles.


As there's no way to stop MekHQ after Step 1 to reassign pilots, do you just change your lances on Mondays and fix the XP (as neccessary) it grants to Training Lances? Is that just the nature of the beast?

I normally do everything on Sundays after any battles. Note that MekHQ now automates the majority of this.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 15 June 2015, 20:19:04
What determines OpFor BV? In my first two missions, against Green/E Pirates, they've absolutely overwhelmed me in terms of BV. Is it because I added lances after accepting the contract? Or just unlucky rolls? (Note: Double OpFor vehicles is UNCHECKED.)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 15 June 2015, 22:39:32
The Opfor in AtB is only balanced against your lance's weight class, and that only determines the weight class of the enemy lances. Their skills are random based on the skill level determined by the contract and their tech level is determined by the RAT and faction.

It's easy to be overwhelmed, especially if you face WoB or clans (they get more untis per lance with nothing to counterbalance that) or have 'double enemy vehicles' turned on.

I've found that I need to turn the campaign difficulty down to ultra green, turn off doubling vehicles and not go after the clans if I want to not crush my tablet's poor CPU with too many princessbot units, which sadly leaves the campaign a tad too easy for me :(


Different topic:
I installed the new version that just came out (3.14 MekHQ) and despite the fix list, I still get the recruitment of the opfor bug. Is that because I continued the old savegame or did I do something wrong?

I also found that in the new version, I always have to replace the bot in  chase(defender) scenario because the bot won't ever even try to escape.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 16 June 2015, 05:06:05
Different topic:

I also found that in the new version, I always have to replace the bot in  chase(defender) scenario because the bot won't ever even try to escape.

I am finding this as well.  I have not replaced the bot yet as it usually works to my advantage since I can not deploy in the same location as the bot (using double blind).  However, if you damage a unit enough, that unit will then try to withdraw under the forced withdrawal rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ironboot on 16 June 2015, 06:21:18
What is the tonnage of your lances?  Light is 0-130, Medium is 131-200, Heavy 201-280 and Assault 281-390.

If you take a look at AtB excel rules 2.31 on the Battle tab lines 173 to 187 Heavy/Assault lances do have a good chance of facing a company of mechs/tanks.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 16 June 2015, 07:22:06
I too, frequently get overwhelmed byt the opfor... but remember that to win most battles you do not need to destroy all enemy units, but frequently only 1/2, 1/3 or even 1/4 of the enemy, or have other win conditions that can be achieved even without destroying any enemy unit.

Note, however, that i´m a very crappy player.... my main strategy is to mob the enemy in barbarian horde style and there are several AtB players around that can curbstomp Elite/A bots using Green/F forces (i´m looking at you Kwic) - AtB tried to achieve a balance that would be fun and challenging both for bad players (like myself) and experts....

Some suggestions if you are having difficulties:
- turn off the option for doubling vehicle numbers
- never accept a contract with Veteran/Elite opfors
- accept only low attrition contracts (Garrisions, Cadre, Security Duty, etc.).
- remember that Pirates and Rebels normally have lower skill levels than other opfors, and are the ideal enemy for the starting player.
- if playing on ages where CASE is not available, try to have only mechs with energy weapons - ammo explosions are one of the most common causes of losing units.
- try to not deploy Assault lances (weight above 280 tons) or Light lances (below 130 tons) - one will generate too big a number of opfors and the other will gave a too low tonnage on the field to handle many missions. I always try to have Scout/Training lances at Medium tonnage and other lance types at Heavy tonnage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 16 June 2015, 11:19:14
Most importantly, try to keep you overall lances at or near the top of their tonnage brackets.  If you have a lance that's 5 tons overweight for Light, and is therefore counted as a Medium, you're facing opposition geared for a high-end Medium lance, not a "just above Light" one.  The percentage difference is not as severe between a Heavy lance and an Assault, so an almost-Light lance against Medium opposition (which can consist of mostly Heavies for the OPFOR, but not for the player) is a worst-case situation.

In essence, the 'Bot can run heavier 'Mechs than the player, even for the same weight class, and has the potential to bring in a supporting lance on top of that.  If you can bring in your own support lance, that can even it up; if not, you're outgunned by a lot, and have to resort to fancy maneuvering to meet the victory conditions, or pull a tactical retreat and try to make up for the loss later, rather than lose a lot of valuable personnel and equipment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 16 June 2015, 11:37:26
I normally do everything on Sundays after any battles. Note that MekHQ now automates the majority of this.

I like this idea. Granted, the Training lance will get training XP immediately, which isn't exactly Rules As Written, but they're still stuck in the Training Lance for the rest of the week.

I also found that in the new version, I always have to replace the bot in  chase(defender) scenario because the bot won't ever even try to escape.

I seem to have the same issue. But I also took the advice of another poster, and frequently replace the bot when battle conditions change. It seems to produce a bit more dynamic of a battle. Once the bot has lost, I switch them to retreat, with a little massaging of the behavioral parameters to reflect how badly things might be going... a "Hold the Line" retreat is different than a "The Chase" retreat, for example. It's only fair that I get to take potshots at them, since they do the same thing when I decide to flee.

As for the OpFor being overwhelming, it's probably a bit of confirmation bias, but my latest campaign (in the latest version), I seem to be getting overwhelmed. It might be the weight bracket issue; I'd never considered that!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 16 June 2015, 13:06:52
I have organized my units in the TO&E in a way that it usually includes support forces in the battles I fight.  The way I do this is thus:...


Blue Demons = Lance name. 
      under that force is  the infantry
               under that is BD Tnk (this is where tanks go)
                          under that is BD 'Mech (where you put the 'mechs)

Now, with this organization, anything that gets a scenario automatically includes the forces under it.  So if BD 'Mech gets a scenario, they are on their own. 
However, if BD Tnk gets one, it includes the 'mechs with them. 

The only thing this does not work with is the special missions and the large battles where you have to assign individual units instead of forces.   
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 19 June 2015, 12:00:53
Can someone help me understand parts availability? I've been trying to crack the code, but to no avail. It makes me not ever end contracts, since I can't reliably predict what parts I'll be able to get in the time I'm SUPPOSED to spend healing, refitting, and repairing. Let alone taking anything but Pirate Hunting, since I can't stockpile.

Example #1:
I'm on a Pirate Hunting mission in 3025. I have a Regular Admin/Logistics. The way I'm reading the AtB rules says that my availability should be 2: Pirate Hunting missions are availability level 3, 3025 imposes a -1 penalty. However, when I go to Purchase Parts in MekHQ, there doesn't seem to be anything I can't buy; the only things labeled "Impossible" is technology that's not been invented yet. I can get Level 3 lasers, and even a Level 4 PPC. Huzzah! PPCs for all! Invest in PPC futures!

Example #2:
I finish that Pirate Hunting mission. Due to personnel defections, I drop down to Dragoon's Rating D. Thanks to a <strike>bribe</strike> performance bonus, my Regular Admin/Logistics stays on. The way I'm reading the AtB rules says that my availability should be 0: Rating D is availability 1, Regular Admin is no modifier, and 3025 imposes a -1 penalty. Things here are weird. I can buy Level 0 Armor (Commercial) but not Level 0 Hatchets. I can buy Level 1 ACs but not Level 1 Actuators. I can buy Level 3 Fusion Engines but not Level 2 Jump Jets.

Seriously, what the hell?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 June 2015, 12:25:11
Parts availability does not exactly conform to the AtB rules. Instead IIRC it uses Era availability. This is because Neoancient would have had to create a whole new database assigning the AtB level codes to everything. Which as you can imagine would be a stupendous PITA.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 19 June 2015, 12:56:41
Parts availability does not exactly conform to the AtB rules. Instead IIRC it uses Era availability. This is because Neoancient would have had to create a whole new database assigning the AtB level codes to everything. Which as you can imagine would be a stupendous PITA.

Okay, that does sound like a total waste of time. Am I safe in assuming that using Era Availability is balanced enough? Are the tables in the Tech Manual, or is it somewhere else, like StratOps or FM:M? My goal is basically understanding how long to linger on an Early Victory contract to get parts, and when to jump ship to deal with retirements and such before finding new employment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 June 2015, 14:57:45
Okay, that does sound like a total waste of time. Am I safe in assuming that using Era Availability is balanced enough? Are the tables in the Tech Manual, or is it somewhere else, like StratOps or FM:M? My goal is basically understanding how long to linger on an Early Victory contract to get parts, and when to jump ship to deal with retirements and such before finding new employment.

Era availability is extremely well documented by which I mean... perfectly.

You should be buying parts all the time at least initially. A strategy that I have used and promoted constantly on this Board is...

Turn off the restriction for your first contract (We can assume your Quartermaster isn't a total idiot but you the human player probably are about what stuff to stockpile). Buy multiples of anything you end up needing. Just before you end your contract buy like 3 to 5 of every actuator and Mech Part like Left Leg for every unit you have in YOUR force. Depending on force size you can burn through armor like crazy. So stockpile a stupendous amount. Then make sure you buy more all the time. Turn the restriction back on. End Contract.

When you manage to Capture/Salvage vehicles like SRM Carriers, LRM Carriers, etc strip them of armor, ammo, and weapons then sell the wreckage. You will never need the engine, turret, stabilizer, etc of a Vehicle for repairs.

Finally, try to quickly shift to a force with a limited number of tonnages. I'm in year 3 of this campaign, contract 3, I have 75, 70, 65, 55, 45, and 35 ton units in my ToE. For those tonnages I have all the actuator and body parts in sometimes insane piles.

Using these strategies it becomes abundantly clear what you need and how much of it without making yourself insane when you start a Campaign.

Hope this helps!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 20 June 2015, 11:59:33
Thanks! That's really helpful!

One potentially super-n00b question: How DO I unload weapons in MekHQ? As near as I can see, the only way to strip ammo from a vehicle or send a mech into the field without that pesky and dangerous and useless Machine Gun ammo is to Salvage the "Ammo Bay" part? That feels like I'm missing something; can't I just tell my techs, "pull all that ammo out of there and leave it empty?"
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 20 June 2015, 21:13:50
I don't think it's possible?
You can, I believe, turn on the option to dump ammo in the MegaMek lobby and then just never reload the bins, but the ammo dumped this way is lost.

It would be nice if MekHQ had a 'none' option for ammo swapping. If nothing else, it would mean your mechs in long term repair aren't hogging any precious their still active friends are running dry on.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kippeth on 21 June 2015, 04:45:37
Hi

im looking to start playing this again after a busy 6 months. Last time i played there was a custom build of MekHQ and Megamek that was being used. It worked quite nicely i could get my friends to connect give them the units then when the match ended MekHQ still picked up on all the units.

Does anyone know what im on about? i foolishly forgot to save the link last year.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 21 June 2015, 08:47:36
Hi

im looking to start playing this again after a busy 6 months. Last time i played there was a custom build of MekHQ and Megamek that was being used. It worked quite nicely i could get my friends to connect give them the units then when the match ended MekHQ still picked up on all the units.

Does anyone know what im on about? i foolishly forgot to save the link last year.

The custom builds are hosted on my emporium [see signature], however they aren't truly custom anymore now that I have full release privleges for all 3 softwares. Now my releases are just "value added" stuff because they contain a huge selection of camo, portraits, extra units, and extra maps.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 23 June 2015, 13:44:48
What's the order of operations for rolls? I'm asking because my current contract OpFor just went to "Rout," but still generated a (non-special) battle. Should I just delete that battle, or do the weekly battle rolls come first?

... I only ask because, I'm surprised they routed. Month #1 I was a whirlwind of death and destruction. Month #2 the pirates fought back with hugely unbalanced OpFors and I lost a lot of battles. Yet they routed. But if I lose this "death knell" battle, my contract goes from success to failure. :\

Also, does MekHQ support Player reinforcement? I'm thinking no, since I've never ONCE had my Scout Lance reinforce my main force, so I'm thinking there's no point, unless you want to blood some guys, to actually "Scouting". The whole point of a Scout Lance should be "lots of action," be it through their higher probability of a battle or their higher chance to reinforce another battle.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 23 June 2015, 14:49:42
What's the order of operations for rolls? I'm asking because my current contract OpFor just went to "Rout," but still generated a (non-special) battle. Should I just delete that battle, or do the weekly battle rolls come first?

... I only ask because, I'm surprised they routed. Month #1 I was a whirlwind of death and destruction. Month #2 the pirates fought back with hugely unbalanced OpFors and I lost a lot of battles. Yet they routed. But if I lose this "death knell" battle, my contract goes from success to failure. :\

Also, does MekHQ support Player reinforcement? I'm thinking no, since I've never ONCE had my Scout Lance reinforce my main force, so I'm thinking there's no point, unless you want to blood some guys, to actually "Scouting". The whole point of a Scout Lance should be "lots of action," be it through their higher probability of a battle or their higher chance to reinforce another battle.

This occurs because battles are rolled for on Monday but on the first of the month the morale check is made. Personally, I think it makes sense to delete the battle. I'm not sure there has ever been a ruling on this though.

MHQ doesn't do the Reinforce rolls. You will have to do them yourself. Remember Fight Lances can reinforce as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 24 June 2015, 09:56:10
I just gave up on my latest campaign when it went from a mostly successful contract to a "base attack" by massive forces against my light 'Mech lance (my lance of light vehicles failed their support roll).  I had the support of roughly two lances of allied and civilian light/medium 'Mechs, vehicles, and gun emplacements, but the opposition was mostly heavy 'Mechs, and included a Stalker and an Orion.  Sorry, but when my side is outnumbered 3:2 (with me controlling less than half of it), averages about half their tonnage, and my pilots and vehicle crews are at a lower average skill level (mine are a mix of Green/Regular, theirs are mostly Veteran in a supposedly "Green" force), it's just not a playable mission.  You don't take on a Stalker, Orion, Rifleman, and Dragon with an already damaged Phoenix Hawk, Firestarter, Locust, and Stinger, and still have enough left to deal with the remaining enemy Lights and Mediums.  My ally's weak units seem to get chewed up and spit out one at a time in senseless single attacks against a mob, doing practically no damage in return.  Result: automatic contract loss after about a dozen totally one-sided and badly failed attempts to get through it.

Looking at the force makeup, it appears likely to be a "nearly worst case" set of rolls, where my Light unit probably generated a "Medium" lance in opposition, which in this case ended up as something like a mix of Light, 2 Mediums, and Heavy, plus a vehicle lance, and the opponent then got a reinforcement group that qualified as Heavy, with a Medium, 2 Heavies, and an Assault.  Their BV is just over double the combined BVs of the defenders, since the defending allies ended up being generated as a mostly worthless pile of trash, especially in the unimaginative hands of the AI.

Note that if the player fields a lance with 4 high-end units in a weight class, it counts as the next higher weight class (3 Jenners and a Spider would count as a "Medium" lance, without having a single Medium 'Mech), yet the AI can potentially field a unit with only one unit in its weight class and the 3 others in the next higher class (a Jenner, Wolverine, Dervish, and Griffin could be considered "Light").  The AI can also randomly field either that same class or one weight class higher, and may end up with reinforcements.  That adds up to a case such as your 130 tons or less of 'Mechs up against up to 290 tons of opposition, PLUS reinforcements.  If you're not at the top end of your weight allowance, and slip into the low end of the next bracket, it's worse.  It's potentially stacked up to way beyond 3:1 tonnage odds against the player (possibly 5:1 or 10:1 if the reinforcements end up heavier than the original force), which far more than counterbalances the inability of the AI to win an even battle.

The AtB idea is great, but the implementation leaves something to be desired.  I like a bit of randomness and odds that can vary from slightly in my favor to somewhat against, but not turkey-shoots for either side.  In warfare, if you can't field a force at least theoretically capable of winning, you avoid battle until you can engage on more even terms, or else surrender, because you're just throwing lives away for nothing.  Few historical battles were "balanced", but few were absolutely one-sided unless the one force was trapped or otherwise had no alternative but to engage.  The advantage of a lighter and faster force is that they're difficult for a superior opponent to force them to fight.  Unfortunately, the current rules leave far too many cases where you simply have to say "no" and suffer the "breach of contract", where no realistic employer (the DCMS might not be all that realistic about it) would demand that you send your light recon force to die in a suicidal slaughter against heavier units with no hope of victory.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 24 June 2015, 11:12:34
In warfare, if you can't field a force at least theoretically capable of winning, you avoid battle until you can engage on more even terms, or else surrender, because you're just throwing lives away for nothing.

I don't use AtB, but you always have the option to skip a battle and take the penalty towards your overall contract, as far as I know. People with more experience can explain it better but AtB doesn't always provide 'winnable' situations, especially early on.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 24 June 2015, 11:43:45
I don't use AtB, but you always have the option to skip a battle and take the penalty towards your overall contract, as far as I know. People with more experience can explain it better but AtB doesn't always provide 'winnable' situations, especially early on.

A few things, yes you will face unwinnable battles. This is by design and not an accident. It sucks that you are facing an unwinnable Base Attack (Defense) but those are the breaks.

MHQ doesn't roll reinforcements for you. Roll them yourself, any Fight or Scout Lance that doesn't have a mission that week can be used.

Infantry can be used to allow you to simply delete any battle of the week. You will have to make the rolls yourself since it isn't implemented in MHQ yet.

The weight class of Lances is directly from a Canon source. When designing your lances be damn careful about the limits. You will want to be as close to full tonnage in the category as possible.

Finally, using light lances or even assault lances is very dangerous. These two lance types will generate more unwinnable fights.

I hope you find this helpful Kovax.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 24 June 2015, 11:56:09
I don't use AtB, but you always have the option to skip a battle and take the penalty towards your overall contract, as far as I know.
...except when it's a base attack.  Lose the battle and it's "Contract failed".

I've occasionally reloaded to Sunday before missions are assigned, but in this case there were two battles.  I did the one, saved the game, and quit for the night.  As I normally do, I deleted most of the large accumulation of saved games except for the most recent and one or two from a ways further back.  Next session, I checked out the second battle and did a double-take when I saw what I was up against.  The previous save that I kept is from around a month and 3-4 battles back.  I can revert to it if I have to, but that means tossing out that whole month and redoing it.  At this point, it probably makes more sense to start over with a significantly larger and more powerful Merc unit that's less fun to play in my personal opinion, since I enjoy lighter and faster-paced play over "turret-tech" and overpowered stuff.

I'd rather run something like a PXH-1, FS-9A, LCT-1V, and STG-3R lance instead of a company of heavies and assaults any day.  Normally, by the time I can field a full company of medium and heavy 'Mechs, it's time to quit and restart because I've lost interest.  Unfortunately, that's about where the AtB rules START to function.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 24 June 2015, 12:28:02
...except when it's a base attack.  Lose the battle and it's "Contract failed".

I'd rather run something like a PXH-1, FS-9A, LCT-1V, and STG-3R lance instead of a company of heavies and assaults any day.  Normally, by the time I can field a full company of medium and heavy 'Mechs, it's time to quit and restart because I've lost interest.  Unfortunately, that's about where the AtB rules START to function.

Yeah that is the part that sucks about failing Base Attack Defense.

I like fast lances myself but I stay in the Lance Class sweet spot.

You have put considerable thought into what is wrong. Although you might have missed the whole Infantry thing which would have gotten you out of this tight jam. Which is also exactly what this rule is included to do.

Other than that... how would you fix things? Keeping in mind the whole some battles are unwinnable element. What specifically would you change?

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 24 June 2015, 13:12:29
...except when it's a base attack.  Lose the battle and it's "Contract failed".

So? Fail the contract and move onto the next one. Yes, there will be penalties but sometimes, especially for new units, things go poorly.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 June 2015, 15:12:40
You can also exploit princess in base battles. Just deploy inside a building of durable construction. Even when princess starts shooting at the building you should be able to just sit their and pound the hell out of whoever shows up. Use jump capable mechs whenever possible and train your lance commanders in tactics as much as possible so you win initiative most of the time. Train for night battles too. Add melee SPAs to that and you can win nearly any night battle and kicking your opponent to death with a Spider or Assassin can be great fun. Use inferno rounds if you face off against a lot of vehicles.

Another thing, when dealing with base attacks (as the defender) put the gun emplacements as your units so you can deploy them properly the traitor them back to your ally after deployment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 24 June 2015, 15:19:46
You can also exploit princess in base battles. Just deploy inside a building of durable construction. Even when princess starts shooting at the building you should be able to just sit their and pound the hell out of whoever shows up. Use jump capable mechs whenever possible and train your lance commanders in tactics as much as possible so you win initiative most of the time. Train for night battles too. Add melee SPAs to that and you can win nearly any night battle and kicking your opponent to death with a Spider or Assassin can be great fun. Use inferno rounds if you face off against a lot of vehicles.

Another thing, when dealing with base attacks (as the defender) put the gun emplacements as your units so you can deploy them properly the traitor them back to your ally after deployment.

I know that this is correct but... using tactics that Princess fails on isn't quite the nature of Kovax's post. Yeah this stuff will work but... not nice :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 June 2015, 20:10:17
When is war ever fair. Exploit your enemy to your benefit. If it saves your men just nuke the pukes (I plan to once I get to that stage of the Age of War. Already got the long tom for it  >:D )
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 24 June 2015, 21:45:58
It's game, not real war. It's a game you play against the bot. The bot doesn't care if it has fun, so do whatever it takes to make the game fun for yourself.

Opfor too large? Delete some before the game. Mission unfair? Delete it and generate a new one (can you do that, right?). Campaign too easy? Crank up the difficulty!
It's your game.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 June 2015, 22:25:08
Quote
Delete it and generate a new one

Not using the AtB part of HQ. No way to roll your own missions inside HQ, though you could use the excel rules to reroll a battle then manually input into HQ. You just wouldn't have all the AtB extras in the scenario. For that you could add a feature request to add that for those who get annoyed with some of the current battles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 25 June 2015, 12:01:58
I would think that an optional setting to prevent enemy reinforcements or additional lances when they've already got an advantage might go a long way toward balancing it, along with something that boosts the odds of reinforcement if they're too badly outmatched.  "Gee, we're only up by 5:2 on them, don't you think we better call in another lance from somewhere else important on the front?" versus "We're outnumbered here, we NEED support."  Whether it's tonnage or BV, there needs to be some rational limit beyond which the enemy doesn't keep dogpiling more units onto yours, and some minimum below which the enemy either calls for reinforcements or runs away without a fight.  Nobody but a madman engages willingly against insurmountable odds.

Tried again last night, and got one battle with my lance (PXH, FS, LCT, STG plus a DV liaison) against an initial force of HBK, BJ, PXH, CDA and WSP, which was a decent matchup considering the suicidal tendencies of the liaison unit.  Then the  reinforcements arrived, consisting of a lance of medium 'Mechs, which turned it from a hard but very winnable fight into a disaster.

I reloaded back to the Sunday before the week's battles, and got a different fight with a mostly heavy and a medium lance of 'Mechs against me, but no reinforcements.  Again, I'm outnumbered almost 2:1, down by a weight class or TWO (what's considered "Medium" for the player is no constraint for the OPFOR), and out-skilled across the board.  I gave up after 3 tries, in which I was down at least one 'Mech by the end of turn one on each try.  I'll play out a match between a Locust and an Atlas (and win, on occasion), but not a Locust against 2 heavies.

Reloaded again, and got nothing that week, but started the next week off with a scheduled urban fight against a full company of assorted tanks.  The Vedettes don't scare me, but the two Hetzers, SRM carrier, and Saladin really make the cockpit of a 20 ton bug 'Mech seem like a bad place to be.  I'll give it a go, but it's going to take a lot of luck as well as some skill to pull off.  As before, if it stopped at both "outnumbering" and "out-tonning" or at "150% BV" (it could still pit you against more than 150% odds, but wouldn't add another lance beyond that point), and then added nothing further, I'd be up against 2 lances instead of 3: doable but not absurd.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 25 June 2015, 12:19:04
Am I reading the rules correctly in that, if using the shares system, the mechwarrior doesn't take her mech with her when she leaves? What's stopping me from hiring a Green Mechwarrior with a great mech and immediately sacking her to keep her mech at a far lower cost (since she'll have minimal shares at that point) than I could get it from the market?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 25 June 2015, 14:25:04
Am I reading the rules correctly in that, if using the shares system, the mechwarrior doesn't take her mech with her when she leaves? What's stopping me from hiring a Green Mechwarrior with a great mech and immediately sacking her to keep her mech at a far lower cost (since she'll have minimal shares at that point) than I could get it from the market?

No you are reading that very wrong.

1 ) Green MWs will have worse mechs
2 ) QUOTING: If using the employer/employee system, you must keep track of the starting mech weight/tech level and, when the mechwarrior leaves the company he/she must receive an equivalent mech. Also, when a new recruit joins the company and own a mech, he/she must receive half the stock price of the mech from the company treasury.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 25 June 2015, 16:41:10
No you are reading that very wrong.

1 ) Green MWs will have worse mechs
2 ) QUOTING: If using the employer/employee system, you must keep track of the starting mech weight/tech level and, when the mechwarrior leaves the company he/she must receive an equivalent mech. Also, when a new recruit joins the company and own a mech, he/she must receive half the stock price of the mech from the company treasury.
That's true of the employer/employee system, but the question was about the shares system. Depending on the size of your units and its net worth, it may be possible to do that within the rules, though I would consider it to be against the spirit. There are many ways the AtB system can be exploited, and it's up to the player to decide what is realistic and what is fun. I consider the conversion of 'Mechs to shares to be unrealistic (though it certainly helped with the record keeping pre-MekHQ integration), so I added an option to track the original unit even if the share system is in use.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Davout73 on 25 June 2015, 21:18:44
Quote
...except when it's a base attack.  Lose the battle and it's "Contract failed".

Right Click...delete mission.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Davout73 on 25 June 2015, 21:20:22
Theres also a ton of things you can do in the lobby.  Add reinforcements to your own side, change the reinforcement turn for their side, delete a few units...it've easy to even thinngs out.

Dav
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Makinus on 26 June 2015, 06:09:23
Changing the Skill Level on the AtB options from Regular to Green also helps.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 26 June 2015, 06:52:11
These days, if the mission looks 'too hard' and I have unengaged units for the week, I'll throw them into the battle.

My aerospace nearly always turns up on turn 6 as reinforcements when added; 20 cluster bombs really helps to clean out the vehicle hordes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: bluedragon7 on 26 June 2015, 10:18:18
Aerospace units should really turn up quicker, considering their speed, but i think AtB is not taking Aerospace much into consideration. ;)




When using Infantry to avoid combat, do you roll once per unit assigned to the task?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 26 June 2015, 15:17:29
Give the squadron leader some strategy points and stick to the really fast light ASFs and aerospace units might even turn up as early as turn 1  :o

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 26 June 2015, 17:00:27
Give the squadron leader some strategy points and stick to the really fast light ASFs and aerospace units might even turn up as early as turn 1  :o
"Enemy 'Mechs spotted on our patrol flight.  Will continue to overfly until ground units intercept, then commence attack runs.  After all, these light airframes can't handle the undivided attention of all those sad excuses for targets."

The ASFs might already be there, and the 'Mechs that won't arrive until Turn 1.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 26 June 2015, 17:51:47
These days, if the mission looks 'too hard' and I have unengaged units for the week, I'll throw them into the battle.

My aerospace nearly always turns up on turn 6 as reinforcements when added; 20 cluster bombs really helps to clean out the vehicle hordes.

This is where we need Neo to add the reinforcement rolls and the infantry support rolls.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 26 June 2015, 18:24:31
Yeah but neo seems to be suffering from the RL sickness that plagued ralgith for awhile. Beginning to think ralgith had a relapse too  :(
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 26 June 2015, 23:27:56
Yeah but neo seems to be suffering from the RL sickness that plagued ralgith for awhile. Beginning to think ralgith had a relapse too  :(
Being a stay-at-home dad of twins was pretty good for getting coding time until they turned three. I spend all day trying to stay ahead of them (usually failing to keep up) and if we can get them to sleep at a decent time I'm often too tired to think straight (which is bad for coding). Then our house was upside-down while we had our kitchen remodeled. Then my computer that was slowly dying finally tipped over the edge. I have a replacement but I'm still working on getting everything set up. I could go on....but infantry and reinforcement rolls are high on the list when I can get back to it. Being away for so long makes it harder to get started up again.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 27 June 2015, 05:27:56
8 & 5 is such a nice age. They go play on their own and I have more free time to code or get other things done. Will help even more when the youngest starts school this fall. I do dread how whiny my soon will be in the mornings though....
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 27 June 2015, 06:19:28
8 & 5 is such a nice age. They go play on their own and I have more free time to code or get other things done. Will help even more when the youngest starts school this fall. I do dread how whiny my soon will be in the mornings though....
2 and 8 for mine...yes whining is included in the you have kids package... >:D
found good way t deal with older ones whining...no spanking or yelling it just does not work...start hugging and kissing makes her really re evaluate the whining lol
and yes as they get older they get better...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SenorPez on 29 June 2015, 11:44:05
Help me understand how infantry interacts right now... I feel like I'm reading a foreign language with the rules sometimes...

801: "Infantry squads can be deployed either on the battlefield or in support operations, using these rules:"

Okay, so I can either assign Infantry to a lance in the TO&E and have them assigned a role, or assign them to support operations.

803: "Each infantry platoon counts as 1 unit for lance unit numbers."

So far so good. You assign the platoon to the TO&E, not the individual soldiers.

804: "Foot Infantry can only be deployed with Defense lances unless inside a transport."

Still makes sense. Modern war, afterall, is almost 100% mechanized.

805: "Foot infantry inside transports do not count for lance unit numbers."

So 803 doesn't apply to Foot infantry.

806: "Infantry never counts for victory/defeat conditions."

This makes no sense at all. Why not? They have a BV. Destroying them reduces the merc company's ability to wage war. If this is the case, I'm getting 3 platoons, putting them in their own lance (with transports, if necessary), and setting them to Scout. The OpFor can NOT defeat them, since the "effective" BV they bring to the field is zero, while if they win, I get free salvage.

808: Support Operations:
809-810: "Only platoons can take part in support operations. The number of infantry platoons that can do support operations depend on the Strategy skill of the company commander – for each point in Strategy one support operation can be in effect.

The limit on the number of operations makes sense. The timing does not. Do I have to declare which support operation they're on during weekly lance assignment? Or can I pick and choose... if I have an injured mechwarrior, can they do S&R? If I have a Defensive battle roll, can I have them do Guard? If I make it to Sunday without "exhausting" the operation, can I do a Sabotage? Or do I have to declare at the beginning of the week and hope I assigned them right?

816-817: Guard: A infantry platoon in Guard can deploy in any Defensive battle, even if the lance deployed is not with Defend orders.

This directly contradicts 801, in which a platoon can be deployed EITHER on the battlefield OR in Support Operations. If you've deployed them with Defend orders, you can't have them perform a support operation.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 June 2015, 13:09:13
lots of words

806: OK but those transports can be destroyed. I can only imagine in horror what kind of OPFOR would generate against that lance. If you got lucky and drew a battle where you always held the field at the end, did manage to kill something, pulled Liaison contracts, and got the Liaison through the battle, then maybe this would be an effective strategy.

808: Timing is never mentioned directly but... a Turn has always started on Monday, ended on Sunday, and any declarations of assignment have always required being set on Sunday. So yeah, declare the mission type first.

816: Don't see the problem here. If it has Defend Orders it draws battles as normal. If it has Guard Support it reinforces any battle where you have drawn defend for instance Chase(Defender), etc.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 29 June 2015, 16:05:51
Over the weekend, my Light lance drew a "chase" battle (I also have a light vehicle lance).  I had a House liason 'Mech as well, but that made 5 of mine (1M, 3L, +1M liason) against 2A, 3H, 2M, 1L, and thee lances of vehicles (5 opposing lances total), PLUS they got two reinforcing lances of vehicles on around turn 8.....but I only had to destroy half of them to win.  I suspect that my Locust might run out of machinegun ammo before I run out of targets.

Then I drew a "Big Battle", and the opposition turned out to be 3 lances of mostly Heavies, plus an assortment of other stuff, totaling two entire Companies.....against my two light lances?  Sorry, but this isn't payable without massive reloading to generate sane missions.

On Sunday, I quit the campaign and started a new one with a Medium lance of 'Mechs and some lighter stuff.  The opposition was almost identical to what I faced with the Light lance, except that I had almost double the tonnage to handle it (195T instead of 115T).  I'm starting to suspect that Lights are being improperly handled by the OPFOR generator.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 June 2015, 18:50:46
You keep describing "The" lance as "Light" but every time we get details about it, it is actually a "Medium" Lance.

It is impossible to draw an Assault Mech as OPFOR if you are rolling a Canon Light Lance or even Medium. You can only possibly draw an Assault mech in a Chase Scenario IF you are using a Heavy or Assault Lance.

Therefore one of the following conditions must be true.
1 ) There is a bug
2 ) You are playing with AtB level set higher than normal
3 ) You are engaging in hyperbole

Please post a Campaign File along with any Custom designs in a ZIP so that the Community can examine the problem.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 29 June 2015, 19:09:30
Where are the lances weights defined anyway.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 June 2015, 20:01:18
Where are the lances weights defined anyway.

In some old rulebook... can't remember... it is like riding a bike... 130, 200, 280, 380, 380+
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 29 June 2015, 22:17:49
It was defined in one of the 1st ed either mechwarrior RPG or mercenary handbook. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 29 June 2015, 22:57:06
Probably would be better to take the average of the group instead. That would still give you a light lance when having 1 60 tonner and 3 20 tonners. Averages out to 30 tons which is less than the 40 needed for a medium mech. So if you go that route it would end up 140, 210, 300 max per lance weight. Meh.. some older stuff should stay buried.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 30 June 2015, 00:33:43
The lance weights are meant to, I believe, encourage the use of the entire weight range, not just the upper limit.

At 140t for a light lance, you're looking at everyone cramming in 4 35t mechs, when those are supposed to be the upper limit, blending into the medium category already, not the baseline light mech.

I think the AtB lance categories are alright, making sure that if you really only put in the biggest mechs, you are fighting more than someone who can only afford the lightest mechs of a category.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 30 June 2015, 01:28:21
Yeah but 4 35 tonners is kinda dumb, especially if you use a fast heavy (6/9) and a mix of 20-30 tons for the rest.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 30 June 2015, 09:30:58
Looking it over again, you're correct, it WAS in fact a "Medium" lance because of the Liason officer.  My 4 'Mechs consisted of a 40T, 35T, and two 20T, totaling 115 tons, which is "Light".  Unfortunately, the AtB rules include the additional weight of the Liason unit (which incidentally outweighed any of my own units) in determining the opposition, which can then generate either a Medium or a Heavy lance in opposition.  For the OPFOR, a "Heavy" lance can consist of a single Heavy and up to 3 Assaults, which is a bit of a struggle for a "light" lance plus a medium liason 'Mech of dubious effectiveness, even without randomly adding a second lighter opposing lance plus reinforcements.

I really think the rules need a "common sense" limit on OPFOR forces, to prevent 3:1 or 4:1 BV "curb stomps".  If you're that badly outmatched, you don't engage at all, and no rational House officer would insist on having you simply throw away your unit for no effect other than to provide some inexpensive salvage for the enemy.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 30 June 2015, 10:05:17
I really think the rules need a "common sense" limit on OPFOR forces, to prevent 3:1 or 4:1 BV "curb stomps".  If you're that badly outmatched, you don't engage at all, and no rational House officer would insist on having you simply throw away your unit for no effect other than to provide some inexpensive salvage for the enemy.

If all battles were no lose situations then the game would be poorly designed (note to current game makers).  You can take a look at a lot of situations in history in which small forces were forced to retreat from big forces (or where small forces engaged and won against big forces).  This is a natural part of any war and should be included in AtB, which focuses on a game world involved in Total War.  Now if 40% of your games are unwinnable scenarios then yes I agree it needs to be toned down, that is why Neo added the Difficulty level in the AtB tab.  On a good campaign I usually win around 60-75% of my battles.  Which means I either don't deploy take the contract hit, I deploy and get unfortunate crits I cannot recover from, or just simply get out played by the computer. 

As for rational House Officers... we can go back through all sorts of text and find those that insisted on throwing units under their command away, several of them were punched in the face by the mercenary commander and dragged out of the combat zone.  You are a mercenary unit your personnel and units are completely expendable, that is what they pay you for. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 30 June 2015, 10:34:47
Looking it over again, you're correct, it WAS in fact a "Medium" lance because of the Liason officer.  My 4 'Mechs consisted of a 40T, 35T, and two 20T, totaling 115 tons, which is "Light".  Unfortunately, the AtB rules include the additional weight of the Liason unit (which incidentally outweighed any of my own units) in determining the opposition, which can then generate either a Medium or a Heavy lance in opposition. 

If this is the case then it is a bug since Allied units count for Lance Number limit but not Lance Tonnage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 30 June 2015, 13:12:33
MHQ does not include attached allies in lance tonnage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 30 June 2015, 13:28:51
Since I restarted a new campaign with an actual Medium lance, I don't have the saved campaigns from that "light" force, otherwise I'd check to see whether MekHQ was generating Heavy opponents (including an occasional Assault 'Mech) against my Light unit, or whether it was counting the liason officer into my tonnage and fielding a Heavy lance (with an occasional Assault 'Mech) against my "Mediums".   Either way, it's not a very balanced situation, and I found myself reloading back to Sundays before mission generation as much as 10-15 times to get "playable" missions for the week, week after week.  I'm not looking to play cakewalk balanced BV against the AI in mission after mission, but I can't handle 2:1, 3:1, or 5:1 odds in one battle after another, especially with a small unit that doesn't have a solid backup lance.

The suicidal 55T liason SHD was more of a liability than an asset, frequently charging into the middle of a group of heavies and mediums and then turning around to give them free backshots.  Granted, it did draw a lot of fire away from my own units, but was otherwise all but useless.

This was on "normal" difficulty against a "Regular" opponent, since the original "Green" opponent went to Low Morale while I was in transit, and routed at the end of my first month on planet, only to be replaced by a "Regular" force a few months later.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 30 June 2015, 14:21:31
MHQ does not include attached allies in lance tonnage.

I didn't think it did myself. Testing again last night just to make certain I know it doesn't.

lots of words
Kovax, the next time you run into the Impossible Battles situation. Please zip and attach, any customs needed to load your Campaign, along with the Current Save and if possible the previous Sunday save. In the post describe what makes the situation "Impossible".
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 10 July 2015, 14:11:42
when you have a mission in a contract that says an early victory is possible, how does that work? i won that battle and the contract didn't end and more missions have popped up. i'm guessing that i have to close out the contract myself like at the end of a normal one. but how do i get the full contract payment or do i just not get that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 10 July 2015, 15:51:00
Zulf:  If the contract is a garrison, the current enemy will be removed and a new one will be rolled a couple of months later.  Any other contract, we might have a bug or need more info.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 10 July 2015, 16:47:39
its a guerrilla warfare mission. the battle was a base attack as the attacker.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 10 July 2015, 17:14:12
are you allowed to assign an extra lance to a mission if you have a free lance. does that effect the contract in any way?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 10 July 2015, 23:32:45
Per the AtB rules a free lance should be available with a roll for it (I think).

For a base attack you will have to manually end the contract early. Last time this was brought up neo did not have it ready to automatically handle it.

A lot of AtB features from teh excel file are either missing or still need work to properly integrate them into HQ. It will get there eventually, but neo is having a bad case of RL disease and has not had the time for it of late. He is the one that does all the AtB work for MekHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 11 July 2015, 20:22:39
the atb rule set says that when an enemy moral turns to rout it can lead to an early victory. how do i now when this is applicable. is it all non garrison contracts all the time?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 11 July 2015, 20:31:20
never mind found the answer sorry
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 12 July 2015, 19:09:29
good evening everyone.

i have a question as to how you upload a modified unit to HQ. i am able to find it in MM and ML when i search for it, but not HQ.

all of the individual equipment is able to be searched for and purchased. but the upgraded mech is not even searchable.

what i'm trying to do is this. DHS's just started to be sold. so i was able to roll for and buy all of the DHS i'd need for the mech, in order to have the parts on hand for the "upgrade".

my plan was to sell the old mech, GM remove the DHS i bought, and finally buy the upgraded mech from the unit search. the money i'd lose from all of this was to be my cost of upgrading.

clearly this is not how i go about doing this haha. so any help would be great.

thanks
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 12 July 2015, 20:03:38
You probably need to set max tech level for purchases to Experimental, and you need to uncheck "Only allow canon units for purchase" and "Restrict units and parts by era."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 12 July 2015, 21:26:48

what i'm trying to do is this. DHS's just started to be sold. so i was able to roll for and buy all of the DHS i'd need for the mech, in order to have the parts on hand for the "upgrade".

my plan was to sell the old mech, GM remove the DHS i bought, and finally buy the upgraded mech from the unit search. the money i'd lose from all of this was to be my cost of upgrading.

This isn't exactly answering your question but... If you right click on a unit you can customize it, following the actual customization rules. No workaround needed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 13 July 2015, 22:03:34
Sweet! i didn't realize i could do that. thank you!

now for when they become available are command consoles supported now.  when i search the forum the only posts i can find are from 2012 and it says they weren't supported?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 13 July 2015, 22:13:13
I know for sure that you can't have more than 1 pilot (rendering dual cockpits useless and causing some issues for tripods) but I actually can't remember if the other features of a command console work or not. Not that the rules make them all that useful from what I can recall.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 13 July 2015, 22:18:38
I know for sure that you can't have more than 1 pilot (rendering dual cockpits useless and causing some issues for tripods) but I actually can't remember if the other features of a command console work or not. Not that the rules make them all that useful from what I can recall.

I'm 99% certain nothing to do with Command consoles is implemented.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 13 July 2015, 22:25:06
i just had fond memories of them from the table top mostly blowing up lol. so just wanted to know.

as for refits it looks as if you can only have one tech work on it is there any way to lower the time with more techs?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 13 July 2015, 22:33:23
as for refits it looks as if you can only have one tech work on it is there any way to lower the time with more techs?

No. That's just how the rules work, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 13 July 2015, 22:38:01
a very anti social bunch those techs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 14 July 2015, 10:01:48
Okay, so maybe I need to back up a step. Because I have no transport capability, but was able to move to my contract destination, so I'm clearly missing something.

As a fresh, brand-new mercenary company, after I get my initial warriors, techs, and meks, what are the steps I take to get my company to the target planet. Looking at my file, I have no transport capability. Do I have to sit there and hope for a JumpShip roll to succeed before I can go out?

I am just telling m, if there is someone desperate enough to hire a fresh Company, he will have the necessary means to transport them to the contract location (even for a price depending on what you roll for "transportatio" in your contract")
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 14 July 2015, 10:45:12
Just make sure that the transportation reimbursement and the up-front money are sufficient to get you to the contract location before your cash reserves run out.  I recall taking one contract with a really high payoff that was pretty far away, and between the cost per jump and the routine salary and maintenance payments along the way, I ran out of money around 2 jumps short of the destination.  Since it was the tiny units first contract, I had nothing to sell off without reducing the OOB down to the point where they couldn't field a full lance.  Reload time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 14 July 2015, 18:44:44
That's why you should take out a loan before you ever go anywhere.  The AtB rules are set up assuming that you do take out a loan to begin with.  Now, you can try to play without a starting loan, but you're going to need a lot of luck to get a contract that's in range and pays you enough to be able to get rolling.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 14 July 2015, 18:59:24
That's why you should take out a loan before you ever go anywhere.  The AtB rules are set up assuming that you do take out a loan to begin with.  Now, you can try to play without a starting loan, but you're going to need a lot of luck to get a contract that's in range and pays you enough to be able to get rolling.

Unless you use a house rule of starting on the contract planet and gm yourself there.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 14 July 2015, 21:51:38
are the full head ejection systems supported? i was testing a mech in MM and it doesn't look like it. and i tried multiple ways of blowing it up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 15 July 2015, 10:03:27
That's why you should take out a loan before you ever go anywhere.  The AtB rules are set up assuming that you do take out a loan to begin with.  Now, you can try to play without a starting loan, but you're going to need a lot of luck to get a contract that's in range and pays you enough to be able to get rolling.
Problem is, when you don't get a viable mission for well over a year and a half, thanks to low initial ratings, and the loan money is mostly spent just to repay the loan itself, that doesn't leave much cash to spare.  The system works well enough as a Veteran or Elite mercenary unit with a company or more of "stuff", but it's difficult to start as a "start-up" unit, with a single Veteran officer and the rest either Regular or Green, no more than a lance of light 'Mechs(*) in its OOB, plus a couple of light vehicles for backup in case a 'Mech is down for repairs.  In my previous campaign (where I kept generating absurd OPFORS - frequently out-BV'ed 3:1 or 4:1 on a "Green" game setting), I ended up having to reload at least 3-4 times to restart the campaign because the money (including the loan) ran out before getting a viable offer, despite manually generating one "extra" contract each month (I got approximately one bad offer every 3-6 months otherwise, all of which showed a projected loss of several million over the course of the contract).

Once the unit has some experience and more equipment, offers are a lot easier to get,  contracts pay better, and generally offer more salvage and transportation reimbursement. Once you have a lance of Mediums or Heavies, you end up facing mostly the same OPFOR as with a Light lance (one enemy lance "tracks" to match you, but the reinforcements appear to be mostly the same), so the fights get easier as well.

Now that I've started out a "heavier" campaign than what I originally intended to run, with higher starting skills across the board, it's going much more smoothly, so there's no point in attaching a save file.  Problem is, this isn't the minimalist "scrounge-tech" campaign against bandits and rebels that I wanted to run, it's a privatized version of a full House military campaign with high-end personnel and equipment, facing similar top-end opponents.  AtB just isn't geared for anything "less".

(*) Previous OOB: standard PXH-1, FS9-A, LCT-1V, LCT-1V 'Mechs (120T total, which qualifies as "Light"),  plus a J. Edgar and Scorpion light tank and a Flatbed Truck as "reserves" and logistical support assets.  The Lance commander/Force Leader was Veteran, all others Regular or Green, including one Regular tech and mechanic, and the rest Green.  I found myself frequently facing "Medium" opponents, which included a distressing number of Heavy 'Mechs (3H plus 1M in one case, and actually encountered Assaults), and was often outnumbered 8:4 or 12:4 by heavier opponents with higher skills.  The AI is no match for a passably decent player, and I'll play out a scenario with a 20T "bug 'Mech" against an AI-run heavy, but I just can't absorb that kind of incoming fire constantly, particularly when it places you on a map where you can't use your speed to get a decent modifier.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 15 July 2015, 10:22:02
are the full head ejection systems supported? i was testing a mech in MM and it doesn't look like it. and i tried multiple ways of blowing it up.

No they aren't.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 15 July 2015, 17:49:27
is there a way to have your techs try to focus on increasing the quality level of a component? the quality changes in a maintenance cycle. but is there a different way to try and improve quality.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 15 July 2015, 18:28:33
is there a way to have your techs try to focus on increasing the quality level of a component? the quality changes in a maintenance cycle. but is there a different way to try and improve quality.

Put better techs on it. Rent a maintenance facility / factory (not sure what the rules may be for that in AtB or if they exist.)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 15 July 2015, 18:31:09
Put better techs on it. Rent a maintenance facility / factory (not sure what the rules may be for that in AtB or if they exist.)

I use a House Rule of 1 mil per month for a one level facility boost and then double the cost per level after that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 15 July 2015, 19:47:07
Put better techs on it. Rent a maintenance facility / factory (not sure what the rules may be for that in AtB or if they exist.)

With a normal profit level, the canon costs, a single slot costs approximate 75k per month. AtB doesn't have anything to say about Facilities in this sense. Other than any Force less than B doesn't have any access at all.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 15 July 2015, 20:53:32
Technically you should also be able to assign up to 2 more tech teams to maintenance and repairs to improve your chances but that isn't implemented in MHQ yet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 16 July 2015, 00:23:35
thanks for clearing that up a bit.

something i've not noticed until now is the "general modifier" line in the retirement roll popup. what is that for? 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 16 July 2015, 01:12:49
and on that note how do you pay out a bonus to modify the roll needed? is that something that cant be done with the "shares" system?

its the only part of the game that i've seen so far that stops you from getting OP. but losing your entire command staff after the first contract which is only 3 months long makes all the time setting them up at the start a waste. lol
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 16 July 2015, 10:46:56
AtB does recommend "GM Mode" to generate a few contracts to kick you off.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 16 July 2015, 11:29:54
thanks for clearing that up a bit.

something i've not noticed until now is the "general modifier" line in the retirement roll popup. what is that for? 
The general modifier is there to give users some ability to customize retirement rolls by modifying the target number. If the AtB rules as written seem a bit harsh, try a -1 or -2. If you hate yourself, try a +1 or higher. When using employer/employee there should be a box you can check to pay a bonus to individual personnel to give a -1 bonus to that person's retirement roll. Many months ago scJazz asked for a check box at the top that could be used to check all the boxes at once. I swear I'll get to that one day.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 16 July 2015, 12:35:47
my first company was set on regular with no rolls just to see how HQ worked. the only time i ever had a scare of running out of cash was when after 6 years i bought a dropship and all most couldn't cover transport costs.

so this time it's elite and how ever the game wants to mess with me lol. 

i love the game by the way thanks for all the hard work and help you've given so far!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 16 July 2015, 13:21:13
Never really had an issue with pay and I always start out with four mechs, four VTOLs, two Aeros, a doc, a medic, four mech techs, an aerotech, two mechanics and a dropship. First contract is usually in the negatives until you get to salvage or just barely profitable, usually shapes up after the second or third contract for me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: cmoreland on 16 July 2015, 18:09:05
Any way to prevent the bot AI from breaking during some missions? If I have to kick and reload the bot then the mission AI just went out the window. For example, your typical chase scenario - bot has to have more than 50% of forces reach the north edge. Bot gets stuck on movement phase, kick bot, add the bot and now instead of getting to the N edge, I have 22 units swarm and attack my lance. This happens a lot :(

Also, is there a way to mod the difficulty of these ATB campaigns?? Good lord starting out I'm barely a lance and they want to throw me against tons of enemy units. Anyone else have this happen regularly? What do you do?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Thorvidar on 16 July 2015, 19:00:16
Yep... your not the only one it happens to. I go BV, so if they are over a 1000 or so BV then myself I just remove units to get them within that tolerance. That's just me though.

Some people like that at times you have a no win mission, or that it's near impossible. I dont. Also those insane op for that your facing was rolled using your lances weight... with a table that can be found in the atb excel sheet... 2.31 I think, under battle subsheet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 16 July 2015, 19:29:47
Any way to prevent the bot AI from breaking during some missions? If I have to kick and reload the bot then the mission AI just went out the window. For example, your typical chase scenario - bot has to have more than 50% of forces reach the north edge. Bot gets stuck on movement phase, kick bot, add the bot and now instead of getting to the N edge, I have 22 units swarm and attack my lance. This happens a lot :(

Also, is there a way to mod the difficulty of these ATB campaigns?? Good lord starting out I'm barely a lance and they want to throw me against tons of enemy units. Anyone else have this happen regularly? What do you do?

Thanks!

Use the ReplacePlayer's options to direct the bots actions. So for Chase you would tell it Home Edge North, immediate withdraw, etc.

AtB was designed with a Company of Mechs being the starting force, sometimes 9, sometimes 12. But roughly one Company of Mechs. Usually on the Medium side of the weight scale. Thousands of man hours have been spent playing and fine tuning the rules. You can turn down the difficulty level which will cause the enemy to have fewer forces. You can turn off Vehicles entirely or just turn off the doubling.

If you want to start with a smaller force just keep the above in mind. Turn on GM Mode and modify things how you want them to be.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 16 July 2015, 21:58:55
Yeah, for starters, turn off vehicle doubling.  Also, know the lance weight class tables, which affects the kind of opposition you're going to face.  Mission type will also affect just how much opposition you might face as well, but you can't control that.  You can control the weight of your own lances, though.

Light lance:  0-130 tons
Medium lance:  131-200
Heavy lance:  201-280
Assault lance:  281-390
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 16 July 2015, 21:59:44
battleclad how do you possibly start with a dropship?


how does the doubling vehicles work? in the getting started with AtB thread. it says to turn it off. is the doubling just based on BV or is there some internal scale used to determine the number of vehicles.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 16 July 2015, 22:16:33
No.  AtB will actually double the number of vehicles rolled up for your given battle.  So if it rolls 4 Vedettes, you end up facing 8.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 17 July 2015, 03:25:53
battleclad how do you possibly start with a dropship?

I just add one is all, I randomly hire units/add them from the market until I've fleshed out my starting unit using my house rule for starting composition.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 17 July 2015, 14:18:36
what benefit is there to checking the "founder" button on a persons profile
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 17 July 2015, 15:52:26
If you are using the Share System they all get +1 share.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 17 July 2015, 17:34:16
so just an additional share. no bonus to retirement rolls. and  for spouses and dependents aside from company fluff any game effect with them?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: angel0616 on 17 July 2015, 18:10:33
Just wanted to say what a great job the devs  have done on AtB. I've been playing for a couple of months and find the rules and  scenarios awesome. Probably  the best mech game I've played! And I own and played pretty much all the computer Btech games.

Thanks guys.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 17 July 2015, 20:24:33
so just an additional share. no bonus to retirement rolls. and  for spouses and dependents aside from company fluff any game effect with them?

retirement bonus already included in the 30 to 50% stuff.

Other than having the extra share... nope.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 17 July 2015, 20:54:26
Watch out for the bug in the current version of MekHQ where it makes you pay for the recruitment of all enemy pilots when you control the battlefield, not just those you captured+defected, if you have paid recruitment enabled.  (It was fixed within days of the current version's release.)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: battletech on 17 July 2015, 22:02:24
I am nearing the end of a pirate hunting contract and only had one duel for a battle.
I thought I would roll up a final mission.
Rolled up base attack attack
I have 11 units comprising 2 medium lances.
According to the mission set up I will get 2 light ally lances.

1- roll up ally lances performing company rules?
2- ally lances under bot or player control?
3- number of enemy lances bases only on my lances or total of ally and my lances?
4- are enemy units controlled by one bot or can you set up multiple bots?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 17 July 2015, 22:56:56
Let's see...

1-Yeah, that's as good a way to do it as any.  But you also will want to use Xotl's RAT tables to help generate your units.  I'll attach my copy, which is an Excel file which is rather old, but it should serve your purpose.

2-If you have Integrated or House command, an allied bot controls them.  If you have Liaison, you control them.

3-Number of enemy lances I THINK should be based on all the lance participating on your side.  I would review the Big Battles section in the Battles tab on the rules spreadsheet, though.

4-You can set up multiple enemy bots, and MHQ does this whenever the bot has reinforcements coming in later.

And here's the RAT generator spreadsheet file I mentioned.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: battletech on 19 July 2015, 09:59:32
I tried the multiple bots route.
Once it got to the weapons phase, the bot acting as the enemy turned on each other.
While this would be great for the outcome, it is not the way I want to win the battle.
I tried setting the strategic unit for all three bots as my unit and the still attached each other.

What do I need to do differently?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 July 2015, 10:08:12
The Bots all need to be on the same Team.  Player setup section in MM.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: battletech on 19 July 2015, 10:11:31
Jazz,
Can you explain it a little more?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 July 2015, 10:44:04
In Mega Mek... in the setup screen, on the middle left side, there is a drop down menu for Team. The bots have to be on one team... your forces and any allied bots on some other team.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 19 July 2015, 11:36:14
for missions that require a set percent of the enemy forces destroyed. is  there an easier way to find out how many units you've destroyed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 July 2015, 13:10:51
AFAIK we all tend to use the BV of the OPFOR and a calculator.

Is there an easier method? No.

Don't forget any bonuses given by the Strategy of the deployed Commander.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 19 July 2015, 19:08:10
Count how many enemies are left in the initiative at the start of the turn.  (Assuming you're using individual initiative, which makes the bot go a lot faster early in the round because it doesn't have to pick which units to move first.)

Or you can open the game html log in your browser and search for "DESTROYED by".  Depending on forced withdrawal options and how you count retreated units, also search for "flees".

(I still use unit count, not BV.)

Don't forget any bonuses given by the Strategy of the deployed Commander.
Leadership increases your side's max allowed destroyed. 
Strategy only affects reinforcement speed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 19 July 2015, 22:07:43
I go  by number destroyed. It's not too hard, I just check the scenario briefing in MekHQ to count the number of starting units and then search the map to see how many are left.

Sometimes you need to remember things like units that skidded off the board, but mostly it's not too much effort.

Strategy, per the rules sheet, also effects what percentage of units needs to remain alive to not lose the mission. I think it's -5% per rank? So a rank three commander in a mission where you have to save 50% of your guys, means you don't loose until 35% instead (ie from half to about a third).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 20 July 2015, 01:08:31
Quote from: v2.31
Leadership:   Affects (on company leader) the max number of combat/support personnel that the company can have before receiving a -1 in the retirement/defection roll. Starts at 12 for each category with 0 Leadership and adds +6 for   each point. If personnel number is twice or higher the allowed for the commander leadership the modifier is -2.  Each point of Leadership on the battle commander (highest ranked officer) increases by 5% the need number of Merc+Allied forces that need to be destroyed for the OpFor to win the scenario.

Strategy:   Defines the max number of Combat/Scout lances the player can deploy (start at 3 at level 0) and allows for the commander in a battle to reduce the number of turns needed for reinforcements to arrive at the battle in 1 turn for every point on the Strategy skill.
   
Tactics:   Allows the commander to reroll one or more of the battle conditions (Battle Type and Opfor rolls cannot be rerolled) and also gives bonus to commander initiative rolls (just enable the options in MekHQ and Megamek).


Strategy, per the rules sheet, also affects what percentage of units needs to remain alive to not lose the mission. I think it's -5% per rank? So a rank 3 commander in a mission where you have to save 50% of your guys, means you don't lose until 35% instead (ie from half to about a third).
Leadership does that.  Not Strategy. 

Strategy gets your forces in place when and where you need them (reinforcement speed).
Tactics gets you favorable positioning in the short-term/small scale (initiative).
Leadership keeps your forces from giving up (morale).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 20 July 2015, 01:32:19
My bad, sorry.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 20 July 2015, 12:06:07
Actually, I'm very impressed with the entire AtB project across the board, EXCEPT for the balance of the battles and the maps it seems to select with distressing regularity.

I've had to reload at least 20 times in the course of a single month to keep my light hover lance from having to fight (or reach the opposite edge) in dense forests with NO clear paths through, or against both a lance of Medium 'Mechs and a supporting lance of Light 'Mechs or vehicles in urban terrain with limited avenues of movement, generally with the opposition getting additional reinforcements as well.  In one situation, it was 3 opposing lances PLUS two more for reinforcement, each of which was roughly equal in BV to my own....without doubling enemy vehicles!  Meanwhile, my heavier tracked lance frequently gets stuck with chase missions against hordes of light hovertanks in open or lightly wooded terrain.....essentially "auto-fail" after they dash out of range on turn one (I've had them roll up at least 10-20 missions over the course of the campaign, but never got one they could actually do).  Maybe it's just my luck against the random generator, but on average I've had to reload almost every week's missions 10-20 times to get something that's even playable.  If the initial result is "no combat", I accept that, but if it gives a combat mission, I reload until I get a combat mission that's "possible" to do (such as fight against a total of less than 200% of my own force (initial opponents plus reinforcements, or balanced more fairly in plainly suitable or unsuitable terrain, or possible victory condition, for the force in question).  Quite simply, you don't move a hover lance into the middle of a dense forest, you don't send heavy armor into the middle of a swamp, you can't expect to chase light wheeled and hover vehicles with heavy tracked ones, etc.  If I'm outgunned almost 2:1, I'll try it, but at 3:1 or 5:1, I'm not going to bother because it's a suicide run, and the mission doesn't pay enough for suicide runs at 20% BLC.

I would really love to see some form of BV alternative (or at least maximum limits) to the currently random balancing mechanism, so fights don't end up 2:1 or 3:1 as "normal", even on the easier difficulty settings, which only seem to change the frequency of combats, not the difficulty of the combats.  If the mission generator stopped adding opposing units after some BV ratio, it might be a lot more playable.

Prior to AtB, I used to use Xotl's tables to roll up random OPFORs, and missions with random BV balances of betwwen 0.75:1 to 1.75:1, depending on a 2D6 roll.  Now I get to send my heavy 'Mech lance against 3 Vedettes and a Swift Wind Scout Car, and then pit my lance of light hovertanks against a full company of 'Mechs in terrain where my vehicles are little more than pillboxes.  PLEASE rebalance the combats, because the rest of the system is excellent, and I'd hate to give that up, but I can't play it "as is".
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 20 July 2015, 17:01:25
a few more questions.

how are the value of the "shares" calculated. for a brand new company the retirement of your officers can zero out your bank account right the first year/contract.

on that note which is the better system of payment. or the over all pros and cons of each.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Davout73 on 20 July 2015, 19:00:35
I use the Flames of War morale system:  If the number of destroyed enemy units exceeds the number of active mobile units (With prone/pilot unconscious not counting either or) I roll 2d6 against the enemy morale with some modifiers.  If they equal or exceed the TN, they fight the next round, and I roll again at the end of the round if the active/destroyed numbers are similar.  Units that have fled do not count towards the total as well

So, say I am fighting 12 mechs.  If 7 are destroyed, and 5 active, you roll.
If four mechs are down/fled/pilot unconscious, and 5 mechs are destroyed, you roll.  As long as the number of destroyed units exceeds the number of active units, you roll.

I do modify this rule from time to time depending on mission, but to me this way makes a lot more sense than BV.

YMMV

Dav
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 20 July 2015, 19:54:15
I've had to reload at least 20 times in the course of a single month to keep my light hover lance from having to fight (or reach the opposite edge) in dense forests with NO clear paths through, or against both a lance of Medium 'Mechs and a supporting lance of Light 'Mechs or vehicles in urban terrain with limited avenues of movement, generally with the opposition getting additional reinforcements as well. 
...
Quite simply, you don't move a hover lance into the middle of a dense forest, you don't send heavy armor into the middle of a swamp, you can't expect to chase light wheeled and hover vehicles with heavy tracked ones, etc.

If your lance's commander has points in Tactics, you can reroll the terrain type.  Get better commanders so you end up with less bad terrain.
Instead of having to reload a bunch of times, you could just cheat and change the map generation settings.

The campaign is (probably) balanced around using mechs, not tanks, so tanks will often end up completely useless in some terrain while similarly-statted mechs would be at a disadvantage but not completely unusable.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 20 July 2015, 20:37:19
how are the value of the "shares" calculated. for a brand new company the retirement of your officers can zero out your bank account right the first year/contract.

on that note which is the better system of payment. or the over all pros and cons of each.

Share value = Value of all assets (cash - loans + sale value of units/equipment) / total number of shares.
If everyone cashed out their shares at the same time and everything was sold and loans repaid, the company value should go to exactly 0.  (In theory, all base payouts would be paid first before calculating the final share value.)

Your cash can go to 0 because the value of your equipment counts toward the company value.


Shares good:
-It makes it less likely for your people to retire (assuming you pay out more than the minimum 20%).
-If you get a lot of income from selling salvage, that money doesn't go to shareholders.  (But it counts toward company assets, so there will be more to pay out when they retire.)
-You can freely reassign non-officers to/from units without rolling for retirement (see Mech Assignments section)
-When recruiting someone who brings in a unit with them, you don't have to pay half the value of the unit when using shares.  (More shares are created, but the company's value went up at the same time so it shouldn't affect share values much.)
-If you're not doing well, shares aren't worth much, so mechwarrior retirements aren't as costly.  (If the company has 12 mechwarriors worth of shares, but only owns 6 mechs, you only pay half a mech in value with shares to the average shareholder instead of an entire mech.)



Shares bad:
-20-50% of contract payments are lost to your shareholders. 
--Since they're much less likely to retire if you give 50%, they'll keep taking that 50% over time.
--If you don't get a lot of salvage and rely on base contract for profit, you're gonna have a bad time.
-If you are very successful, retiring shareholders are potentially really expensive.  (Reverse of the above example.  If a company of 12 mechwarriors has 24 mechs of value, then when an average mechwarrior retires he gets 2 mechs of value if using shares, 1 mech if not using shares.)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 21 July 2015, 13:48:16
So when not using shares. does increasing or decreasing the salaries play any effect in retirement rolls?

And then I guess the best plan for hiring in that system is going with dispossessed pilots. as there is no multi-million c-bill payouts at the start or end of their time with you.

I don't mind the revolving door of pilots as long as I can keep my hangar full.  You can make do with with a vet and some regs until your unit gets the street cred to keep elites.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 21 July 2015, 14:02:17
Paying a bonus i.e. clicking the box increases retention, +1 vs the +3 (???) of shares.

However, I end up having to keep repeating this point. Things are not nearly as bad as people think.

In a D rated unit Elite pilots have a roughly 58% chance to stay if they are paid a bonus. If they are officers it increases to 72% retention rate. Every single week of a campaign you have a chance of hiring someone. Many times those someones are MWs some of those will be Elites. Negating any issue with retention.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 21 July 2015, 14:21:02
Paying a bonus i.e. clicking the box increases retention, +1 vs the +3 (???) of shares.

However, I end up having to keep repeating this point. Things are not nearly as bad as people think.

In a D rated unit Elite pilots have a roughly 58% chance to stay if they are paid a bonus. If they are officers it increases to 72% retention rate. Every single week of a campaign you have a chance of hiring someone. Many times those someones are MWs some of those will be Elites. Negating any issue with retention.

No matter how much I expand the retirement window I can never find the bonus option... I've just started paying a 10000c-bill bonus for each of my pilots for each -1 I apply to the unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 21 July 2015, 16:17:26
No matter how much I expand the retirement window I can never find the bonus option... I've just started paying a 10000c-bill bonus for each of my pilots for each -1 I apply to the unit.
There seems to be a checkbox in the AtB campaign options menu that needs to be clicked if you want to be able to pay a bonus to modify retirement rolls; at least that's what it appears to do.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 21 July 2015, 23:42:42

In a D rated unit Elite pilots have a roughly 58% chance to stay if they are paid a bonus. If they are officers it increases to 72% retention rate. Every single week of a campaign you have a chance of hiring someone. Many times those someones are MWs some of those will be Elites. Negating any issue with retention.

I guess your computer is nicer to you than ours are to us.  With that 72% retention rate, that still leaves a 28% loss rate.  That's 1/4 of all the elites you have.  Now, I don't know about everybody else, but my computer seems to get that 28% fifty percent of the time.    :D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 22 July 2015, 10:05:09
you can always fake an elite pilot with a quad and "single weapon specialist". in fact weapon specialist and sniper are probably more bang for you buck than promoting a green or regular to a 3 gunnery.


The advanced medical rules are something I just found and look interesting. But what about all the other odd extra things you can add in the options do they all work yet? For example the tougher healing,  procreation, and era rolls for repair. What are those I suppose less talked about rule sets and how do they effect the game
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 22 July 2015, 10:21:26
Do not turn on Era mods for maintenance! All the options do work. Procreation can be a bit buggy but you will end up with Children dependents. Tougher healing is exactly what it says.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 22 July 2015, 10:38:58
Era mods for maintenance essentially just make maintenance and repairs even more punishing than they already are.

For maintenance I highly recommend the 'only damage parts that are already at "A" quality' rule - the maintenance rules (from StratOps) were clearly not tested very extensively when tracked at the individual part level. This just makes it so that parts have to degrade in quality quite a bit before they can break. But it is another of my unofficial options in there, so I may be biased.  ;)

Most of the options give a pretty good overview of what they do if you hover over them. As the tooltip says for advanced medical, there is a doc included with MHQ that outlines how that works.

Tougher healing is exactly what it says.

And just to note; tougher healing has no affect on my advanced medical rules. Tougher healing modifies the normal injury rules, while advanced medical completely overrides them essentially. (Hits are converted into specific injuries after a battle)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 22 July 2015, 21:02:28
Is a 4/6 or 5/5 pilot supposed to be a Regular?  I always thought they were Green. 
Meaning the Gunnery/... skills would be Target Number 7,  not 8.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 22 July 2015, 22:33:51
I think currently AtB treats a 5/5 as regular, with 5 being the regular skill for all piloting and gunnery values. That'd make a 4/5 halfway to veteran, but usually still tracked as regular in the roster.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 23 July 2015, 02:55:37
Jenniferinamad is right about how MHQ does it.  HOwever, there is a place in the campaign options screen, a skills tab or something, that allows you to change some of that stuff and modify it for the most part how you want.  I think MHQ averages the skills when it comes to multiples for a proffession. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: cmoreland on 23 July 2015, 09:53:32
Thanks for the help with the bot reloading in chase missions. I had another question though.

It seems like the the bot does hang nearly every round on the movement phase. Why is this and how do I stop it from happening?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 23 July 2015, 10:20:46
Thanks for the help with the bot reloading in chase missions. I had another question though.

It seems like the the bot does hang nearly every round on the movement phase. Why is this and how do I stop it from happening?

It's deciding on movement most likely, individual initiative should shorten that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: cmoreland on 23 July 2015, 10:26:01
It's deciding on movement most likely, individual initiative should shorten that.

Would it still be individual initiative if I kick and reload the bot and at that point things get moving again almost instantly?

It's like playing with a narcoleptic and having to nudge him back awake each move phase. NAP ATTACK ZZZzzzZZzzzzz

EDIT: Is that changed at the basic campaign option screen, uncheck team initiative?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 23 July 2015, 12:24:58
Would it still be individual initiative if I kick and reload the bot and at that point things get moving again almost instantly?

It's like playing with a narcoleptic and having to nudge him back awake each move phase. NAP ATTACK ZZZzzzZZzzzzz

EDIT: Is that changed at the basic campaign option screen, uncheck team initiative?

ATB rules or megamek options if memory serves, as for the kicking... Pretty much, I've always considered the Ai to slow down as it gets more variables to calculate into it's moves. For instance ammo depletion, damage, withdrawl, heat levels and so on. Without Individual Initiative it tries to consider every single unit during the same sequence, whilst trying to account for our movement as well. Turn on Individual Initiative and you force the AI to focus plus you lighten it's workload by easing management. I could be completely wrong but that's how I consider it.


A fresh bot just looks at the board as is instead of being bogged down by tracked data.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: cmoreland on 23 July 2015, 14:25:37
ATB rules or megamek options if memory serves, as for the kicking... Pretty much, I've always considered the Ai to slow down as it gets more variables to calculate into it's moves. For instance ammo depletion, damage, withdrawl, heat levels and so on. Without Individual Initiative it tries to consider every single unit during the same sequence, whilst trying to account for our movement as well. Turn on Individual Initiative and you force the AI to focus plus you lighten it's workload by easing management. I could be completely wrong but that's how I consider it.


A fresh bot just looks at the board as is instead of being bogged down by tracked data.

I just realized that I'm on an older version of MekHQ. 3.6 I believe. Have there been many changes to the AI and resource utilization since then? This is almost unplayable.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 23 July 2015, 14:52:06
They're waiting for SourceForge to be back up or updated or something or another right now.  As soon as that happens there is supposed to be a newer version getting posted there.  Yeah, definately worth getting new.  Even if for nothing more than the graphics updates with megamek. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 23 July 2015, 15:23:49
I just realized that I'm on an older version of MekHQ. 3.6 I believe. Have there been many changes to the AI and resource utilization since then? This is almost unplayable.

Depending on how cooperative Sourceforge is being you can try downloading 3.14 for here:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/mekhq/files/development/MekHQ-0.3.14/
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Killface on 23 July 2015, 16:48:04
Anybody have any suggestions on a framework for adding both positive and negative traits as time goes by to give mechs more personality?  "Oh that?  That's old Stompy...  Took a hit to the knee in '38 and has had that hitch in his step ever since" or "Hey Cap!  The boys and I were thinking about it and we got an idea on how to isolate the recoil from your autocannon so it tracks better!"
Maybe Positive quirks are something techs buy with XP, and negative quirks have a chance of showing up any time you take internal damage?  I don't know!  Idea me!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 23 July 2015, 22:16:54
I just realized that I'm on an older version of MekHQ. 3.6 I believe. Have there been many changes to the AI and resource utilization since then? This is almost unplayable.

If SF isn't working you can use Dylan's Custom from here...
http://bt.dylanspcs.com/
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 24 July 2015, 00:30:03
I'm having a problem with the "purchase unit" window. I'm trying to narrow down the search by tech. but even when i check "intro box set" and inner sphere only  i still have clan mechs and other not intro mechs show up. what am i doing wrong?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 24 July 2015, 09:56:12
There seems to be issues with a lot of the original designs not showing up as "legal" (including the "standard" models of most 3026 vehicles).  I allowed illegal and non-canon designs and one or two other options, and got a much more complete selection of both 'Mechs and vehicles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 24 July 2015, 12:29:31
even when i click all IS i still have clan mechs showing up though that's  the problem i'm having.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 24 July 2015, 17:06:26
so i routed a contract and i went to close it out as complete. i got paid and then i had a one month extension added on. so at the end of the next month i went to close out the contract, i got paid the full amount as the main contract and another extension and this keeps repeating.

i know the contract extension thing is in the rules, but why am i getting paid the full amount again and again?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jh316 on 29 July 2015, 01:45:16
Hey, I've been out of AtB for about a year and a half, is that modded version of MekHQ that included AtB rules still updated?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 29 July 2015, 09:56:52
Hey, I've been out of AtB for about a year and a half, is that modded version of MekHQ that included AtB rules still updated?
All of the newer MekHQ versions include AtB options.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 29 July 2015, 11:02:43
Hey, I've been out of AtB for about a year and a half, is that modded version of MekHQ that included AtB rules still updated?
It's been several months since I worked on it because I'm a bit overwhelmed by RL responsibilities, but I will get back to it. The longer I've been away the harder it is to start up again, but hopefully I can start easing back in with some bug fixes in the next few weeks.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Argon on 01 August 2015, 13:37:48
I have question about "noble" section.
"basic base - allows up to 4 units to be deployed on the terrain" - any terrain/region from starting landhold, or only on terrain/region where base is?

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 August 2015, 15:20:58
(DELETE) wrong thread
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 02 August 2015, 22:59:31
I have question about "noble" section.
"basic base - allows up to 4 units to be deployed on the terrain" - any terrain/region from starting landhold, or only on terrain/region where base is?

Only on the terrain the base is at.  Other lands you control have a set number of units they can support.  I do not have the rules open at the moment, it might be that each terrain is allowed 2 units and the base allows 4, or it might be that mountains can only support two and cities can support four and the base adds 4 to that value... I cannot recall right off hand... making mountains 6 and cities 8. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Killface on 03 August 2015, 19:25:45
I just noticed that the MekHQ AtB implementation dings me for violating the 12+LD*6 personnel limitation during defection check if I have too many dependents.  Is that right?  I had just assumed that they didn't count for Leadership purposes, but I can't find a clear reference in the rules one way or the other.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 04 August 2015, 11:57:43
I just noticed that the MekHQ AtB implementation dings me for violating the 12+LD*6 personnel limitation during defection check if I have too many dependents.  Is that right?  I had just assumed that they didn't count for Leadership purposes, but I can't find a clear reference in the rules one way or the other.
The rules under the Officer section refer to it as a limit to "Combat/Support Personnel", but doesn't mention Dependents, which I believe are not considered "support personnel" unless they gain additional skills by spending accumulated XP.  You have individual limits for combat and support.

Personally, I'd like to see a reorganization of the rules, because the current set seems like a haphazard conglomeration of all the bits and pieces in no particular order.  It has stuff like modified units and specialized skills detailed before a lot of the basic info, for instance, and the essential info on officer effects and stats are scattered throughout.  The latest set doesn't seem to have much info on the nature of battles, much of which has been incorporated into MekHQ, but I couldn't find anything on which lances (besides infantry) can be sent to assist a battle, based on their deployment role.  There's also a bunch of odd notes toward the right side of the document, which seem to be unrelated to the rules, but cause a lot of issues with trying to print it.

Unfortunately, the rules as they stand are an invitation to meta-gaming to keep your lance weights, OOB, and stats at or just under certain numbers, rather than being a somewhat nebulous method of keeping the opposition and expenses in line with the unit's capabilities.  I find it next to impossible to "just play"; I have to conform my play to the AtB rules rather than have the rules provide a decent experience.

For example the officers get 1+ XP per week (there are options in MekHQ to increase it even further, but not to reduce it!), while the non-officers have only a small chance of getting 1 XP per several months, leaving you with Super-Legendary-Demigod leaders of otherwise Regular or Green lances.  The only answer is to recruit all new troops at Veteran or higher stats while your "old hands" remain as inept as ever or retire.  If you're trying to run a marginal periphery campaign or a small unit with a bunch of relatively "normal" troops, only able to hire Green or occasional Regular new members, it just doesn't work.  There just aren't thousands of Elite Mechwarriors and other key personnel hunting for work at any given time, but lots of Regular and even more Green "wannabe" troops for hire.

The overall idea and a lot of the work that went into the rules are excellent, but it needs some significant adjustment in several respects.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Killface on 04 August 2015, 12:53:40
Ok another question:  Does an Early Victory just end the contract, or do you get the balance of payments immediately, or do you just leave the contract open until expiration, collecting monthly payouts?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 04 August 2015, 14:18:30
Ok another question:  Does an Early Victory just end the contract, or do you get the balance of payments immediately, or do you just leave the contract open until expiration, collecting monthly payouts?

Just end it early you will get paid... although if you are as paranoid as I am you will calculate how much you should get and save it in Calculator before you push the button.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 05 August 2015, 09:52:05
Personally, I'd like to see a reorganization of the rules, because the current set seems like a haphazard conglomeration of all the bits and pieces in no particular order.  It has stuff like modified units and specialized skills detailed before a lot of the basic info, for instance, and the essential info on officer effects and stats are scattered throughout.  The latest set doesn't seem to have much info on the nature of battles, much of which has been incorporated into MekHQ, but I couldn't find anything on which lances (besides infantry) can be sent to assist a battle, based on their deployment role.  There's also a bunch of odd notes toward the right side of the document, which seem to be unrelated to the rules, but cause a lot of issues with trying to print it.

When Makinus releases a new build of the rules I will work on organization again to put things in a work order flow.  I did the current setup, but so much has been added, removed, and changed things have fallen out of order again.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 06 August 2015, 07:45:20
Enemy Morale:
When the enemy Morale changes by one "tick" above or below normal level during the monthly routine, does MHQ automatically increase or decrease the chances for a battle for each deployed Lance?
If it does not, how should the itensity be modified for enemy low/high morale in the ATB options?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 06 August 2015, 10:50:54
One additional comment about the current vehicle options:

The AtB rules as implemented in MekHQ have a check-box to count the player's vehicles at 1/2 weight.  While that balances the situation more evenly in some cases, it's absolutely pointless in others.  Picture a light vehicle lance, with a Saracen, Saladin, Scimitar, and J. Edgar, which are each 35T except the J.E. at 25T, and add up to 130T.  That's a "Light" lance according to the rules.  With the box checked, it counts as 65T, which is still a "Light" vehicle lance; no difference.  The weight reduction only really matters if you're running heavy tanks, not light vehicle scouts of 35T and under.

I believe that one of the earlier MekHQ versions included "very light" or "ultra light" lances as a class, so you could field such a light scout vehicle unit and not have to face opposition like a Medium 'Mech lance plus supporting vehicles, where the supporting vehicles alone could out-ton and out-BV your force.

As pointed out earlies, the rules are more-or-less balanced for a 'Mech force, but in my opinion they really need to be revised and expanded for a wider range of playing styles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 06 August 2015, 11:14:19
In that situation I would uncheck the limit on lance sizes and run those light vehicle lances at 8 units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 07 August 2015, 05:03:11
In that situation I would uncheck the limit on lance sizes and run those light vehicle lances at 8 units.

This!

I am still on MHQ version 3.12 *dodges rotten tomatoes* and in my current campaign I do not get any prisoner defections to my side. My dragoon rating is C and the POWs I capture are usually green and regular with some odd veteran and elite gunners or drivers. Do I have to check a box somewhere in the options?
I think I remember to get prisoner defections in my last campaign using the same version of MHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 07 August 2015, 09:11:30
I am still on MHQ version 3.12 *dodges rotten tomatoes* and in my current campaign I do not get any prisoner defections to my side.
Running 3.14 and have the same issue.  The Campaign Options box to check for prisoner defections is activated, but the combat resolution no longer assigns enemy personnel as "Prisoner" or "Escaped" after battles; I have to manually roll it and check the appropriate box; they're ALL empty by default.  Then I have to manually do a defection roll as well on any who have been captured.  In a previous version, it was done automatically.

[ The check box is under the AtB tab. ]
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 07 August 2015, 10:29:19
Ok, I take a look at home if I can find that box for prisoner defection in my campaign options - thx :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 29 August 2015, 19:59:13
So I was wondering about selling units in the various markets.  How do y'all handle that?  I used to think that the disadvantage of using the Merc market was that you had to buy or sell in groups of three, but the current MekHq implementation of the rules doesn't seem to require that.  Often the units from that market aren't divisible by 3.

So do you all mostly sell in the markets whenever, or only on the 1st or something?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 29 August 2015, 20:08:35
Also, how am I supposed to handle the bot attached units after the fight?  Marking them as lost seems to hurt my contract score.

I've had two battles so far, one victory (bot lived, but I marked it as lost), and one defeat with the bot destroyed.  Dumb Locust insisted on fighting a Von Lukner Heavy Tank at point blank range ... 

My current score of -3 (+1 for victory, -2 for defeat, -2 for two minor breaches) tells me that I shouldn't have marked the bot attached unit as lost.  Should I just GM delete it then? 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 August 2015, 23:41:20
There is a bug that will cause attached units to be marked as total loss, lost every time regardless. Mark it not a total loss in the first screen and in the 2nd mark it correctly.

There is and has never been a limit on the number of units sold through the market in any way AFAIK.

Buy and sell as you wish. Understand though that MHQ is not tracking your sales you'll need to do that by hand, or Excel.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 30 August 2015, 02:40:17
There is a bug that will cause attached units to be marked as total loss, lost every time regardless. Mark it not a total loss in the first screen and in the 2nd mark it correctly.

There is and has never been a limit on the number of units sold through the market in any way AFAIK.

Buy and sell as you wish. Understand though that MHQ is not tracking your sales you'll need to do that by hand, or Excel.


hmmm.  this is the reverse of what I have been doing.  if you read the paragraph above where you choose your losses, the one says it will remove from your hangar, the other says unit destroyed.  you should be marking unit loss in the one that says "removed from hanager" and unmarking it in the other. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 30 August 2015, 08:28:40

hmmm.  this is the reverse of what I have been doing.  if you read the paragraph above where you choose your losses, the one says it will remove from your hangar, the other says unit destroyed.  you should be marking unit loss in the one that says "removed from hanager" and unmarking it in the other.

Exactly how I handle it and the contract score is adding up correctly for me then.
For unit sales; there should be shown in the finance tab. If you sell a unit to a market using AtB rules, you should roll for  sell modifier and adjust the sale price and adjust in the finance tab accordingly.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 30 August 2015, 10:40:39
I have also noticed that in the latest couple versions of MHQ, the skill and abilities costs are not persisting when you click on those buttons in the Against the Bot tab.  Am I the only one experiencing this before I make a bug report?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 31 August 2015, 04:52:15
I've noticed that as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 31 August 2015, 11:08:58

hmmm.  this is the reverse of what I have been doing.  if you read the paragraph above where you choose your losses, the one says it will remove from your hangar, the other says unit destroyed.  you should be marking unit loss in the one that says "removed from hanager" and unmarking it in the other.
It's checked as "destroyed" in the second screen by default, so you have to uncheck any surviving allies.  The first screen appears to be set properly by default, where units that aren't integral parts of your force are checked off as "lost", and will not be added to your hanger, otherwise you would get all of your ally's units for free after each battle (possibly including dropships).  I believe it used to work properly in previous versions up until the last two or so.

The Capture screen definitely used to work before, but in the last couple of versions I've only seen one mission in around 20+ where it actually checked a box for a captured pilot, and I think it was a special mission where it happened.  Normally, the odds of capture for a badly injured pilot or crewman are reasonably high, and getting one capture out of 50+ defeated personnel, many of them injured, really doesn't seem to be working right.  The boxes are all empty, not showing "escaped", "captured", "MIA", or anything else.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 September 2015, 11:51:37
It's checked as "destroyed" in the second screen by default, so you have to uncheck any surviving allies.  The first screen appears to be set properly by default, where units that aren't integral parts of your force are checked off as "lost", and will not be added to your hanger, otherwise you would get all of your ally's units for free after each battle (possibly including dropships).
Unchecking the box on both screens works just fine for the Allied mechs. No extras delivered to Hangar.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 September 2015, 18:13:08
I have also noticed that in the latest couple versions of MHQ, the skill and abilities costs are not persisting when you click on those buttons in the Against the Bot tab.  Am I the only one experiencing this before I make a bug report?

I just checked it and it worked fine from a New Blank Campaign. Campaign version issue? What do you have as your skills for things like Admin, Techs, and Docs?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 01 September 2015, 19:42:04
I've now done a Base Attack (Attacker) mission twice, and won both times.

But rather than MM throwing it over to MekHQ like usual, it just sort of gets confused.  The usual boxes don't come up after the one asking if I controlled the battlefield.

Resolving it manually doesn't seem to work either.  I pick the salvage mul and the mul for my forces, but when i click OK, nothing happens.

This is with 3.16.  Anyone else noticing this issue?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 01 September 2015, 19:43:54
I've now done a Base Attack (Attacker) mission twice, and won both times.

But rather than MM throwing it over to MekHQ like usual, it just sort of gets confused.  The usual boxes don't come up after the one asking if I controlled the battlefield.

Resolving it manually doesn't seem to work either.  I pick the salvage mul and the mul for my forces, but when i click OK, nothing happens.

This is with 3.16.  Anyone else noticing this issue?

2 Versions out of date. Check latest version please.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 01 September 2015, 19:50:13
2 versions, but only a few weeks!  I was actually planning on upgrading once I finished this contract.  ANyway, downloading 3.18 now.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 September 2015, 19:52:27
I've now done a Base Attack (Attacker) mission twice, and won both times.

But rather than MM throwing it over to MekHQ like usual, it just sort of gets confused.  The usual boxes don't come up after the one asking if I controlled the battlefield.

Resolving it manually doesn't seem to work either.  I pick the salvage mul and the mul for my forces, but when i click OK, nothing happens.

This is with 3.16.  Anyone else noticing this issue?

3.15 was the last usable release for AtB... sorry Ralgith and Tarharqa.

Shin Ji you have been caught up in the maelstrom of Releases. The Dev's are pushing toward a new Stable. Doing a fine job of it as well. However, right now, new releases, bug fixes, and new bugs are being published weekly.

This is good... except for you the new player. Still it is good!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 02 September 2015, 08:22:36
3.15 was the last usable release for AtB... sorry Ralgith and Tarharqa.

That statement makes no sense, as nothing with AtB has changed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 02 September 2015, 09:45:01
Unchecking the box on both screens works just fine for the Allied mechs. No extras delivered to Hangar.
Right, you only need to uncheck the boxes in the first screen to avoid getting unearned units, and it normally sets it correctly for you.  You can manually change it for RP reasons, or to cheat if you so choose.  That much works the way it should.

The first issue I have with it is that the second screen defaults to losing all of your allies, and consequently getting a heap of negatives to your contract score.  I THINK it used to figure that out by itself, with the check-boxes giving you the ability to change that for RP purposes, but now you have to intentionally change them to avoid failing the contract.  That involves making a list after the battle of which units survived and which were destroyed, and then checking the appropriate boxes in the combat resolution process (last night's Big Battle involved 12 civilian units and 3 attached allied units to track for combat resolution purposes).  In my opinion, if it can't resolve it automatically, it should at least default to them surviving, not dying.

The second issue is that it no longer resolves the captured crew/pilots except on a few specific missions, so you again have to manually roll the dice and set it.  Previously, I recall it resolving and setting the outcomes for most or all battles automatically, with an occasional capture and most escaping.  Now, they're all left blank.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 02 September 2015, 10:51:37
In case anyone was wondering, upgrading to 3.18 fixed the problem.  I was able to redo the fight and everything was smooth.

Downgrading to 3.14 (I could find that one on Deadborder's site) did not help at all.

Of course, there's an excellent chance I'm just doing something wrong here, but just fyi.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 02 September 2015, 12:42:38
That statement makes no sense, as nothing with AtB has changed.

Princess got broken, then fixed. ahhh nevermind.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 02 September 2015, 17:57:23
what effect does killing every single escaped pilot/crew has on morale on the planet?
i just finished a guerrilla mission and killed off every single pilot/crew that manged to abandon its vehicle and only nothing i noticed is lack of missions on 2 year contract i had had no missions  for 5 months
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 02 September 2015, 18:14:55
what effect does killing every single escaped pilot/crew has on morale on the planet?
i just finished a guerrilla mission and killed off every single pilot/crew that manged to abandon its vehicle and only nothing i noticed is lack of missions on 2 year contract i had had no missions  for 5 months

Exactly... no effect at all in MHQ/AtB. On the other hand that would make you a Criminal and Rogue according to ComStar.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 03 September 2015, 10:50:09
Mechwarriors can be picked up, but crews of abandoned vehicles fight as infantry and can't be collected.  They WILL shoot at you, and you have no choice other than to wipe them out to complete the scenario, unless you use the "/victory" command-line entry to end the battle.  I've also noticed that the 'bot went from ignoring infantry and bailed crews even when they were a direct threat, to the opposite extreme.  AI controlled units now seem to intentionally target bails, even when there are active 'Mechs and vehicles engaging them, which as pointed out would be a war crime.

Several versions ago (probably 5-6 back), they could be picked up just like pilots.  While it didn't make a lot of sense for a potentially large number of them to fit into a 'Mech somewhere (especially if you have heavy vehicles which require large crews), having them turn into infantry which need to be killed isn't a "better" solution, just a different work-around.

I've been torn between the choice of risking having my ejected pilots and crews brutally murdered by the AI, versus turning on "auto-flee" and not being able to capture opposing personnel.  Ideally, Pirates should behave far more  viciously and spitefully than House forces, with Mercenaries being the most inclined to capture rather than kill.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 03 September 2015, 11:09:46
Given the fact that AtB does have rules in place for Prisoner capture I have always used AutoFlee. It just makes more sense to me. IMHO.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 04 September 2015, 01:42:00
Given the fact that AtB does have rules in place for Prisoner capture I have always used AutoFlee. It just makes more sense to me. IMHO.

I have never used autoFlee because I wanted to have control of my warriors/crews that had abandoned vehicles.  Or am I thinking incorrectly. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 04 September 2015, 10:27:31
AutoFlee removes them from the map entirely when they eject. They just dissappear
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Perigrin on 07 September 2015, 22:02:03
Why did 7 of my veteran and elite mechwarriors just leave? that's half of my current force.
EDIT: I field 3 lances, and i only have 5 mechwarriors now, and all but one are green.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 07 September 2015, 22:07:04
 During a battle or did you get hit with a retirement/defection roll's?

 I personally turn off retirement and such, starting off, even with a good CO, I lose way too many folks in key positions, even my CO sometimes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Perigrin on 07 September 2015, 22:14:08
I got hit with a retire roll, and everyone beyond green level save the CO left. Mechwarriors, Techs, and Infantry. I cant find how to turn it off in the bloody options either.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 07 September 2015, 22:19:14
 It is in the AtB rules, think it is 5th to 6th down, "allow retirement rolls" is what it is called. Just uncheck that little dude, you will still get a popup down the road saying it has been a year since last retirement but you can just cancel it out.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 08 September 2015, 06:53:56
I am curious to know whats the leadership value of your CO and how large your force was before the retirement roll.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Perigrin on 08 September 2015, 08:04:15
12 Mechwarriors, 10 techs, a doctor and an admin. The CO died the next combat to a demolisher headcapping it, so I can't quite tell you what his leadership was.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: legatoblues on 08 September 2015, 08:22:38
I just completed a Star League Cache mission, but didn't receive or have the option to receive a mech. What was I supposed to do here?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 08 September 2015, 08:23:49
And how many infantry platoons?
Did you play with shares and if yes how much of your contract paments was distributed as shares to your mercenaries (20, 30, 40 or 50 percent)?
If you opt to play with defection rules as they are written in the AtB rules you shuld take care that the size of your force does not exceed what your CO can handle with his leadership. Your CO is not invulnerable to bullets, laserbeams, exploding reactors, skidding into dropships (i like that one) and all other sorts of sudden, violent demises in the BT universe, always ensure you have a backup with some leadership skills.
If you play with shares, don't be a miser. Give out the max (i.e. 50%) of your contract payments as this has the most impact on what keeps veteran and elite combat and support personel in your company, especially if your company still has a low rating as C or D. Most of your income is generated by salvage anyway, so it's not really a big deal. If you stick to the rules, do bonus payments when it comes to retirement rolls. The +1 die roll modifier can make the difference if a elte tech stay loyal or is gone for good.
If you don't play with shares - good luck :D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NewDallasPatriot on 26 September 2015, 13:42:47
Is anyone else having trouble following the download link? I can only get to a 404 error.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 26 September 2015, 14:31:02
Yeah I also get 404.

File attached to this post

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 27 September 2015, 15:10:50
Does anyone know how you increase the shares paid out to combat personnel?  It defaults to 20%, and I don't see a way to change that either before or after accepting the contract.

Also, do contracts requiring more lances start showing up if you've got a bigger force, and do they pay better?

Using 3.18 now.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 27 September 2015, 16:32:42
look below
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 27 September 2015, 17:33:27
There's a really easy to miss number box near the top of the screen when viewing a potential contract which defaults to "20".  You set it there.

(http://i.imgur.com/jeygJE8l.jpg)

If you forget (like I do 80% of the time), you can edit it in the the .cpnx file.
Look for your current contract (starts with something like: <mission id=) and edit the field near the bottom of that section that looks like <sharesPct>20</sharesPct>.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ironboot on 28 September 2015, 08:00:05
I forget too! Its done during the contract.  THank you for show me how to edit it after the fact!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 08 October 2015, 12:47:05
Thank you so much, Obvious!  If I may ask what is almost certainly a very dumb question, what file do I open to find that mission id thing you mentioned so I can edit it?

Also, does anyone know how the system determines how many rerolls you get for the maps and such?  A lot of my officers have a point of Tactics, but I never seem to get rerolls.  Does it look at the highest ranking officer?  Even with my officers at LT JG/SG rank, it doesn't seem to give rerolls.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 08 October 2015, 12:51:20
Rerolls are based on the tactics skill of the commander of the Lance assigned to the battle. The commander is the person with the highest rank.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 08 October 2015, 13:14:17
OK.  What if there are several people in the Lance with the same rank?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 08 October 2015, 13:30:55
...what file do I open to find that mission id thing you mentioned so I can edit it?

Probably campaigns/[campaign name].cpnx.
Open with your favorite text editor.
Obviously, you'll need to load the campaign in MekHQ again after editing.
Probably should make a backup first in case something gets messed up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 08 October 2015, 13:36:25
That worked perfectly, Obvious!  Thanks again.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eugee on 08 October 2015, 15:34:07
Question about purchasing new units in AtB:

Are we only supposed to use the Unit Market?  If I use Purchase Units, there are still Acquisition rolls being made, and lots of stuff is listed as unavailable.  Since we get parts using Purchase Parts, I'm confused if we're allowed to use Purchase Units (behind the GM-Add during company creation).  I feel like we're not supposed to use it, since it really makes the Unit Market largely pointless.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 08 October 2015, 16:29:23
The bottom line for anything involving AtB is that you do what you want to. It's your campaign and AtB provides a framework to help you. That being said, the unit market is the standard method for an AtB campaign. The purchase unit dialog is a more general approach and you're free to use it instead if you find 5he unit market too limiting. Or use both. Or make up your own system.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 08 October 2015, 16:36:06
OK.  What if there are several people in the Lance with the same rank?
If the highest rank is held by more than one person then MHQ can't determine which is supposed to be the unit commander and could pick any of them to determine the commander tactics level. If you want a specific person to treated as the commander, you need to make it clear by assigning that person the highest rank in the unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eugee on 08 October 2015, 17:05:57
The bottom line for anything involving AtB is that you do what you want to. It's your campaign and AtB provides a framework to help you. That being said, the unit market is the standard method for an AtB campaign. The purchase unit dialog is a more general approach and you're free to use it instead if you find 5he unit market too limiting. Or use both. Or make up your own system.

Yeah I've turned off the weather and lighting myself, as I'm teaching a guy to play BT by having him control some of my forces, and it's a bit overwhelming (and makes some fights really not fun) so I get that it's about making it your own experience.  I just wanted to know what the "standard" is.  I like using the market, watching each month for mechs that I want.  It took me a very long time to get 3x Marauder II + 1x Charger (variant) for my assault lance, I feel like I earned them!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 08 October 2015, 19:53:26
I usually use Individual Initiative.  Provides no rerolls (unless you have someone with Tactical Genius), but people with the Initiative skill get it added to their roll. 

As for getting specific mechs, if it's something I want and it's not in the market, I pay double it's normal pricetag.  And that works with the clan multiplier.  So if your multiplier is 2.5 like mine, youll end up paying 5 times the cost of a clan mech you're specifically going for.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 08 October 2015, 22:03:19
I know when I was playing AtB I never purchased anything that was not on the market.  Again it is what makes the game fun for you.  Some players want to be able to buy their favorite mechs and have them on hand.  Others have fun in finding hidden gems on the market to be gobbled up.  It is your game, your campaign, your rules.

I know I always turned off lighting in my games as that just made the game un-fun.  I don't mind fighting in a blizzard... but a blizzard plus moonless night... no thanks.  It was simply not fun.  I also hate retirement rolls as written so I turn them off for the first 3 years, give my company time to ramp up and be effective.

AtB recommends Individual Initiative for several reasons, but primarily it helps the bot to move since it is looking at one unit rather than 4-16 units.  Secondly it prevents the player from using a unit sink... essentially the bot will focus on an easy target and line up shots against that target, so you can leave a FS9 stationary near bot units, the bot will move units to the base of the FS9 then your last move, you simply jump the FS9 far away and now you have several easy targets the bot placed in bad positions because it did not know the FS9 was going to move away.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eugee on 11 October 2015, 00:26:30
In a Probe (Attacker) scenario, does "Must destroy 1/4 of enemy forces" include any reinforcements, or just the starting enemy force?  (Disclaimer:  I understand it's whatever I want it to be that I find fun--we all understand that--and I have stuff I don't use, like lighting/weather combined.)

But what was the *intention* of the rules in AtB?  On the one hand I think counting the total force makes the mission more challenging (than ganking one mech and running) but on the other hand, if I reinforce the battle with my Fire Lance that's out Scouting there's no change to the enemy forces.

So in my gut I feel like it should not count the reinforcements in that 1/4.  So basically kill one of their mechs without losing one of yours, and GTFO.  That seems like a recon engagement as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 11 October 2015, 03:26:13
Battle:A226
"battle. Reinforcements do not count for victory/defeat conditions."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SLDF_Spector on 12 October 2015, 13:15:27
I'm looking to get started with this.  Can anyone point me in the right direction for the latest rules?  I can't seem to find them.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 12 October 2015, 18:50:19
Try the link in my signature, and scroll to the bottom of that particular post.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 12 October 2015, 18:51:28
Oh, shoot, never mind!  The post doesn't exist anymore!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 October 2015, 11:54:52
Here you go... AtB 2.31 Rules
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Marauder0083 on 22 October 2015, 14:00:08
I've been poking around for a while and would like input about transport for my unit.

I have a Mule that my merc crew has been using. Despite having plenty of room, HQ shows that all my 'mechs, tanks and everything else is not transported. 300+tons of supplies are shown as being stored aboard though.

Knowing that the Mule is by design, a non-military dropship, do I have to mothball everything inbetween contracts for HQ to properly show that my transport needs are fulfilled?

Also, is there any reason to have the ship in the TO&E if i have no desire for it to show up in a mission?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 22 October 2015, 14:05:52
Yes everything needs to be mothballed.

For accounting purposes anything not listed in the ToE doesn't count. So if the Mule isn't made a part of the ToE you won't get paid for it. It is possible that other stuff might occur but it has been a long time since I was in your shoes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Marauder0083 on 22 October 2015, 15:54:39
Thanks. I guess I may sell it and buy a proper dropship or two that wouldn't need that extra step (or just forgo having one entirely.)
Do you know if transport costs accurately reflect your own transport capabilities? I have a feeling that that may be one of the features not yet implemented.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Taron Storm on 22 October 2015, 16:05:04
The Mule Class DS is can be modified easily.  You can refit it to have the bays necessary so you don't have to mothball everything. 

The best way to do it is to copy the file and edit it.  Subtracting cargo space to include however many bays you need. 

Here is one I modified for one of my games.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 22 October 2015, 16:08:37
Thanks. I guess I may sell it and buy a proper dropship or two that wouldn't need that extra step (or just forgo having one entirely.)
Do you know if transport costs accurately reflect your own transport capabilities? I have a feeling that that may be one of the features not yet implemented.

It is vague... really vague
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 22 October 2015, 16:40:42
It currently uses a formula to calculate the cost to transport any units without dropship transport. And then it calculates the cost to jump based on the necessary number of jump-collars. If all of your units fit into one dropship, it won't charge you for extra transport slots and it will only charge you for one collar per jump. If you have sufficient dropship capacity and sufficient jumpships, it won't charge you for transit. (Any transport reimbursement from contracts should go towards maintenance, etc. for fleet assets)

Anything considered cargo does not get counted towards transit, so you don't end up being charged for thousands of tons of spare parts.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 22 October 2015, 19:14:46
So MekHQ does not at the moment consider if a dropship's cargo capacity is exceeded?

Another thing I've noted: Small craft are not considered carried if bays are available but those bays are aboard jumpships (haven't yet tried small craft bay dropships). Is this deliberate?

I was trying to find some kind of vessel with BA bays, as it's really fiddly to mothball those for transport and reassign all the troopers to the correct squads again at the destination, and the only option in the 3050s appear to be battle taxis. But it seems I'll get charged more for using those than leaving the BA untransported.

edit: to clarify, the bays will be listed as used in the capacity/usage tab, but at least for the dragoon rating system the % transported will be calculated and rated as though they weren't transported.

I get that battle taxis shouldn't be able to reach planets from a jump ship, and that's fine. But even the dropshuttles, described as mini dropships in their own right, have that untransported problem.

edit: to clarify, while the cargo capacity/usage tab shows the bays being used, the dragoon rating for % transported will treat them as not transported.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 22 October 2015, 19:22:14
Many stuff

Which version of MHQ are you using?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 22 October 2015, 21:15:20
As of now 3.19, but I have observed the same behaviour as far back as 3.17. I have not tried 3.20 yet as I hear it has issues with AtB (which I am using).

The issue occurs if the small craft are on the TO&E, but not if they're not.

It likewise occurs if the small craft are Battletaxis not on the TO&E, their BA bays are needed to carry the BA and the BA are on the TO&E, but not if the BA are also off the TO&E.

I can easily reproduce it by GM adding a few Battletaxis, a jumpship with SC bays and BA, and then observing the Dragoon transport rating as I move them on and off the TO&E.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 22 October 2015, 21:19:17
It's not a known issue that I'm aware of. You could check through the posted bugs but otherwise, I would post it to the tracker. It isn't an intended behavior as far as I'm aware.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 22 October 2015, 22:19:57
Oh, ok. I'll see about doing that. I must admit I thought it had been intended to show that battletaxi's can't make it from the jump point to the planet without a bay on a dropship.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 22 October 2015, 22:29:30
I don't have an account on sourceforge. Is that where I'm meant to report the bug? How do I do that? (And is there a way without creating yet another account?)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 22 October 2015, 22:51:07
I don't have an account on sourceforge. Is that where I'm meant to report the bug? How do I do that? (And is there a way without creating yet another account?)

Unfortunately you need a account to post bug reports.  We've had too many issues in the past with Anonymous posted bugs.

Also to help us please give this a read before posting a bug.

How to post a bug (https://sourceforge.net/p/megamek/wiki/bug_report_howto/)

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 23 October 2015, 12:29:41
I must admit I thought it had been intended to show that battletaxi's can't make it from the jump point to the planet without a bay on a dropship.

Thanks.

Unfortunately, the jumpship / dropship and transit handling isn't anywhere near that sophisticated at this time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 23 October 2015, 13:42:48
I must admit I thought it had been intended to show that battletaxi's can't make it from the jump point to the planet without a bay on a dropship.

Of course they can... they just can't do it burning 1G all the way.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: VortexRikers on 23 October 2015, 21:59:10
I've noticed something very funky going on with value of salvage during contracts.

After a battle, when I control the battlefield, I get the salvage pop up screen, where I can select which stuff I take as salvage, and what stuff the employer takes. However, I've noticed that after getting my loot, the numbers in the loot screen, and the overall contract screen vary greatly.

For example, I've just finished a single fight in the contract, my total salvage is at 8,143,583 C-bills, the employer sits at 13,124,680 C-bills, and the percentage is at 38%, (max 40%).

As soon as I finish the battle, the actual MekHQ campaign screen tells me that, in fact, my total value salvaged is at 4,071,759, employer still sits on his 13,124,680, and the contract's salvage percentage is at 23% of 40% max.

This means that for whatever reason, MekHQ undervalues my salvage by almost exactly 50% when it finalizes the numbers. It also doesn't do this to the employer, which means I am free to take so much more salvage in future missions that pop up during the contract.

I've been trying to figure out what exactly is going on here, up to using a different version of MekHQ and starting a different campaign, but the weird issue persists. Can anyone clue me in as to what may be causing this?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 24 October 2015, 08:22:13
VortexRikers;

Just waking up so excuse any blathering.  The Salvage after a battle is calculated for JUST that battle, after you get that salvage, it is added to the overall salvage percentage for the entire campaign.  That bit of leftover that inevitably happens just keeps adding up.  Occasionally go OVER the percentage of salvage for a battle and you'll see the overall number normalize.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 24 October 2015, 13:44:52
So to Spice Up my next ATB campaign, I decided to move to another era (3060-3080, gonna playthrough the FCCW/Jihad) and to do unit generation a little differently than normal: Start with a commander mechwarrior and 100,000,000 C-bills, and get 1 year to make your unit- buying stuff and hiring people- entirely within the ATB rules. It actually turned out... pretty interesting! I think I'll probably do it this way in the future.

The Narrative
(Obligatory side note for non-default options: Using FM:Mercs unit rating, turning off maintenance because it bores me, 2d6 days for deliveries, yooge penalty for clan equipment, use tactics, individual init, special abilities, edge, and advanced medical rules, pay for literally everything, 3x clan tech price mod, 1.5% contract payment on TO&E unit value, add 1 XP per kill and remove the weekly Admin bonus, ATB personnel market, exclude large craft from share value- though I don't anticipate having one- treat aero pilots like mechwarriors, customize retirement rolls, use aerospace, using Neoancient's RAT, don't double enemy vehicles, opfor lance times are 2 mek/1 mixed/1 vee, disallow vtols, adjust lance weight for player vees, varied weight distributions by faction, use dropships, random enemy capture, variable contract length, 3 lances per strategy rank instead of 1, 90% intensity!)

*cough* Okay. That was a lot of blather. But! We're on sunny Lyran Galatea with 100,000 C-bills burning a hole in our pocket and big dreams. Our commander is the aptly named "Brewster Millon", a 27 year old 3/4 mechwarrior with 1 edge, 1 point in Tactics, and dodge- not at all bad, but not a particularly outstanding specimen. Now! It's January 1st, so let's PLAN THINGS. Since I gotta hire everyone, I'm... you know what, I'm just gonna say I'll be looking for specific dudes in the personnel market, oh, 40 out of 52 weeks. 4 million! Put on another million for hiring bonuses to people, another... what the hell, 3 million for salaries and maintenance throughout the hiring year, 1 million for a cushion while hunting for the first contract, and I should have... 91 million C-bills to spend on machines! Yay! Now, what I WANT is a mech company with a heavy, medium, and light lance, as well as a 2-aerospace fighter unit.* We'll see what I can get, since I have, uh, 11 chances to buy units. I'll go ahead and toss in the rule that I can buy any unit for double list price in December, but I really need to not rely on that to break my bank... I can spend an *average* of 7 million C-bills per unit with that hoped-for organization. So!

*I use my own simple air rules. A deployed 2-aero flight counts as a lance, and can either be doing Recon or Ground Strikes. Recon- roll 1d6 each week. If it's a 1, you get intercepted and have to do an air to air fight. If it's a 5, you can skip any one mission that week. If it's a 6, you can skip any one mission and count it as a victory. Offer void when dealing with base defense or attacks. Ground Strike- also roll 1d6 each week. Same outcome for a 1, on a 5 you can deploy the aero as reinforcements to 1 battle that week, on a 6 you can do that *and* outfit your aero with bombs if you have any! I'm looking forward to an AI that can dogfight.


January-February 1: Hired a pair of admins. On the 1st of the month, the only two mechs available are a Quickdraw-5A and a Panther-9R. I HAAATE light mechs that can't go 6/9, especially at this era, so... ugh. The quickdraw? On the one hand it has shit for armor and a poor offensive loadout, but... it's a 5/8/5 heavy and those don't grow on trees, and it's cheap at 80% cost. I'll buy it and hate myself. For aero, there's a Stuka-K5 for 90% and I'll snap that up on the open market.

Combat Units: QKD-5A; STU-K5 (2/14 units bought)
Personnel: Capt. Millon, Regular admin/Command, Green Admin/HR.
Funds: 89.7 million C-bills remain


February-March 1: four paid recruitments and zero mechwarriors. I may need to rethink this. The unit market brings an EXTRAVAGANZA at least. A pair of JR7-Ds for cheap and a pair of ON1-Ks. I'm beginning to understand that I'm going to be a tech one outfit because of these rules, and that I'm basically going to get my face stomped. But that's no reason not to forge on. I buy an Orion and a Jenner.

Combat Units: ON1-K, QKD-5A, JR7-D; STU-K5 (4/14 units bought)
Personnel: Capt. Millon, Regular admin/Command, Green Admin/HR.
Funds: 80.4 million C-bills remain


March-April 1: I go for techs this time, and end up with... a decent haul, all things considered. It gets me up to Dragoon rating C, anyway. The only mechs are black market onesl as tempting as a nightstar is, I can't afford it even a little. There IS, however, a -7M Thunderbolt that tempts me enough to risk, and I get it.

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, JR7-D; STU-K5 (5/14 units bought)
Personnel: Capt. Millon, Regular admin/Command, Green Admin/HR, 1 reg/1 green Mech Tech, 1 vet/1 green Aero Tech
Funds: 74.2 million C-bills remain


April-May 1: The personnel market favors me. I get a doctor, two mechwarriors, and both my planned aero pilots in one month. The aero pilots even both come with tactics, and one starts with a shitty Thrush. I'm selling that, son, I'll get you something better, don't fret. I'm starting to realize that juggling my recruitment timing to be able to keep a C rating is going to be surprisingly important... Nothing on the unit market, though I am agonizingly tempted to reach out of my price range and buy a Bandersnatch-01A!

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, JR7-D; STU-K5 (5/14 units bought)
Personnel: 2 Vet/1 Reg Mechwarrior, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 1 Reg/1 green Mech Tech, 1 Vet/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 73.5 million C-bills remain


May-June 1: Oh christ, am I already almost halfway through? A regular and veteran mech tech join the crew. A Veteran mechwarrior with- be still my beating heart- 3 tactics and her own OTL-4D comes onto the team. I'm so giddy I just hire the regular mechwarrior who showed up at the same time. I'm a little worried about that veteran leaving with that mech, but... that's a problem for future me and future me is probably a dick. Another regular mechwarrior comes in later, putting me at half my desired complement. On the final day of the month, a veteran and 2 regular mech techs come in, which makes me exceedingly pleased. The personnel side is finally shaping up! I almost have enough to form a credible heavy lance: the Orion, Thunderbolt, and one of the Quickdraw/Ostsols puts it at 200 tons, and heavy lances can be up to 280 tons. If I can find another good 75 tonner, or even a light assault mech, I'll be golden there, and the other of the OTL/QKD pair can be the command mech for the medium lance. Nothing useful drops in the market, though. I've been thrifty enough that i could... damn, I should have bought that Bandersnatch.

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, JR7-D; STU-K5 (6/14 units bought)
Personnel: 3 Vet/3 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 2 Vet/4 Reg/1 green Mech Tech, 1 Vet/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 70.4 million C-bills remain


June-July 1: Hired a third aero tech just to make myself feel better, but THAT IS THE END OF THAT. Rest of the month is entirely trying to bulk out my mechwarrior pool, but I only grab a regular mechwarrior. Bupkis on the unit market and I'm getting a little worried. 5 more market days and I need to buy 2/3 of my force still. I'm okay with buying good lights at double price in the final month since I've been thrifty, but I really, really need to luck into some good medium mech rolls.

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, JR7-D; STU-K5 (6/14 units bought)
Personnel: 3 Vet/4 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 2 Vet/4 Reg/1 green Mech Tech, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 70.0 million C-bills remain


July-August 1: Hired A Bunch Of Mech Techs and I think I'm actually OK there for the rest of the year. On market day... I... I am so tempted by this WHM-7S on the black market. Oh, this black market is evil. It also has an AWS-8Q and a DV-6M, but... I... I can't. I can't do that to myself yet. Oh god I should have done it I ALREADY CLICKED ADVANCE DAY NO-

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, JR7-D; STU-K5 (6/14 units bought)
Personnel: 3 Vet/4 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 3 Vet/7 Reg/3 Green Mech Techs, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 69.5 million C-bills remain


August-Sept. 1: gottabuyunits gottabuyunits gottabuyunits BUT FIRST. Hired another regular mechwarrior, hired a veteran mechwarrior and sold his enforcer. Okay! Market day. Finished my aero-hunting with a steeply discounted Chippewa-W5. Once more, virtually everything is on the black market that is worth anything. I do a stupid and buy two Crab-20s, but hey, at least only one shows up. Stupid black market. I also grab a Spider-5K with the intent of refitting it to something else on the same chassis that I don't loathe. I was hoping to be jump-heavy on my medium lance, all jumpers if I could, but it's looking unlikely. 

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, CRB-20, JR7-D, SDR-5K; STU-K5, CHP-W5 (9/14 units bought)
Personnel: 4 Vet/5 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 3 Vet/7 Reg/3 Green Mech Techs, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 53.7 million C-bills remain


September-Oct. 1: I am hanging onto a C rating by the skin of my teeth. I so, so critically need more tech-2 stuff. I almost pee myself when an Elite mechwarrior shows up: No mech with him, but that's great! I only need 2 more mechwarriors, and with 3 months to go I may be able to start with veteran average experience. Sure enough another Veteran shows up. Pity she owns a Trebuchet-7K, but I'm gonna just sell that off. (I'm ignoring the rule that if you sell someone's mech they immediately get a retirement roll, because this would be a horrorshow if I didn't.) On Sale Day- I have three left after this one- I buy a Thorn THE-S just to get my light lance a little situated better. I wanted a jumper, but life is full of compromises. The Jenner, Spider, and Thorn together come to 85 tons, so I could have a 45 ton (a Phoenix Hawk, let's be honest) as the light lance leader. That'll work. The medium lance has a Ostsol and a Crab right now, at 110 tons, so I need 90 tons worth of mech. We'll see what I can find.

Combat Units: ON1-K, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, CRB-20, JR7-D, SDR-5K, THE-S; STU-K5, CHP-W5 (10/14 units bought)
Needs: A good heavy or 80-ton mech, a 45 ton mech good for leading a scout lance, 90 tons of mechs to bulk out the medium lance, TECH TWO PLEASE
Personnel: 1 Elite/5 Vet/5 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 3 Vet/7 Reg/3 Green Mech Techs, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Funds: 53.7 million C-bills remain


October-Nov. 1: Adding the thorn dropped me to a D rating. Why won't the market ever give me IS2 stuff. Oh god I should have risked buying that Bandersnatch. I'm obsessing a little. No hires all month. Why would mechwarriors want to come to a D-rated outfit? Sigh. I break my no reloading rule once- and ONLY once- when the only thing the unit market has for me is a WHT-1 in my hour of need. Evidently the game decides to stop playing with me, because I get a startlingly well-suited pair of mechs on the reload. A Tsunami-P1 looks like a decent 40 ton 6/9/6 infighter with a pair of MLas, pair of MGs, and a SSRM-2 with good armor. If nothing else, I can refit it. The Black Market hands me a War Dog -02FC, and... well, those SSRM-2 one shots aren't really useful, but hell, I'll risk that purchase. The Black Market does not screw me, and I have my heavy lance, I think.

Combat Units: ON1-K, WR-DG-02FC, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, CRB-20, TS-P1, JR7-D, SDR-5K, THE-S; STU-K5, CHP-W5 (12/14 units bought)
Needs: A 45-ton (phoenix hawk) light lance command mech, a 50 ton brawler medium mech
Personnel: 1 Elite/5 Vet/5 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 3 Vet/7 Reg/3 Green Mech Techs, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Personnel needs: 1 more veteran-or-better mechwarrior, Fill out the admin team.
Funds: 36.3 million C-bills remain


November-Dec. 1: I'm much calmer now. Adding the two tech-2 mechs put me back barely in rating-C land. Nothing lands, so next month I'm going to have to buy my last two mechs for double price. Not great, but I'll live. Also have to get my last mechwarrior this month or I'm boned.

Combat Units: ON1-K, WR-DG-02FC, TDR-7M, QKD-5A, OTL-4D, CRB-20, TS-P1, JR7-D, SDR-5K, THE-S; STU-K5, CHP-W5 (12/14 units bought)
Needs: A 45-ton (phoenix hawk) light lance command mech, a 50 ton brawler medium mech
Personnel: 1 Elite/5 Vet/5 Reg Mechwarriors, 1 Vet/1 Reg Aero Pilot, 3 Vet/9 Reg/3 Green Mech Techs, 1 Vet/1 Reg/1 Green Aero Tech, 1 Reg Admin(Command), 1 Green Admin(HR)
Personnel needs: 1 more veteran-or-better mechwarrior, Fill out the admin team.
Funds: 35.9 million C-bills remain


December: I splurge on a PXH-3D to be my light lance leader. For the final medium mech, I've got a 60-ton 5/8, a 50-ton 5/8, and a 40-ton 6/9/6. I'd like a 50 ton jumper, and I can spend, oh, 14-16 million on it, so a list price of 7-8 million. Starslayer-3D, come on down! The last mechwarrior I need hits on December 12th, as I settle for a regular. The last two hiring dates are for a admin/transport and admin/logistic. Everything comes together at the very last instant, and leaves me as a C-rated (50) mercenary company arranged the way I like it! I was hoping to have time to hire infantry, but I just couldn't.



Mercenary Unit: Brewster's Millons

Mech Company:
Heavy Lance: Capt. Millon (3/4, 1 tactics, 1 edge, Dodge), WR-DG-02FC; Lt. Dowson (3/4, 1 tactics, Sniper), ON1-K; MSGT Gronholm (4/4, 1 tactics), TDR-7M; SGT Ungureanu (5/4, Blindfighter), QKD-5A [7438 BV]
Medium Lance: Lt. Brown (4/4, 3 tactics), OTL-4D; MSGT Entee (4/4), STY-3D; SGT Song (5/4), TS-P1; SGT Dubiel (5/5), CRB-20 [5263 BV]
Light Lance: Lt. Delicati (3/3, 1 tactics), PXH-3D; SGT Vu (6/4), SDR-5K; SGT Hoxha (4/5), JR7-D; SGT Fu (5/4, 1 tactics), THE-S [3949 BV]

Aero Flight: Lt. Hamal (4/4, 1 tactics), STU-K5; Chief Muniz (5/5, 1 tactics), CHP-W5 [3427 BV]

Support Personnel:
Mechs: 3 veterans, 9 regulars, 3 greens
Aero: 1 veteran, 1 regular, 1 green
108 Astechs
Medical: 1 Regular Doctor, 4 medics
Admin: 1 Regular Admin/Command, 1 Regular Admin/Transport, 1 Green Admin/HR, 1 Green Admin/Logistical

Initial Funds: 8.7 Million C-Bills

Let's see where this goes!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: VortexRikers on 24 October 2015, 13:50:46
Let me elaborate.

I've just finished my very first mission on another contract, it was a straight 50% split.
I got roughly 10,000,000 cbills of garbage, which left the employer with 10,000,000 cbills of garbage. So far so good.

But when I leave shut off the Megamek screen, process the battle, and go to the contract screen, the contract screen tells me that for whatever reason I actually have half of that, 5,000,000 cbills of stuff... the value was modified by 50%, while the employers' wasn't, employer is still at 10 million.

I'm guessing what happens is the game modifies the final value to reflect that if I would sell the salvage at the current prices, which are roughly 50%, I would indeed get 5 million C bills and not 10 as before.

This would only make sense if the values were also adjusted to the employer, which they are not!

So in practical terms, it plays out as if I did not select my 50%, which I of course did, so in the next battle, whatever the outcome is, I'll be free to take another 5 million C bills worth of stuff just because of last mission's funky math, giving me an unfair amount of salvage. This salvage -also- gets modified by a 50% reduction, so after 2 missions, the game says I'm roughly 30% of my 50% allowance... while whatever the contractor salvages is still valued at the true 100% value. The more missions that follow, the more and more stuff I can 'freely' loot, as  it thinks it's the employer who is somehow getting the lion's share, which it is not.

Is my math completely screwed up or am I not getting something that's extremely obvious and in my face?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 24 October 2015, 16:09:24
VortexRikers,

I'm lost.  I know there have been some AtB issues as of late, though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 24 October 2015, 19:47:45
Well, I would try to play this company, if MekHQ weren't cheerfully informing me that the only weapons available to a C-rated merc company on Outreach in 3060 are a machine gun, flamer, AC/2, AC/5, AC/10, and AC/20. Ugh.

*removes restrict-parts-availability-by-mission, is now able to buy literally anything in the game's database despite still having restrict-parts-by-year on*  :-\
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Spartan10590 on 24 October 2015, 20:25:27
Which version of MekHQ are you using?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 24 October 2015, 21:25:42
314- I gave up on updating it when it looked like every single release had gamebreaking bugs, and then saw that the devs had given up on ATB altogether and will eventually just replace it with something else. Which... well, I guess I can go back to the pen and paper rules. :(
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 25 October 2015, 10:33:21
Did you go to the new to AtB thread and follow all the steps there for setup?  It seems like you forgot something - maybe no one is set up to buy stuff, for example.

I use 3.18 and everything is super smooth.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 25 October 2015, 12:57:57
Did you go to the new to AtB thread and follow all the steps there for setup?  It seems like you forgot something - maybe no one is set up to buy stuff, for example.

I use 3.18 and everything is super smooth.

ditto.
 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 25 October 2015, 13:45:32
314- I gave up on updating it when it looked like every single release had gamebreaking bugs, and then saw that the devs had given up on ATB altogether and will eventually just replace it with something else. Which... well, I guess I can go back to the pen and paper rules. :(

There is a big difference between giving up...and being a volunteer project with limited hours to work on stuff.  In fact Neo/Taharqa have actually fixed quite a few MHQ bugs since 3.14.

Code: [Select]
v0.3.21-git (The next release)
+ Bug [#963]: CampaignOptionDialog crashes with NPE when "Confirm" button is pressed
+ Bug: [AtB] MM game launched from MHQ using AtB does not enter deployment phase.

v0.3.20 (2015-10-12 00:11 UTC)
+ Bug: NPE on warehouse tech filter
+ Bug: check for missing external id on ejected enemy pilots
+ Bug [#888]: Briefing Room: Cancel load saved game causes NPE
+ Bug [#951]: Auto-resolve fails even with new mul method
+ Bug [#950]: Autofailing battle by advancing day does not undeploy lance
+ Bug [#891]: [ATB] Contracts Change Value On Reload
+ Bug [#889]: [ATB] Non-Special Battles Generated Despite Rout
+ Bug [#879]: [ATB] minimum <= value <= maximum Error
+ Bug [#852]: [ATB] Manual contracts : Employer/Enemy units always generates as "Independent"
+ Bug [#946]: AtB: Edit mission causes enemy faction to change
+ Bug [#847]: Manually adding contracts : transportation amount is incorrectly calculated
+ Bug: [AtB] Star League Cache special missions can cause NPE if SL-era RATs are missing.
+ Bug [#943]: File ratinfo.xml not updated correctly
+ Bug [#623]: 0.3.6. : Unable to edit scenario start date even in GM mode
+ Bug [#807]: [ATB] Contract renegotiate buttons no longer work
+ Bug [#845]: [ATB] Employer offers follow up contract, but follow up contract has incorrect employer
+ Bug [#860]: [ATB] Special missions still generating gravity even if "use planetary conditions" is turned off
+ Bug [#861]: [ATB] 100 ton ASF being classified as "Medium" in the unit market
+ Bug [#858]: Personnel market : Mechwarrior's unit is a tank
+ Bug [#864]: [ATB] Uses Highest Strategy not "Deployed" Strategy
+ Bug [#870]: Jumpships getting assigned to battles in AtB
+ Updated MegaMek.jar to 0.41.10
+ Updated MegaMekLab.jar to 0.1.46

v0.3.19 (2014-09-14 01:25 UTC)
+ Bug [#922]: Location of Jump Jets is not shown in repair tab
+ Bug [#908]: Pay for Recruitment Pays for All Enemy Pilots
+ Bug: enemy salvage not identified via manual resolution when it has a UUID
+ Adapt packaging to support MML svg files
+ improvements to prisoner tracking in ResolveScenarioTracker (prisoners from ejected units not yet correct)
+ simplified prisoner interface in ResolveScenarioWizardDialog
+ Bug: totally dead crews generating an NPE when shuffled in ResolveScenarioTracker
+ Bug [#932]: BA prisoner problems
+ Bug [#944]: Assign Kills Error
+ option to capture prisoners
+ option to set prisoners as bondsman by default
+ prisoners are tracked correctly from ejected units
+ added Utilities.isLikelyCapture for the logic of what/who gets captured in ResolveScenarioTracker
+ Bug: all salvage is considered total loss
+ show salvage value below to reduce width in ResolveScenarioWizardDialog
+ Bug: ResolveScenarioWizardDialog not showing correct damage status of player's own units
+ Bug [#571]: Experience Error With Late Deployment
+ sort personnel and prisoners in ResolveScenarioWizard by unit name
+ Bug: when no mul file is loaded, pilot resolution is skipped
+ Bug [#928]: Picked up MechWarriors are not shown in Post Battle Resolution
+ Bug [#657]: Units incorrectly listed as escaped at end of the battle
+ Bug [#945]: Peronnel tab, Fluff Information view - cannot sort by kills
+ Bug [#930]: Name of Tab different between MHQ and MML
+ option to reverse quality name reporting (e.g. F becomes A)
+ Show vessel engineers in repair bay with time
+ Bug [#934]: Unlimited Repairs for Dropships and Warships
+ Bug: shorthanded mod not showing for large craft
+ Bug [#910]: sorting problem in parts store dialog
+ Bug [#897]: Can't Determine Salvage In Exchange
+ Bug [#899]: MHQ Version Upgrade Causing Jump Path Error
+ Bug [#929]: Warehouse Tab - sorting issues
+ Bug [#920]: Start a New Campaign and the Date Chooser
+ Bug [#813]: Mek HQ pilots/crews with -1 and below skills do not function correctly in the MM lobby
+ Bug [#816]: Injury handling for MIA pilots doesn't work correctly
+ WIP Bug [#900]:  Daily Log overwhelmed by Injury Reports
+ Updated MegaMek.jar to 0.41.9
+ Updated MegaMekLab.jar to 0.1.45

v0.3.18 (2015-09-01 12:10 UTC)
+ Bug: units listed as not invented when they have been
+ Bug: ammo bins should not be loadable in warehouse
+ various improvements to ResolveScenarioTracker including tracking actual damage to total loss units
+ partial fix of Bug [#830], not yet working for manual resolution
+ removed separate salvage file from manually resolution, one mul will now process entire battle
+ Bug [#830]: Crews "Killed" in MM not handled properly in MekHQ
+ process kills from manual resolve
+ Bug: some items on ResolveScenarioWizardDialog are not laying out correctly
+ Bug: contracts not being checked for duplicate names
+ Bug: NPE when trying to assign prisoners for BA
+ Updated MegaMek.jar to 0.41.8
+ Updated MegaMekLab.jar to 0.1.44

v0.3.17 (2015-08-26 21:30 UTC)
+ Bug: Ammo bins not reserving for refit if other ammo bins of same type in warehouse
+ Bug [#909]: Refits not shopping for ammo
+ Bug [#502]: MekHQ Freezes
+ Bug [#646]: Standard Fusion Engines listed separately by clan and IS
+ Bug [#647]: Incorrect mech component locations in the repair bay
+ Bug [#678]: End of battle screen -> finish -> program hangs, array index out of bounds
+ Bug [#682]: Omni pod refits are not working correctly
+ Bug [#689]: Unable to select multiple contracts of the same name
+ Bug [#693]: Unable to repair heatsink ; array index out of bounds
+ Campaign loading routine unloads ammo bins that are not reserved for refit
+ some fixes to parts reservations in Refit
+ Bug [#673]: GM mode -> procure single refit kit does not work
+ Bug [#672]: GM mode -> procure all refit kits causes HQ to hang
+ Bug [#912]: Costs of refits kits don't seem right, armor not prorated
+ Bug [#913]: Parts not separated by quality in warehouse
+ Bug [#721]: BA SRMs do not reload correctly in the mecrepair h bay
+ Bug [#732]: MekHQ unable to handle custom dropship with a lot of weapons
+ improvements to AmmoBin.getFullShots to avoid loading protomech entity from units.cache
+ Bug [#915]: Must salvage parts in location before replacing bug
+ Bug [#766]: Refit Kits still serached/ordered when all parts are present in warehouse
+ new campaigns will remove reservation from refits where the unit is not there or is not refitting
+ check on campaign loading for unstacked parts in warehouse that could be stacked and do so
+ Bug [#853]: Battle Loss Compensation not being calculated correctly for destroyed units
+ Bug: Ammo bins were reporting zero value regardless of ammo level (not yet working for BA ammo)
+ Bug: get BA Ammo tons per shot correct
+ Warning cleanup
+ Bug [#917]: Advanced medical is broken
+ Add resetPilotAndEntity to joinScenario
+ Bug: joinScenario did not set vehicle crew sizes
+ Bug [#712]: Inconsistent infantry unit pricing
+ Bug [#885]: Spend XP Not Working Correctly
+ Bug [#808]: Warehouse : "Sell all parts of this type" only sells 1 point of standard armor
+ Allow underweight units to be refit
+ Bug [#811]: Bug in Editing Potential rewards in Scenario
+ Bug [#836]: Cannot Repair Jumbo's AC Bay
+ Bug: crew hits to large craft not affecting personnel
+ Updated MegaMek.jar to 0.41.7
+ Updated MegaMekLab.jar to 0.1.43

v0.3.16 (2015-08-15 19:40 UTC)
+ Bug [#823]: NPE during 'Auto Resolve'
+ Bug [#415]: Fighters and small craft have thrusters
+ Bug [#698]: All BA armor is incorrectly set to clan tech
+ Bug [#699]: BA armor may not be bought from the parts market
+ Bug [#277]: BattleArmor costs
+ Bug [#862]: Battle Armor Breaks Save Files
+ Bug [#898]: BA suits not getting roll to avoid destruction
+ re-added infantry weapons
+ Major overhaul of BattleArmorSuit replacement to allow for sub-parts to follow main part
+ fixed TechRating values for parts with IS_TW_ALL that should be ALLOWED_ALL
+ Bug [#893]: can't get parts before year introduction from parts store
+ added the ability to save and load campaign option presets
+ Bug [#901]: mekhq.campaign.Campaign.newDay Error
+ Bug: Protomek parts not showing up in repair bay by location
+ Bug: Protomek leg location sending incorrect casting exception
+ Bug: quad protos getting arm parts
+ Bug: engine-less protos still have running MP
+ Bug: updateConditions in ProtomekLocation not critting/uncritting things correctly
+ Bug [#902]: Tank and Aero system parts not getting check for destruction
+ Moved all equipment checks for destruction into Part.updateConditionFromEntity
+ removed time and difficulty variables from Part, now tracked by specific methods in each part,
no need to always updateConditionFromEntity to switch
+ target for equipment destruction from combat is now a customizable option
+ Bug [#618]: Ammo bins cannot be replaced on mechs
+ Bug: swapped out ammo is lost on ammo swap
+ Bug [#577]: Incomplete Ammo Acquisition
+ Bug: units not showing up in repair bay when set to salvage
+ removed salvaging variable from Part, Part.isSalvaging() now determined by characteristics of unit
+ reclassified BaArmor and ProtomekArmor as sub-classes of armor
+ Bug: previous change made it possible for overnight tasks to do the wrong thing if unit repair/salvage status was switched
+ Bug [#896]: Removing units from TO&E does not remove them from deployment
+ Bug [#903]: [ATB] Retirement Sort by Cost Incorrect
+ Splitting Models out of RetirementDefectionDialog
+ Changed FormattedNumberSorter to use long instead of int
+ Bug [#849]: Removing ammo from a design does not cause the corresponding ammo to appear in your warehouse
+ Bug: cancel customization not available in unit context menu
+ Bug [#857]: Refit kit does not remove parts from the warehouse when the refit is completed
+ Bug [#602]: 0.3.6 warehouse graphical glitch
+ Bug [#904]: Armor parts showing up as zero amount on refits
+ Bug [#906]: Location specific armor parts showing up for refit after save and load
+ Bug [#905]: Refit parts are reserved a day too late
+ Bug [#843]: Ammo bin repair
+ MegaMek.jar updated to 0.41.6 and MegaMekLab.jar updated to 0.1.42

v0.3.15 (2015-08-04 10:50 UTC)
+ Planetary faction updates
+ Bug [#716]: Add Another Special Ability not Cancelled
+ Bug [#884]: Shoulder/Hip Crits disappear
+ Bug [#887]: Different Prices for Parts
+ populate store with more jump jet options, change labels to indicate tonnage of unit for JJs
+ Bug [#881]: Cannot reload Field Artillery ammo
+ Bug [#873]: Right Torso location cannot be replaced without salvaging...
+ Bug [#854]: Engines take extra damage after saving/reloading
+ Bug: array index out of bounds on Faction.getFullName causing campaign option save fail
+ Bug: trailing empty cells not collected by split method in faction generation resulting in some arrays being too short
+ added array length safety check methods to Faction.getEraMods, Faction.getFullName, and Faction.getStartingPlanet
    and incorrect data reported to log
+ Bug [#829]: GM mode -> set XP for personnel does not work when attempting to set XP higher than 100
    (IllegalArgumentException: setSelectedIndex: 0 out of bounds)
+ Bug [#867]: Custom Vehicles w/ C3Master unable to network
+ Bug [#348]: random skill error
+ Bug [#826]: 2525 points of standard armor in the warehouse, but cannot replace standard armor on a marauder
+ Bug [#814]: Fusion engine incorrectly in head location
+ Bug [#415]: Fighters and small craft have thrusters
+ Bug [#892]: Missing BA suit, MekHQ
+ Updated MegaMek.jar to 0.41.5 and MegaMekLab.jar to 0.1.41
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 25 October 2015, 16:22:37
Sure- I was referring to the plans to scrap ATB and include parts of its functionality in a way that fits better with the rest of the code, though. :)

Also, prior 314 games haven't ever had this (I've done this quite a bit, which is why it happening this time threw me so badly)- the workaround has been just allow myself to buy everything and manually make sure I"m not violating causality.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 31 October 2015, 14:26:05
Sure- I was referring to the plans to scrap ATB and include parts of its functionality in a way that fits better with the rest of the code, though. :)

No one said "scrap". In point of fact, ATB will still be possible. The idea is to generalize the functions so that they can be used for non-ATB.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Greggory123 on 31 October 2015, 22:40:12
@Vortex  I was wondering about what the heck was going on.  When you select your salvage, it is at market-buy value.  After, it is turned into market-sell value while the employers' stays at market-buy.
Overall, that's a net benefit for you.  I think it'd increase your salvage by 50% or so.

I've been getting a ton of RNG bugs.  We're getting the same mechs over and over.  The mechs are at the extreme ends of the rat with a lower chance than mechs we've never seen.  We've been getting Base Defense (the bad kind) on contracts we are winning.  The kicker was last week when we had 6 lances on defense on garrison duty and pulled 5 fights.  3 HtL (D), 1 BA (D) and a large battle.

That's 3.18.  We tried 3.20 and could never get it to work.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 16 November 2015, 19:31:48
I just wanted to share something funny/shameful.  Not a specific AtB thing, but still.

I have been playing this game for years.  YEARS.  In all that time, I never understood how the turn function worked during deployment.  Turns out (heh) after putting your unit in the hex you want, you click the turn button, then click at the hex you want your unit to point towards.

All this time I had been assuming the turn function didn't work.   ;D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 16 November 2015, 22:45:13
I just wanted to share something funny/shameful.  Not a specific AtB thing, but still.

I have been playing this game for years.  YEARS.  In all that time, I never understood how the turn function worked during deployment.  Turns out (heh) after putting your unit in the hex you want, you click the turn button, then click at the hex you want your unit to point towards.

All this time I had been assuming the turn function didn't work.   ;D

You can also shift-click, which is quicker.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 17 November 2015, 04:56:30
You can also shift-click, which is quicker.

ooooooh thanks.   I wondered why the shift a or shift d didn't work on deployment. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 17 November 2015, 09:01:43
ooooooh thanks.   I wondered why the shift a or shift d didn't work on deployment.

Probably an oversight.  I don't normally use the keybinds for turning, as I find shift-click easier.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 24 November 2015, 22:08:39
So I wanted to compile a lot of the house rules/additional rules I've been using, and I decided to package them all together and put them on here for everyone to look at. I'm uploading a rules 2.31 with an extra tab at the end; it includes a number of extra things.

Included rules:

Take a look- it's mostly for people to look over and see if they enjoy it, but if neoancient and makinus find any inspiration in here, great! I sure as heck took a lot of inspiration from other people's rules in here, though I didn't quite outright take anything without fussing over it and tweaking it after some playtesting.

I almost included my version of neoancient's ATB Clan Campaign rules, but that one needs a bit more cooking...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 25 November 2015, 11:47:49
So I wanted to compile a lot of the house rules/additional rules I've been using, and I decided to package them all together and put them on here for everyone to look at. I'm uploading a rules 2.31 with an extra tab at the end; it includes a number of extra things.

A very nice synthesis of many ideas that have been kicked around.

I know what I'm doing for the holiday :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 25 November 2015, 14:55:05
I like these rules enough that I might do my next contract without the AtB ruleset enabled in MHQ, so I can incorporate them all!

Bravo on the Artillery, Infantry, and Aero implementations!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 November 2015, 17:43:46
So I wanted to compile a lot of the house rules/additional rules I've been using, and I decided to package them all together and put them on here for everyone to look at. I'm uploading a rules 2.31 with an extra tab at the end; it includes a number of extra things.

So I've been playing with the extras you have presented since you released them.

Some constructive criticism from what I've seen so far...
Enemy Force Size Rules - Garrison and Cadre should definitely be exempt from the early completion. Instead use the Rout Nd6 option for months without opposition. Then re-roll enemy.

Special Missions available might be excessive using Strategy x 3. Using my current force that is 15 (5x3) Special Missions a Week. This force has been building for 10 years game time so perhaps things might be twitchy in terms of how much Strategy I built up using straight 2.31 rules. Still, with Strategy x 3 and my Combined Arms force I can literally skip every scenario, or reinforce it, or arty/air support nearly everytime. Strategy x 2 is probably better.

Perhaps even better would be something like...
Strategy x 1 PLUS...
For every 6 ASF/CF add +1 Air Missions
For every 6 Artillery add +1 Arty Missions
For every 9 Infantry platoons add + 1 Infantry Missions

Perhaps even add in a Maximum of like Strategy/2 Round up or down missions in any one group. So you can only run a total of N of any one group.

This rule...
+1 if unit has an Elite commander, -1 if unit has a Green commander (D217)
It is unclear in a way. If you are referring to the Player then it is nearly impossible for the Commander to be Green. If you are referring to the OPFOR then there is no way of determining the Skill Level. I assume you mean the Player Unit. This presents problems in that it almost guarantees a bonus. The whole section might need a tweak.

Great job though!

Thanks
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 29 November 2015, 00:06:12
So I've been playing with the extras you have presented since you released them.

Thanks! My cunning plan was to do more playtesting myself of all the rules together and also of the Clan ATB rules I took from neoancient's draft and went at with tweaking... and my cunning plan was defeated when I found out the laptop I took won't run Megamek well (it's INTERESTING trying to run a scenario when your unit windows start outside the viewable window and you can't get it back on!) So I will have to wait for some more of my own playing before I add your feedback in. Different ATB styles are affecting what I wrote a lot more than I realized, as seen below...

Quote
Some constructive criticism from what I've seen so far...
Enemy Force Size Rules - Garrison and Cadre should definitely be exempt from the early completion. Instead use the Rout Nd6 option for months without opposition. Then re-roll enemy.

Yep, makes sense. I actually had been doing that, but I didn't write it down, so it doesn't count.  :)

Quote
Special Missions available might be excessive using Strategy x 3. Using my current force that is 15 (5x3) Special Missions a Week. This force has been building for 10 years game time so perhaps things might be twitchy in terms of how much Strategy I built up using straight 2.31 rules. Still, with Strategy x 3 and my Combined Arms force I can literally skip every scenario, or reinforce it, or arty/air support nearly everytime. Strategy x 2 is probably better.

Strategy FIVE. This is... well, see, I usually run with house rules that drastically reduce the amount of advancement available (most notably 'no XP for non-mech kills'), and so I increased the impact of leadership/strategy to compensate... and as a result I don't think I ever have had a commander with more than strategy-2. It didn't even enter my mind- though it should- that other people would be rolling with a set of rules that gave their commanders a loooot of XP to spend on those things.

Quote
Perhaps even better would be something like...
Strategy x 1 PLUS...
For every 6 ASF/CF add +1 Air Missions
For every 6 Artillery add +1 Arty Missions
For every 9 Infantry platoons add + 1 Infantry Missions

Perhaps even add in a Maximum of like Strategy/2 Round up or down missions in any one group. So you can only run a total of N of any one group.

I toyed with having the number of missions of each branch relate to the tactics/strategy skills of the ranking officer in that branch (you can always do 1 of each, and if you have- say- an aerospace officer with 1 strategy you can do 2 air missions, etc.) but in the end I went with just basing it flatly on the overall force commander's strategy so that the player had more choices to make. These ideas are interesting; I'll probably drop to strategy*2 and see how that tends to go in practice without my unwritten-and-not-even-mentally-considered-at-this-point lower-xp houserules.

Quote
This rule...
+1 if unit has an Elite commander, -1 if unit has a Green commander (D217)
It is unclear in a way. If you are referring to the Player then it is nearly impossible for the Commander to be Green. If you are referring to the OPFOR then there is no way of determining the Skill Level. I assume you mean the Player Unit. This presents problems in that it almost guarantees a bonus. The whole section might need a tweak.

It's intended to refer to the ranking officer *of the flight/platoon that is undertaking the actual mission and making the roll*; the intent is that, say, an elite infantry lieutenant has a better shot at getting his men in and out of the Blakist ammo dump without blowing up or getting shot than some greenhorn 90-day-wonder with a shiny officer's bar on his collar.

Quote
Great job though!

Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 November 2015, 16:30:42
lots of stuff

Thanks for considering my feedback. You are definitely on to something here.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 01 December 2015, 15:21:28
I really like what you did with support forces. I think the changes you made to infantry missions are an improvement, both in terms of integration into a more extensive strategic mission system and in balance. Under the current system the player gains a distinct advantage over the OpFor by having access to infantry special missions, most of which have no downside. Balancing benefit with risk rewards players who are able to recognize when circumstances cause the benefits to outweigh the risks.

A correction:
In the definition of a support unit on row 79 you listed infantry twice and the context implies that the second should be artillery.

A question:
A critical failure roll for artillery support missions states that the player should roll for a chase(att) scenario. Does this mean roll to generate the scenario or roll to determine whether one occurs? I understood it as the latter when I read it, and only thought of the former when I could find no instruction to determine the chance of one occurring.

Enemy force size is something I worked on a bit last year while playing around with developing rules for managing a persistent OpFor. The system involved knowing the OpFor's general mission type as well, simplified into one of four categories: assault, defense, raid, guerilla (A, D, R, G). In some cases it was obvious: if the player is on a raid, planetary assault, or pirate hunting, the enemy is always D. On riot duty, the enemy is G. Relief duty could be against A, D, or G. Garrison and cadre could be against either A or R. Security is assumed to be always against R. The primary reason for determining this had to do matching up the pregenerated enemy lances with the player's in the correct types of battles, but it also had an effect on OpFor size, particularly on garrison contracts when the enemy could be conducting either a planetary assault or a raid. I also considered starting the contract without any certain enemy present. The first month of the contract would roll for a new attacker just as if a previous one had been routed.

I am looking forward to seeing playtesting feedback on all this.


Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 02 December 2015, 03:17:16
Haven't had time to actually playtest these new rules since I wanted to finish my current contracts first, but I thought your idea about non-Mech kills not giving XP is an excellent one.  It changes the game in some dramatic ways.

For one thing, it explains how a Mechwarrior that has been in 5+ contracts can still be Regular-level skilled, as we see in the fiction.  Because, at least in my experience playing in the 3030-3045 range, 90% of your kills are vehicles. 

As it stands now, everyone becomes Elite with several SPAs by the third contract or so.  But that may be a function of me assigning all unassigned kills to the ranking officer (like when the vee's crew flees an immobilized vehicle, for example).

And all my Admins have something like 100 XP last I checked.  That should probably be trimmed down a bit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 02 December 2015, 05:52:48
What I did was to change the cost of upping skills and SPAs to match what they are in AToW; as close as I can get them anyway. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 02 December 2015, 14:36:19
Has the rate of XP gain per mission week been reduced since 3.14?  I haven't updated in a while, but the default 1 XP per week turns into absurdity on an 18 month garrison contract, where your officers really don't do a whole lot, but end up with 50-80 XP by the end of the contract.  By contract 2 or 3 they're Elite with a grocery list of specialties, yet may have only done 5-10 actual combat missions.  The AtB options allow you to increase the rate of XP gain, but not reduce it below 1 unless you drop it all the way to 0, which is equally problematical.  Is it possible to do X points of XP per Y number of weeks?

I also tend to adjust the skill gain to 1 point per 3 kills, which is enough to bring some of the regular troops up in skill quite a bit faster than the ones who don't fight regularly, without having them outpace them by a 5:1 margin.  At least I can adjust that.

Ideally, having the option to reduce XP gain for fighting units of a lower "class" would be excellent, so a MechWarrior would gain full XP against other 'Mechs and half or under the normal amount for killing vehicles, and virtually zilch for infantry kills.  I find it silly to get a point of XP for stomping an ejected pilot.  A vehicle crew would gain for 'Mech and vehicle kills, but half rate or less for infantry.  Infantry would get full value for everything.  In my opinion, that would make more sense than getting full XP value for everything.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 03 December 2015, 08:00:12
IN the campaign options you can change the xp gained for them. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: cmoreland on 03 December 2015, 12:46:57
Guys I know Battletech is coming but I still see myself playing Megamek via MekHQ because it is tabletop Battletech. I want AtB to keep going, please don't let it die. :(

It does need a lot of work, I wish I had the skillset to help.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 03 December 2015, 14:17:52
You can still play AtB, it's just that you'd have to roll the dice yourself, is all.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 03 December 2015, 18:06:40
IN the campaign options you can change the xp gained for them.
Yes, but can it now be toned down to less than 1 per week without going to zero?  Gaining 1 XP per week on a 52 week (one year) contract is a rather rapid rate of gain, especially compared to the regular troops getting a slim chance at 1 XP per 3 months.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 04 December 2015, 00:41:51
Yes, but can it now be toned down to less than 1 per week without going to zero?  Gaining 1 XP per week on a 52 week (one year) contract is a rather rapid rate of gain, especially compared to the regular troops getting a slim chance at 1 XP per 3 months.

ah, I see.  I misunderstood what you wanted.  Sorry.   I went the opposite route and upped the amount of xp cost to raise a skill to match that of the AToW without the slow/fast learner traits.  And then I upped the amount of xp per fumble to 3 and crit success to 2.  Then I lowered the TN for the monthly gain to 3 such that only a 2 will not gain an xp per month.  Changed the number of successful skill usages to 10 in order to gain 1 xp. 

Then, for the PSAs, I tried to set them as according to AToW; however, they seem to be capped at 100 so those PSAs that, according to AToW cost more, I maxxed out.  Having to use the higher numbers for spending xp causes a slower progression of skill gain, but you still get a progression. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Degrath on 05 December 2015, 12:51:45
ATB campaign questions here. I am confused about the current state of ATB and the various rules.xls I see for download.
 
Has the developement of ATB stopped?
Are the spreadsheets used and rolled manually and separate from what MeqHQ and ATB do automatically?
Are there any plans to add the functionality of the spreadsheets to ATB and MekHQ?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 05 December 2015, 18:06:50
ATB campaign questions here. I am confused about the current state of ATB and the various rules.xls I see for download.
 
Has the developement of ATB stopped?
Are the spreadsheets used and rolled manually and separate from what MeqHQ and ATB do automatically?
Are there any plans to add the functionality of the spreadsheets to ATB and MekHQ?
The spreadsheets are the official version of the AtB rules. Suggestions for rule changes are nearly always made with reference to that format. MHQ does nearly all of it for you, but it's been hard for me to find the time to work on it this year. Development on the system is still ongoing, as evidenced by Mukaikubo's post a couple weeks ago. It's the latest version of the rules with some suggestions for some new features added on the last page. Work on AtB in MHQ is limited to bugfixes until the next stable release.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Degrath on 06 December 2015, 00:16:55
Thanks for the quick reply, answered my questions.
I was basically thinking the spreadsheet ATB rules were merely a work around to keep playing and expanding while waiting for features to be implemented.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 07 December 2015, 01:47:46
Okay! Some feedback:

scJazz: Fixed the garrison/cadre reinforcements-leading-to-contract-completion thing. Changed the number of special missions per week to 2 + 1 for each point of strategy, with a max of (strategy+1) in any one field arm (so if you have strategy 0, you can do 2 missions, but only 1 each of infantry, artillery, and aerospace). This has been working out pretty well in my testing. Clarified the skill bonus for special missions.

neoancient: Fixed typo on row 79. Clarified the artillery support mission critical failure (and made it a bit rarer, since it's almost always a complete wipe in practice :( May need to fix this).

Some playtesting:

The firebase attack is pretty fun, and I like having a baby Base Attack in quite a lot.

The clan different size tables are... a bit twitchy, honestly. I don't really like them much. But I still like them better than the base of just swapping in stars for lances!

The special rules are working great. Balancing the rewards of the missions is hard, and not quite "there" yet; mostly I'm trying to make the really good ones have low chance of success. I've found myself not using artillery at all because it's so easy to just lose them outright with a forward posting under my rules as of now and in rear postings they're nearly worthless. Conventional infantry dies like flies which, well, makes sense.

The enemy force size rules work well enough. You already know if you like it just by looking at it. A few more rolls, not much more work.

I *LOVE* the way the Larger Force Rules are working, with one exception. Extraction missions are almost freaking impossible with multiple lances. You get much bigger maps, and so everyone starts farther apart, but the net effect is usually "your moronic flatbed(RL) trucks decided to try to get a backshot on a heavy mech for funsies even on the most cowardly AI settings available before you got within 30 hexes of them". I've been houseruling extractions to be one-lance only, but I haven't written that in yet. But company-on-two company standup or probe battles are super, super fun if your setup can handle them without too much slowdown.

Been playtesting with a 3055-era merc unit of 1 mech battalion (heavy company, 2 medium companies), 1 aero flight, 1 infantry company (all conventional), and 1 artillery platoon. Going pretty well; a 3 month raid contract is now a manageable number of fights. Going to be doing a planetary assault next. God, I'd forgotten how much easier the MekHQ integration made running these campaigns!  :D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 07 December 2015, 14:08:21
Okay! Some feedback:
More Feedback

Good choice for Strategy change in Special Missions.

Artillery Special Missions needs help. Some ideas...
- Failure: Unit Driven off by Counter Battery (no damage they just had to GTFO)
- Critical Failure: Unit takes 2d4 x 5 damage for Mobile Artillery, 1d4 x 5 for Infantry Field Gun. Any additional Artillery Missions for the week are simple failures. (OPFOR has established Artillery Superiority for the week. <<< Just an idea)

Apply the above in similar fashion to all the Artillery Missions.

Modifiers to Special Missions
I always get a little twitchy when the range of penalties and bonuses are not equal. Right now a -5 is possible but bonuses only add up to +4. Maybe compare unit skills against each other? -0, -1, -2, -3 for the OPFOR, reverse it for Player. So Elite OPFOR vs Elite Player = 0.


More later...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 07 December 2015, 16:48:56
The spreadsheets are the official version of the AtB rules. Suggestions for rule changes are nearly always made with reference to that format. MHQ does nearly all of it for you, but it's been hard for me to find the time to work on it this year. Development on the system is still ongoing, as evidenced by Mukaikubo's post a couple weeks ago. It's the latest version of the rules with some suggestions for some new features added on the last page. Work on AtB in MHQ is limited to bugfixes until the next stable release.

I was working on an Excel solution for AtB (retirement, capture, etc) when you released the MHQ version based on the 2.28 rules. It has been about 18 months now, since basically anything more than bug fixes has occurred for MHQ and 9 months give or take since Makinus posted. Should I go back and work on XL?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 07 December 2015, 19:14:35
I was working on an Excel solution for AtB (retirement, capture, etc) when you released the MHQ version based on the 2.28 rules. It has been about 18 months now, since basically anything more than bug fixes has occurred for MHQ and 9 months give or take since Makinus posted. Should I go back and work on XL?
It's only been 17 months since AtB was added to MHQ. I certainly have done more than bugfixes in that time, including some updates to later versions of the rules. I think it's probably as close to 3.31 as it is to the 2.29 rules that I started with. What Makinus puts out determines what is considered official and enabled by default, but does not impede continued work on the system and implementation of additional options.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Arkaris on 09 December 2015, 11:35:51
I was working on an Excel solution for AtB (retirement, capture, etc) when you released the MHQ version based on the 2.28 rules. It has been about 18 months now, since basically anything more than bug fixes has occurred for MHQ and 9 months give or take since Makinus posted. Should I go back and work on XL?

You also have to remember that MekHQ is currently (or at my last update was) in a feature freeze as they try and make the next stable version of the program.  So 90% of what is coded in currently is bug fixes and some small updates to make things run better.

But as the devs have said they plan on incorporating large parts of what neoancient has done in to the core frame of MekHQ.  I eagerly await the end of the feature freeze and ralgith's plan for a persistent opFor.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: CommissarK on 13 December 2015, 21:31:28
Hey guys!

New to posting here, but long time Btech enthusiast. I've run a couple MekHQ campaigns, participated in several Mekwar cycles on a variety of servers, and only just now have I seen the awesomeness that is Against-the-bot!

Introduction given, I have a couple rules questions as to the current implementation of the AtB rules in MekHQ and the RAR in 2.31. Specifically, it looks like the implementation of the MekHQ retirement rolls is based on an older version of the rules (base retirement TN = 5, seems to penalize roll based on experience without taking Dragoon Rating in to account). Would anyone be able to give me (or point me to) an explanation of what I would need to manually set as custom modifiers when doing retirement rolls?

MekHQ as implemented seems to have a very rough retirement threshhold. After completing a single contract, the 7s and 8s needed to prevent my regular and veteran mechwarriors from retiring were very scary!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 13 December 2015, 23:27:56
Hey guys!

New to posting here, but long time Btech enthusiast. I've run a couple MekHQ campaigns, participated in several Mekwar cycles on a variety of servers, and only just now have I seen the awesomeness that is Against-the-bot!

Introduction given, I have a couple rules questions as to the current implementation of the AtB rules in MekHQ and the RAR in 2.31. Specifically, it looks like the implementation of the MekHQ retirement rolls is based on an older version of the rules (base retirement TN = 5, seems to penalize roll based on experience without taking Dragoon Rating in to account). Would anyone be able to give me (or point me to) an explanation of what I would need to manually set as custom modifiers when doing retirement rolls?

MekHQ as implemented seems to have a very rough retirement threshhold. After completing a single contract, the 7s and 8s needed to prevent my regular and veteran mechwarriors from retiring were very scary!

The AtB rules apply modifiers to the roll and any roll of 4 or less results in retirement/defection. MHQ uses standard BTech practice for target numbers by considering 5+ to be success (personnel retained) and the modifiers are applied to the target number. The result is the same, but I chose to do it this way to make it consistent with the way everything else works. It also allows use of existing code to shownhow the target is calculated. There is a setting in the campaign options that will allow you to set a universal modifier to the target number as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 December 2015, 12:38:53
Okay! Some feedback:

I think one of my favorite features of the Big Force rules isn't even a feature. The Law of Unintended Consequences has delivered!

Previously, all my Lances were some what generic. Medium, Heavy, Assault all at or near the maximum weight limits. No Light Lances cause they just couldn't stand up to all the punishment. I didn't have any "Fire Lances", "Sniper Lances", etc. All my lances were long range mech, short range mech, and 2 generics, no matter what the weight class happened to be. Now with the additional Lances I can finally build specialized lances once again.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 24 December 2015, 15:37:52
What are the "Big Force rules" i have 2.31 and i don't see them, but then i'm totally blind to the things i'm looking for.

(seriously i searched the house for half an hour trying to find my keys only to realize they were in my pant pocket....)


As for the problem with folks leaving my work around is it's the family business so i turn it off. however my unit only grows from dependent rolls or when someone gets hitched. i make a roll every year to see if there are any kids, if so i GM a protomech pilot(cause they are small lol) and set the age to 1 and they don't become active until they are 18. the result is my unit is almost always small, under staffed, and its really hard to replace any deaths, but i can keep the skill level stable. i run a mech only unit and with some luck i can get to a decent size by the time the clans show up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 24 December 2015, 15:53:00
What are the "Big Force rules" i have 2.31 and i don't see them, but then i'm totally blind to the things i'm looking for.

(seriously i searched the house for half an hour trying to find my keys only to realize they were in my pant pocket....)


As for the problem with folks leaving my work around is it's the family business so i turn it off. however my unit only grows from dependent rolls or when someone gets hitched. i make a roll every year to see if there are any kids, if so i GM a protomech pilot(cause they are small lol) and set the age to 1 and they don't become active until they are 18. the result is my unit is almost always small, under staffed, and its really hard to replace any deaths, but i can keep the skill level stable. i run a mech only unit and with some luck i can get to a decent size by the time the clans show up.

The "Big Force Rules" are something that Mukaikubo wrote as a part of an expansion to existing rules you can find his initial post and the XLS here...
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=45803.msg1154755#msg1154755

Regarding the Retirement Rules... honestly, if you keep hiring new members every Monday there isn't much if any issue. Frankly, it is easier to hire Veteran XXX than training them up if you check every Monday. Elite is far more tricky but still easier than training a Green to Elite.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 25 December 2015, 00:33:01
yeah but its a bit crazy when the commander of the unit just walks away in the first year.

maybe the devs could add a way to tag a handful of people to keep them from running.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 25 December 2015, 01:52:42
yeah but its a bit crazy when the commander of the unit just walks away in the first year.

maybe the devs could add a way to tag a handful of people to keep them from running.

If you are playing AtB, you can turn the option on that allows you to adjust the TN down to 2 or less for anyone in the unit.   There is also a way to adjust the TN for everyone at the same time if you want. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 28 December 2015, 14:04:25
If you check the box under AtB campaign options to allow modified retirement rolls, there's an overall modifier at the top of the retirement screen, and you can click the right-most box on the individual members to add or subtract from their own roll.  I usually add a -2 global modifier at the top for the first contract, and reduce that to a -1 after that.  The unit commander also gets a personal -2, and the initial officers get -1.  After 2-3 years, you can generally afford to lose the global modifier, but it's nice to have your ranking officers maintain a little bit of continuity, so I keep the personal modifiers.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 December 2015, 14:54:20
yeah but its a bit crazy when the commander of the unit just walks away in the first year.

maybe the devs could add a way to tag a handful of people to keep them from running.

So click GM mode... go into Personnel-Retired and Flip him back to active. Or Modify the COs TN in Retirement... Or give the whole unit a retirement boost. There are so many ways to fix this issue that I can't see a Dev "fixing" it for a long time.

I use the 2nd option... lowering the TN for my CO and XO to a 2+ Roll.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 01 January 2016, 04:29:14
I i knew about the global mods. I didn't  realize that you could make a change for individuals. Then yeah that's the "fix" I was  talking about lol.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 08 January 2016, 23:08:11
Random reproduction strikes!

The *only* time I have noticed it come up:

Quote
Saturday, May 14 3025 
Fiona Marshe has conceived

Status: Active (Pregnant)

My unmarried unit leader just got assigned to the training lance for that indiscretion for the next nine months...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 09 January 2016, 10:14:58
Fiona Marshe struck and critted for 9 months by Horny  >:D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 09 January 2016, 21:02:23

My unmarried unit leader just got assigned to the training lance for that indiscretion for the next nine months...

On the bright side you could end up with a stellar new recruit.  I have one child in one of my campaigns who was born with Tactical Genius +3 in Tactics.  :)

 

 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kilderkin on 12 January 2016, 03:16:31
Hey guys,

Just recently gotten into megamek, but not sure where to find the AtB spreadsheets to download.

Thanks,

EDIT: Think it might all be handled in mekhq. my bad :D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 12 January 2016, 10:36:11
Hey guys,

Just recently gotten into megamek, but not sure where to find the AtB spreadsheets to download.

Thanks,

EDIT: Think it might all be handled in mekhq. my bad :D

Just in case I've attached the XLS. Not everything is implemented in MHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 12 January 2016, 11:29:19
Just in case I've attached the XLS. Not everything is implemented in MHQ.

And based on some questions I've seen, it never hurts to know/understand the rules.

Though the same goes for Megamek and MekHQ in general. Things make a lot more sense if you understand the underlying rules of battletech...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 12 January 2016, 15:56:00
I remember seeing someone where that there are rules for running a Clan force with ATB.  Anyone have a link for that information?

Thank you,
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 12 January 2016, 16:27:40
1 set of rules was proposed by Neoancient

1 set of modifications was proposed by Mukai

Neither set got very far.

Both attached
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 12 January 2016, 17:51:26
Thanks,  I'm looking at doing some modifications to the Nobel rules set for my own campaign.  Mainly just a good way of record keeping.  But I also wanted to look into what had been done with the Clan rules to maybe build on it.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 12 January 2016, 18:17:20
Nobel's rules are what? Can you attach?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 12 January 2016, 18:38:22
Its in the 2_31 rules above.  Its for running as a Nobel house under a IS ruler.  Its an addition to the base game like running a pirate.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 12 January 2016, 21:53:42
Its in the 2_31 rules above.  Its for running as a Nobel house under a IS ruler.  Its an addition to the base game like running a pirate.

That would be Noble, not Nobel.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 13 January 2016, 09:24:26
Sorry, minor dyslexia.  I tend to switch letters around.  If spell check doesn't grab it I'm screwed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 January 2016, 09:53:42
Nobel's rules are what? Can you attach?

 >:/! [face palm]
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ManiK on 16 January 2016, 16:03:37
I've been having a great time with this so far, so thanks to all involved for putting MekHQ and the AtB rules together.

I have a strange issue with my current campaign: Replacement parts are impossible to find. Not in a "my admins keep failing their rolls" way, in a "simple stuff (like heat sinks) are listed with a target number of impossible". It's 3060 so I doubt a medium laser should be hard to find. Strangely, stuff like fusion engines, actuators, and even autocannons are available.

Anyone ever run into this before?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Davout73 on 16 January 2016, 17:00:01
Give a couple of techs and one of your admins some skill points in "Scrounge.'
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ManiK on 16 January 2016, 18:00:28
Hmm, that doesn't seem to be working.

In the repair bay if I try to acquire the part it just says "this part is not currently available to your unit."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 16 January 2016, 18:19:27
If you are using the AtB options, uncheck the 'parts by mission' box. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ManiK on 16 January 2016, 18:22:45
Awesome, that did it. Cheers.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 16 January 2016, 19:11:06
Awesome, that did it. Cheers.

There has been a lot of work between the initial coding from Neoancient and now. Keep that option turned off.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 17 January 2016, 03:36:26
Awesome, that did it. Cheers.

Glad I could help. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 17 January 2016, 09:29:27
Fiona Marshe has given birth to Takashi Marshe, a baby boy!

A newborn who is a tactical genius... (Tactics: +2)   :-\

Should take command just in time for the clan invasion.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 17 January 2016, 09:57:43
Fiona Marshe has given birth to Takashi Marshe, a baby boy!

A newborn who is a tactical genius... (Tactics: +2)   :-\

Should take command just in time for the clan invasion.


So that worked out well :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 22 January 2016, 21:02:04
I'm running with maintenance on and wondered for a while why I was not making cash on the contract alone... then finally caught the dropship maintenance cost as it was paid!

Having enough transportation affects the Dragoons Rating, but do other players try to run a dropship?  Or just run without one when using maintenance.

I have all the Finance boxes ticked.  Does give the 'struggling mercenary' role a workout.  I make my money on salvage (no missions below 70% salvage offered; no money otherwise).


Also, with salvage, is it best to repair mechs before selling them?  Or just sell the ruined corpse?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 23 January 2016, 11:05:23
Depends on how you have the Finances setup really.

I do collect pay for Infantry. I have been running for about a year using 1% rather than 5% as the base Salary for my unit. Any real profit we collect comes from Salvage.

As for repairing the salvage. When time allows I let my technicians run maintenance to get the recovered units up to F status. I sell everything before I leave planet to avoid transport fees.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 January 2016, 18:06:29
I have a few questions with ATB.

If dont want to utilize reinforcements can I turn that off for myself and the OPFOR?

Can someone please point me to where I can find out what an objective raid, cadre duty, and what the various mission types mean?

I will buy a mech on the unit market using ATB and will recieve and invalid unit designation in megamek like for a Griffin 1N (intro level tech, yr3025, disallow extinct units and parts, purchase canon units only). Does one of those options not apply to ATB?

I have downloaded and purchased tacops, atow, etc and am still not really sure on the scrounge skill.  As in who should have it?  I assume the techs and that its for finding parts but, if i set acquisition to the admin skill then scrounge doesnt have any other use?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 25 January 2016, 18:34:49
The Attachment contains the official rules which are "mostly" implemented in MHQ.

Just delete the reinforcement units in MM before you start the game if that is your desire. You can also add more.

The attachment contains the official AtB Rules version 2.31 and describes what MHQ is doing automatically (more or less).

There are some changes in progress right now to the code which is causing those invalid unit errors.

Scrounge isn't used in the AtB rules.

Note: MHQ version 3.21 is the most recent build that works cleanly for AtB use. Do not use 3.23.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 January 2016, 19:23:40
Thank you, and yeah I noticed 3.23 has some issues but, didnt know what version ran the smoothest overall.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 January 2016, 20:35:18
Where do I find that 2.31 AtB rules file for myself when later versions are released and 3.23 finally does work well with AtB?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 25 January 2016, 21:46:17
do a search on ATB Makinus 2.31

MHQ won't sync up anytime soon but isn't too far off.

Makinus is the author of the AtB rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 26 January 2016, 09:23:18
Scrounge vs Admin is a personal choice based on period.

I'm using Scrounge to find parts currently, as I'm in the Succession Wars period (3026), and finding parts ain't easy.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 26 January 2016, 16:27:57
Scrounge is optional.  I don't use it at all as it is not in the skill list for AToW.   However, I have been considering changing that so as to make sure that it is the Logistical admin that is looking for/purchasing equipment and not just the highest skilled admin.  I just noticed in a game I'm playing that it was an admin I have set to HR that made the four vehicle purchases I just did. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 26 January 2016, 17:04:32
Scrounge is optional.  I don't use it at all as it is not in the skill list for AToW.   However, I have been considering changing that so as to make sure that it is the Logistical admin that is looking for/purchasing equipment and not just the highest skilled admin.  I just noticed in a game I'm playing that it was an admin I have set to HR that made the four vehicle purchases I just did.

That is a brilliant idea!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 27 January 2016, 02:24:21
When does the HR admin gain xp?  When hiring personnel right?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 27 January 2016, 02:41:21
However, I have been considering changing that so as to make sure that it is the Logistical admin that is looking for/purchasing equipment and not just the highest skilled admin.  I just noticed in a game I'm playing that it was an admin I have set to HR that made the four vehicle purchases I just did.

Makes sense.

A the subject of Scrounge.  It could be used in conjunction with the 'Restrict parts by mission' option to make it a viable to play that way.
It would also give Admins something to spend their exp on.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 08 February 2016, 12:23:33
FYI I finally got around to working on the scenario resolution bugs. Resolution should work in the latest release.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: ralgith on 08 February 2016, 23:38:29
FYI I finally got around to working on the scenario resolution bugs. Resolution should work in the latest release.

Except the latest release pulled from the wrong repos, so they're incorrect. This will be corrected in the next couple days.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Cimbri on 14 February 2016, 03:38:35
So, uh, what does one do if one of your officers rolls a 12 on the chart, gets to roll again for Star League stuff, and then rolls a 2, getting a 3 and as such no weight? Treat it as a light?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 05:45:15
Can anyone point me how to make a boneyard file as buying all the spares I need when starting is taking hours of clicking and selecting :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 February 2016, 10:29:02
When I start a new Campaign I just turn off limit parts for the first Contract. I buy ammo and armor and then as I play that first contract I just buy 5/10 of anything I end up needing for repairs. Then I turn it limit parts back on and go from there. It kind of makes a nice cheat sheet for parts needed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 10:31:05
Was more looking for a way to add lots of parts quickly via an import and how to format said sheet but thanks for the tip :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 February 2016, 11:37:16
Your going to have to go through the pain of setting it up at least once. Then Export Parts from Warehouse window, save that file and then import it for later Campaigns.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 11:41:40
Thanks off to give myself RSI :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 18 February 2016, 11:55:51
Or like I do, you can just save a template campaign file so that all of your campaign and MM options, custom ranks and exp and anything else are already setup as a starting point for new campaigns.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: elf25s on 18 February 2016, 12:31:46
i thought i was the only one doing that?
saved me about 45 minutes of set ups to the way i want them...

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 February 2016, 12:44:31
Last year (awhile ago) there was a "Template Campaign" for AtB but with all the changes it became obsolete.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 12:49:21
I've got the settings saved and it does save time it's just buying all the parts that's taking forever :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 February 2016, 13:26:11
I've got the settings saved and it does save time it's just buying all the parts that's taking forever :)

Well at least you only have to RSI for 1 day then :)

Side note: maybe after your done you could post your template?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 18 February 2016, 13:31:53
Maybe one day the devs will create the ability to click the top part in the "parts in use" overview tab and shift click the bottom part or "select all" and the option to buy 1 of each part but, we all have to do it this way for now.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 14:31:21
Well at least you only have to RSI for 1 day then :)

Side note: maybe after your done you could post your template?

Will see what I can do but it's pretty specialised most of it is spares for the mechs, so might have to create spares packets for each tonnage.

Need to think on it :)

Glad I'm only doing a company :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mixmastashizz on 18 February 2016, 14:51:39
I'm having an issue with AtB using the latest mekHQ. Everything is working fine so far except for one thing... the contract market is missing! I click the marketplace tab and all the other options are there. Is there a fix for this or will I just have to downgrade a couple versions?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 February 2016, 15:00:39
Use MHQ version 3.21... 3.24 has some game stopping bugs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 18 February 2016, 15:04:37
I'm having an issue with AtB using the latest mekHQ. Everything is working fine so far except for one thing... the contract market is missing! I click the marketplace tab and all the other options are there. Is there a fix for this or will I just have to downgrade a couple versions?

Had that issue but reloaded and it reappeared, I also started a new campaign so not sure which was the fix.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Fire Mandrill on 22 February 2016, 12:45:57
Much thanks and praise for all involved in making the AtB campaign... This game has kept me up many nights, and the following day I swear to go to sleep at a reasonable time but I keep getting drawn back in.  :)

I have one question about the rules when it comes to purchasing new BattleMechs in AtB. In the campaign options I have checked the box to restrict parts/units by year. Also, when I go to buy a new 'Mech I select the years 2750 to 3020 (playing in the Third Succession War). But once the list of 'Mechs appear I check the descriptions and many are listed as appearing in 3039 especially, some from 3075, using ER weapons or Artemis IV, etc...

I am sorta a stickler for accuracy and so it takes me a long time to scroll through the weight classes and pick an accurate 'Mech for my lance. Is there an option that I am missing to ensure the list of 'Mechs I can choose do not appear before they are suppose to? Or maybe I am forgetting to check a box somewhere?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 22 February 2016, 13:31:19
In the same campaign options tab where you restrict units by year what level rules do you have selected?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Fire Mandrill on 22 February 2016, 17:42:58
Well, there are two different year restriction areas it looks like.

The first one I am referring to is Campaign Options>Tech Limits. I have 'Limit Units and Parts by Year' checked. 'Maximum Tech Level' is Standard and 'Only allow canon units for purchase' the checked, too.

The second area is back in the AtB main window under Marketplace> Purchase Unit> Advanced Search. I enter as the Design Year 2750 - 3020. Unit type is Mek, Tech Class Standard, and the Tech Level is IS TW.

Once I click 'OK' and go to the 'Mechs I'm still seeing, for example, the Archer 2K and 2S whose entries show them both with a 'Source: TRO 3039' entry; Ostscout and Koschei 'Mechs  are listed with the 'Source: TRO 3075' entry, etc. and there are lots of other 'Mechs from later decades that show up despite the restrictions I put in place.

Maybe some BattleMechs have not yet been assigned the right timeframes to appear in yet? Is there some option or section in the game that I need to look at to make the changes I want?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 22 February 2016, 17:50:34
ok but, in the unit list in the purchase unit window the mech's year doesn't states something later than your current game year does it?  And are they all level 1 tech?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 22 February 2016, 18:18:31
Well, there are two different year restriction areas it looks like.

The first one I am referring to is Campaign Options>Tech Limits. I have 'Limit Units and Parts by Year' checked. 'Maximum Tech Level' is Standard and 'Only allow canon units for purchase' the checked, too.

The second area is back in the AtB main window under Marketplace> Purchase Unit> Advanced Search. I enter as the Design Year 2750 - 3020. Unit type is Mek, Tech Class Standard, and the Tech Level is IS TW.

Once I click 'OK' and go to the 'Mechs I'm still seeing, for example, the Archer 2K and 2S whose entries show them both with a 'Source: TRO 3039' entry; Ostscout and Koschei 'Mechs  are listed with the 'Source: TRO 3075' entry, etc. and there are lots of other 'Mechs from later decades that show up despite the restrictions I put in place.

Maybe some BattleMechs have not yet been assigned the right timeframes to appear in yet? Is there some option or section in the game that I need to look at to make the changes I want?

The Archer 2k was actually introduced in 2856 - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/73/archer-arc-2k

The Archer 2s was first introduced in 2915 - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Archer

Ostscout in 2600 - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Ostscout

The Koschei was introducedin 2504 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Koschei

The TRO names is not reflective of the unit introdates.  At this point 99% of the Canon unit in MM are date accurate.  But I can't speak to the options in MHQ to get them to show correctly.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Fire Mandrill on 23 February 2016, 00:08:37
ok but, in the unit list in the purchase unit window the mech's year doesn't states something later than your current game year does it?  And are they all level 1 tech?
I am not sure what you mean by level 1 tech. If you mean IS introductory boxed set being level 1, then that is listed as well as IS TW-non-box set (level 2?) since I do not have advanced or expiremental 'Mechs.

But the year listings when I go to buy a 'Mech do not go past 3020. See I thought the TRO was what one went by, thus my confusion on the matter.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Fire Mandrill on 23 February 2016, 00:13:23

The TRO names is not reflective of the unit introdates.  At this point 99% of the Canon unit in MM are date accurate.  But I can't speak to the options in MHQ to get them to show correctly.

Gotcha. Looks like that is what was throwing me off as I went by the TRO and not the year listed in the purchase screen.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 25 February 2016, 17:49:36
I've been playing an ATB campaign and feel like I've got a decent idea of how much of it works. I've encountered some bugs (I'm using 0.3.23, which has some issues, like the invalid mechs that cause saves to fail to load if I select them as salvage), so I'm planning on starting a new campaign with 0.3.26 when it is available, and I understand that should be a more or less stable build.

I have a few questions about ATB:

1) I have read about "support" missions for infantry. How do I get them, and what do they do?

2) Perhaps related to the above, how is it best to integrate infantry into the TOE? As their own unit, or organized in a company of three platoons with their 3 APCs?

3) I have read that you can configure the bot to use individual initiative to select which unit it moves (to speed up turns) while not moving your force to individual init. How do you do that?

4) ATB seems to roll more missions for larger units (perhaps one roll per Lance or equivalent in the TOE?). Is that correct?

5) ATB seems to create missions for lance equivalents with 3 or more units in them. Because of that, I have been organizing artillery and aerospace units as 2 per Lance equivalent so that they are not forced into a mission where I dont want to use them. Is that the best way to prganize them?

Anyway, I'm very impressed with how far MekHQ and MegaMek have come. It's been years since I played MegaMek in Mekwars. I'm really enjoying the ATB generated missions, as it lets me play a single player campaign.    O0
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 February 2016, 17:56:01
3) Under the mmconfig folder open up botconfig and change the line "force individual initiative=false" to ".....=true".
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 25 February 2016, 18:37:04
3) Under the mmconfig folder open up botconfig and change the line "force individual initiative=false" to ".....=true".
That seems easy enough.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 February 2016, 18:58:13
1) Infantry support missions will be on the campaign_system tab along the bottom of the screen and near the bottom of the page if you do not already have this document.  It explains near everything about how AtB works.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 25 February 2016, 19:21:42
Just in case it's not clear, AtB is a fan designed rule system for playing a campaign against a bot in MM.  The rules were originally designed to be run by hand, and parts of it have been integrated into MHQ somewhat recently.  Not all of the written rules work/are implemented in MHQ.  (I don't know that infantry support missions worked in MHQ, but I don't play or develop AtB so I don't know definitively).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 26 February 2016, 10:00:25
Just in case it's not clear, AtB is a fan designed rule system for playing a campaign against a bot in MM.  The rules were originally designed to be run by hand, and parts of it have been integrated into MHQ somewhat recently.  Not all of the written rules work/are implemented in MHQ.  (I don't know that infantry support missions worked in MHQ, but I don't play or develop AtB so I don't know definitively).
That makes a lot of sense, and it explains some of the difficulties I've been having. The integration is pretty good at this point.

The also spreadsheet fills in some of the gaps for me as well.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 26 February 2016, 12:15:32
That makes a lot of sense, and it explains some of the difficulties I've been having. The integration is pretty good at this point.

The also spreadsheet fills in some of the gaps for me as well.  Thanks!

Hey BlueThing... welcome to group. Nice to see another Player.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 26 February 2016, 12:34:46
I've been playing an ATB campaign and feel like I've got a decent idea of how much of it works. I've encountered some bugs (I'm using 0.3.23, which has some issues, like the invalid mechs that cause saves to fail to load if I select them as salvage), so I'm planning on starting a new campaign with 0.3.26 when it is available, and I understand that should be a more or less stable build.

I have a few questions about ATB:

1) I have read about "support" missions for infantry. How do I get them, and what do they do?

2) Perhaps related to the above, how is it best to integrate infantry into the TOE? As their own unit, or organized in a company of three platoons with their 3 APCs?

3) I have read that you can configure the bot to use individual initiative to select which unit it moves (to speed up turns) while not moving your force to individual init. How do you do that?

4) ATB seems to roll more missions for larger units (perhaps one roll per Lance or equivalent in the TOE?). Is that correct?

5) ATB seems to create missions for lance equivalents with 3 or more units in them. Because of that, I have been organizing artillery and aerospace units as 2 per Lance equivalent so that they are not forced into a mission where I dont want to use them. Is that the best way to prganize them?

Anyway, I'm very impressed with how far MekHQ and MegaMek have come. It's been years since I played MegaMek in Mekwars. I'm really enjoying the ATB generated missions, as it lets me play a single player campaign.    O0

1 ) You should download and use MHQ 0.3.25 (see that Ralgith the correct version number  :P )

2 ) AtB doesn't handle Infantry very well. Heck Princess has a hard time using them as well. Generally, I use them as Reinforcements and keep them in an over-sized lance so they don't show up in the Briefing Room and aren't chosen for battles. Using Infantry in the Support Missions is the way to go.

3 ) Depending on the speed of your computer you might not even need to use Individual Initiative. The main drags on speed are when Princess is using very fast units on a complex map. Right now I'm playing on a 2 year old laptop and Princess has control of about 24 units. Things are moving along smoothly.

4 ) Yes, you are correct. I find it useful to assemble oversized Lances (more than 6 units) so that they are not considered for Battle Rolls. I attached a couple of WIP files for AtB rules. The last tab of the Mukai XLS describes some alternative rules for Large Forces. They work out pretty good. Also, remember, the point is to have fun. You are your own GM. If you don't want to fight the 6th Chase mission of the month, just delete it. Mukai's optional rules also expands on Artillery, ASF, and Infantry missions. He put it all together from the suggestions of several players (me included :) ). I have only used this rules since they were released.

5 ) AtB only considers lances of 3 to 6 units. Anything else doesn't count. You can also, as mentioned in 4, just delete the "crazy" battles.


The number 1 rule of AtB is... there are no rules... consider it a skeleton for creating fights easily. Change it all you like. Cause the 2nd rule of AtB is... HAVE FUN!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 26 February 2016, 13:29:52
1 ) You should download and use MHQ 0.3.25 (see that Ralgith the correct version number  :P )

2 ) AtB doesn't handle Infantry very well. Heck Princess has a hard time using them as well. Generally, I use them as Reinforcements and keep them in an over-sized lance so they don't show up in the Briefing Room and aren't chosen for battles. Using Infantry in the Support Missions is the way to go.

3 ) Depending on the speed of your computer you might not even need to use Individual Initiative. The main drags on speed are when Princess is using very fast units on a complex map. Right now I'm playing on a 2 year old laptop and Princess has control of about 24 units. Things are moving along smoothly.

4 ) Yes, you are correct. I find it useful to assemble oversized Lances (more than 6 units) so that they are not considered for Battle Rolls. I attached a couple of WIP files for AtB rules. The last tab of the Mukai XLS describes some alternative rules for Large Forces. They work out pretty good. Also, remember, the point is to have fun. You are your own GM. If you don't want to fight the 6th Chase mission of the month, just delete it. Mukai's optional rules also expands on Artillery, ASF, and Infantry missions. He put it all together from the suggestions of several players (me included :) ). I have only used this rules since they were released.

5 ) AtB only considers lances of 3 to 6 units. Anything else doesn't count. You can also, as mentioned in 4, just delete the "crazy" battles.


The number 1 rule of AtB is... there are no rules... consider it a skeleton for creating fights easily. Change it all you like. Cause the 2nd rule of AtB is... HAVE FUN!
Thanks for the info. I'm definitely following rule #2. It has been years since I played Battletech, and it's great to have a way to get back into it with a single player campaign.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 04 March 2016, 23:33:11
Note to Self

Turn off the 'Double enemy vehicles' option before starting a contract against the Clans.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 05 March 2016, 00:48:55
Note to Self

Turn off the 'Double enemy vehicles' option before starting a contract against the Clans.
MHQ ignores the "double enemy vehicles" option when generating Clan forces, since standard Clan organization effectively doubles them already with 2 vees/Point.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 05 March 2016, 02:49:46
neo, did you ever finish that capture/defector gui you were working on a long while back? Would be nice to see it make it in.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 12 March 2016, 17:40:50
Retirement/defection rolls (campaign_system tab, line 626)

If the unit rating is a D or an F and the pilot is a veteran then it will be a -2 to the roll correct?

Since I'm recreating how it is in the Marine Corps on my campaign I do these rolls myself every four years like real contract lengths are and pay reenlistment bonuses off the bonus table when pilots roll successfully.  But, could we in the future manipulate when the rolls are done by HQ?  (like every four years)

Also I have been organizing my lances with a 2LT as the commander, a SSGT as the lance sergeant, and four PFC's when starting out.  I've decided I dont like that and classifies the lance as super heavy so, not a good idea in against the bot when five of the pilots are boots.  Would it be more realistic for each lance to start out with three PFC's, two lances commanded by a SSGT, and one lance commanded by a 2LT in a company?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 12 March 2016, 22:28:10
Also I have been organizing my lances with a 2LT as the commander, a SSGT as the lance sergeant, and four PFC's when starting out.  I've decided I dont like that and classifies the lance as super heavy so, not a good idea in against the bot when five of the pilots are boots.  Would it be more realistic for each lance to start out with three PFC's, two lances commanded by a SSGT, and one lance commanded by a 2LT in a company?
I normally do one commissioned officer and the rest non-commissioned personnel for my lances (often 1 LT, 1 SGT, and 2 privates or corporals). I'm sure I remember reading about all of that years ago, but I don't recall which Battletech or mechwarrior book had the info. :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 12 March 2016, 23:42:25
Yeah it isn't consistent between books at all. The older books usually have 1 Lt, 1 Sgt, 2 Mechwarriors (rank or title, never very clear on that)

At least tech ranks were outlined for mercs in one of the books though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Spartan10590 on 13 March 2016, 09:53:45
I like to keep mine a bit more in line with how it's done in the Navy and Air Force with pilots, where they are all officers. I tone it down a bit by having the lowest ranked Regular mechwarriors be Sergeants, Trainees/Green/Ultra-Green personnel at Corporal, and Veteran/Elite who aren't lance commanders at Master Sergeant. It isn't quite in line with how things are normally done in Battletech lore, but it makes more sense to me than putting a private into a multi-million C-bill battlemech.

A typical lance for me (using Star League ranks) is led by a Lt SG commanding a combination of 3x Lt JG/MSgt/Sgt
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 March 2016, 13:10:12
Yeah I dont really like the idea of giving a 18yr old PFC a mech either but, still nowdays a big part of our military is 18-20yr old kids and I was a 20 or 21yr old driving a million dollar MRAP(1.29 avg) through Ramadi on deployment.  Also, they way I do it a PFC already has 6 months time is service (2-3 months boot camp and then 3-4 months for their MOS school training them to be mech pilots) so, I rationalize that they have some training.  And we all know the clans always have very young pilots.  I also have them go through 2D6 months of predeployment training to get some xp and increase their skills before going on a mission, when they get back they may get a boot drop then more training and another mission, over and over again.  I think I will do one lance commanded by a 2LT with a CPL and 2 PFCs and the other two lances with a SSGT instead of a 2LT.  I dont want to get too many officers in the unit competing for the 1LT company executive officer position.  And I try to setup the ranks to where say a SSGT is about to promote to a GYSGT and become the company ops chief then is another pilot close to ranking up to a SSGT and taking his place or else somebody is going to have to EAS or transfer to another unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bongfu on 13 March 2016, 15:39:44
Pretty new to the whole ABT thing. I am absolutely LOVING it so far. Just a quick question though:

I am doing a bot generated contract with generated missions. Its awesome except for one thing: Almost always (if I have any employer reinforcements) have to wait 8-10 turns to deploy while my employer will send one Battlemech into the fight. Often its against a vastly superior foe. Right now, the DCMS seems to think a lone Panther can handle a cluster of Omnimechs for 10 turns.

Is there a setting I am missing somewhere? Or is this normal?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 March 2016, 16:21:22
It all depends on the mission and I think you are overstating the 10 turn thing a bit. There is however a bug that causes the "Employer" units to not respect the arrival time rule. They should arrive with the rest of your unit more or less.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bongfu on 13 March 2016, 16:23:50
It all depends on the mission and I think you are overstating the 10 turn thing a bit. There is however a bug that causes the "Employer" units to not respect the arrival time rule. They should arrive with the rest of your unit more or less.

Nope, did two missions back to back where the employer deployed first and I deployed 10 turns later.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 13 March 2016, 16:37:52
Do you have more than one force on your TO&E?

Are you deploying foxes other than the one listed on the scenario?

As only the force listed on the scenario should deploy at the start of the scenario, all the others show up later as reinforcements.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 March 2016, 16:42:28
Do you have more than one force on your TO&E?

Are you deploying foxes other than the one listed on the scenario?

As only the force listed on the scenario should deploy at the start of the scenario, all the others show up later as reinforcements.

Attached units in Cadre and Liaison Contracts are not a separate force.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 March 2016, 17:12:55
In the megamek lobby you can right click on any of the units and configure them.  On the deployment tab you can set on what turn they come on the board.  So, if something doesnt make sense you can change it which makes this game great.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 13 March 2016, 18:14:54
Attached units in Cadre and Liaison Contracts are not a separate force.

I was asking about his forces not the attached units.

I've seen the following behavior in MHQ and was wondering if it applied.

say you have a company of mechs in three lances.

Battle
Fire
Command

Now the scenario says Fire Lance is the deployed force, but you also deploy Battle and Command then Fire is deployed at the start and Battle and Command  deploy in later turns.

I was wondering if he had deployed a difference force for the battle and not included the force specified in the scenario then would the force not deploy later on as if they were reinforcements?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 March 2016, 18:41:13
Quoting from the holy AtB 2.31 bible, Battle tab, starting at line 222:

Reinforcements                        
If the player has a lance with Fight or Scout orders that does not have a battle on the current week he/she can use the lance                        
to reinforce a battle. To see if the lance can reinforce a battle, roll a 1d6 – Fight lances can reinforce a battle on a result of                        
6, Scout lances can reinforce a battle on a result of 6 or 5. Otherwise the lance is too far away to be able to reinforce the                         
battle. Reinforcements do not count for victory/defeat conditions.                        
Player reinforcements always deploy in 12 minus walking speed turns of the slowest unit.                        
                        
The bot also has a chance of reinforcing a battle regardless if the player is reinforcing or not. To see if the bot is reinforcing                        
use the following table:                        
                        
   Bot Reinforcements      2      Light Lance = Deploys turn 6         
   Roll (1d6)   Reinforcements         Medium Lance = Deploys turn 8         
   1   None                  
   2   None         Units can also deploy in 12 minus walking speed         
   3   None         Turns (-1 if has JJ). - This rule is optional as it adds         
   4   Light Lance         too much micromanagement.         
   5   Light Lance                  
   6   Medium Lance                  
                        
ATTACHED UNITS                        
Depending on contract command level or if the contract is Cadre Duty you will have attached units provided by the employer                        
to be deployed with your own units. These units follow some rules detailed here:                        
                        
Command Level      Effect                  
Integrated      Two employer units for every lance. Bot controlled.                  
House      One employer unit for every lance. Bot controlled.                  
Liaison      One employer unit for every lance. Player controlled.                  
Independent      No attached units.                  
                        
You roll the attached units every battle, using the skill/rating/RAT of the employer forces.                         
Attached units of Fight and Defend Lances are Medium. Scout and Training lances receive Light units.                        
Attached are rerolled for every battle (add them on Megamek)                        
                        
If a attached unit is destroyed during battle you get a Minor Contract Breach.                        
                        
Cadre Duty contracts are contracts where the attached units are in fact “cadets” that your own unit is training. Regardless                         
of command level you always receive three “cadets” for every lance and they are always Player controlled.                        
                        
Attached Units count for the min/max limits (3/6) in unit numbers in a lance but do not count for tonnage purposes.                        
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 March 2016, 18:46:25
Quoting from the holy AtB 2.31 bible, Battle tab, starting at line 222:

*many stuff*
so it was written so it shall be done
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 March 2016, 18:47:54
so it was written so it shall be done

And Makinus is our prophet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 14 March 2016, 05:50:39
Quoting from the holy AtB 2.31 bible, Battle tab, starting at line 222:

"Snipped stuff"


Correct but MHQ lets you deploy what ever forces you want so if the OP was deploying other forces to the battle the delayed arrival can occur, I've just tested it in a quick battle you can undeploy the required unit and deploy any other units you  and only unit deploying at the start of the game was the liaison Mech. ll the other units were showing up on Turn 8 or 9.

I think this a quirk of MHQ rather than the AtB rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 14 March 2016, 09:33:48
Ok yeah that doesn't sound right.  So if you undeploy the force that is auto assigned to the scenario when fight day is reached and then redeploy it or any other force they come in as reinforcements X turns later correct?  In the MM lobby are you able to right click, config, and on the deployment tab set the mechs to deploy at the start of the game since it doesn't make sense?  Im thinking maybe thats how AtB is coded to handle having other units deployed to the scenario after it already had a force selected.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Wildfire on 14 March 2016, 10:17:17
Don't know what happens if you undeploy  the auto assigned force and redeploy it, but any other forces attached to the mission that aren't liaison etc come in later as if reinforcements.

Yep sounds like it's the coding in MHQ is the cause.

Luckily emerging is configurable in the lobby of MM.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 14 March 2016, 10:33:36
Not positive about the latest release, but I've noticed that if a retirement roll comes up only a couple of weeks or months before the end of your contract, and you select "not at this time" (because you're going to be making another one shortly at the end of the contract), it won't do the usual roll at contract's end.  If you agree to do the roll, you end up doing it a second time in another few weeks or months.

I've been looking forward to the proper inclusion of infantry in both the AtB scenarios and in MegaMek itself.  As far as I'm concerned, infantry shouldn't count against your unit total for contract purposes, so it shouldn't generate additional combats and higher contract lance requirements.  For example, if I deploy a lance of APCs or tanks with infantry compartments, the game would count the vehicles, but I should be able to include up to a platoon or squad of infantry (whatever fits) for each of those vehicles without bumping up the count.  You're paying tonnage for those infantry compartments, regardless of whether there are "grunts" filling them or not.

More critically, I think the rules are due for a complete overhaul, using BV2 or some other measure, rather than a selection of fixed lance tonnages (L/M/H/A).  The current iteration strongly pushes the player to tailor their force to the rules, rather than tailoring the rules to the forces that you actually have.  That means, instead of the game saying "you have a medium lance" and deploying an OPFOR suited for a medium lance of 200 tons even if your lance is only 135 tons, it should say "you have a force of 2200 BV, and choose an OPFOR suitable for a 2200 BV force.  The current system pushes me to create odd combinations of 'Mechs that come out exactly to or just below the "maximums" for each weight class, rather than adjusting the opposition to what I have, otherwise I'm going into every fight "underweight".  The system at present also doesn't account for skill levels, so a lance with one Veteran, one Regular, and a couple of Green Mechwarriors is going to be a lot more effective than one with an Elite, two Veterans, and a Regular, yet both will typically face the same opposition.  That leads to the campaign starting out brutal, getting to a "sweet spot", and then becoming far too easy once your crew gains enough experience to simply outgun whatever the game throws at them.  I end up quitting the campaigns after a couple of years because they're no longer challenging.  A BV system could extend that "sweet spot" considerably.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 14 March 2016, 12:40:45
According to the campaign_system line 801:
Infantry squads and platoons can be deployed either on the battlefield or in support operations, using these rules:

- Each infantry platoon counts as 1 unit for lance unit numbers.
- Foot Infantry can only be deployed with Defense lances unless inside a transport.
- Foot infantry inside transports do not count for lance unit numbers.
- Infantry never counts for victory/defeat conditions.

 So if a foot infantry is inside a vehicle it does not count towards your lance numbers.

And I do not agree with the third paragraph.  The enemy would never tailor their forces to yours.  Obviously yeah you would not want to send your lance up against a company or a green unit against a veteran unit but, when you select a contract just have it keep generating ones until it comes up with a contract where the opfor skill level is green and you won't be so outmatched.  And it does somewhat tailor the opfor based on your lance; Battle tab starting at line 170:

After finding the battle type, roll a d100 to find the bot lances for the battle, the table to be used according to the                              
player lance weight:                              
                              
Light         13      Player Lance is Medium         5      
Roll   Bot Lances            Roll   Bot Lances            
1 – 9   1 Medium             1 – 5   2 Light            
10 – 16   2 Light            6 – 10   1 Heavy             
17 – 20   1 Heavy            11 – 20   1 Medium + 1 Light             
                              
Player Lance is Heavy         9      Player Lance is Assault         15      
Roll   Bot Lances            Roll   Bot Lances            
1 – 3   3 Light            1 – 4   2 Medium + 1 Light            
4 – 7   2 Medium            5 – 7   1 Heavy + 2 Light            
8 – 9   1 Assault            8 – 9   2 Heavy            
10 – 12   1 Heavy + 1 Light            10 – 11   1 Assault + 1 Light            
13 – 16   1 Medium + 2 Light            12 – 15   3 Medium            
17 – 20   1 Heavy + 1 Medium            16 – 18   1 Heavy + 1 Medium + 1 Light            
               19 – 20   1 Assault + 1 Medium            
                              
                              
If you are playing with vehicles, roll a d6 for each enemy lance.                               
If a lance is a vehicle or a mixed one, double the number of vehicle                              
units.                              
Roll   Description                           
1 – 3   Vehicle lance                           
4 – 5   Mixed lance (half vehicles, half mechs)                           
6   Mech lance                           
                              
If the lance is a vehicle or mech only lance, roll on the following table to find the weights of the individual units:                              
                              
Lance Mech/Vehicle Weights            2      Clan Stars            3
Roll   Light   Medium   Heavy   Assault      Roll   Light   Medium   Heavy   Assault
1   LLLL   LLMM   MMHH   HHAA      1   LLLLL   LLMMM   MMHHH   MHHAA
2   LLLL   LMMM   MHHH   HHAA      2   LLLLL   LMMMM   MHHHH   HHHAA
3   LLLL   LMMM   MHHH   HAAA      3   LLLLM   MMMMM   MHHHH   HHHAA
4   LLLM   MMMM   HHHH   HAAA      4   LLLLM   MMMMM   HHHHH   HHAAA
5   LLLM   MMMM   HHHH   HAAA      5   LLLMM   MMMMH   HHHHH   HHAAA
6   LLMM   MMMH   HHHA   AAAA      6   LLLMM   MMMHH   HHHHA   AAAAA
                              
                              
Regional mech weight variations (optional)                              
After finding the bot lances and individual unit weights, to better reflect biases of BT factions in unit weights, you can apply                              
the following modifiers to specific factions:                              
Kurita – Any lance with 2 Medium units, change 2 Mediums for 1 Light and 1 Heavy.                              
Steiner – Any lance with 3+ Light/Mediums and at least one Medium, a Medium is changed to a Heavy.                              
Marik – Any lance with 2+ Assaults, one Assault changes to a Heavy.                              

If the skills dont make sense you can click the random skills in the MM lobby, select the bot, change to total warfare and skill level green or wtvr you want and have it randomize it.  It can all be tailored to whatever makes sense in you BT universe.  Personally I dont use AtB scenarios since I just have a lance right now and am building up to a company so, I just delete wtvr scenario pops up and then create my own from tables I made in a spreadsheet, atb just chooses the date.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 15 March 2016, 11:18:18
Yes, the AtB rules (and MekHQ) obviously tailor the OPFOR to the type of lance that you're running, or at least to the type of lance that it "thinks" you're running.  It's also true that the OPFOR wouldn't be so kind as to limit themselves to what's a "fair fight", but armies seldom engage unless they think they have a chance of winning, otherwise they fall back to a more defensible position, or simply run away.  To some extent, either the opposing armies are "in the same ballpark" or else you have a chase scenario, not a "battle".  (You're outnumbered 3:1, the enemy is veteran while your men are a mix of green and regular, and they have superior technology.  You have 10 turns to destroy 50% of the enemy units.....)

Personally, I believe that a randomized BV value (typically ranging from around -25% to around +35% of the player's force for a Regular opponent, with the possibility of reinforcements altering the odds from there) would be a relatively playable battle, and selecting contracts against Green or Veteran opposition would further skew the values up or down, allowing some voluntary adjustment by contract selection.

As it stands, I've gone through 30+ reloads on MANY occasions just to get a single battle that's even "playable": either one side is more than double the BV of the other (my underweight Light Lance - at 95 tons - against a "Medium" lance that includes 3 Heavies, plus reinforcements), my Hover lance ends up on a Dense Woods map and I can't even deploy the whole lance in the single non-wooded hex available, my Heavy Lance and Dropship face off against 3 Vedettes and a Scorpion tank, or some other pointless exercise in frustration and wasted time while the campaign reloads.....again.

The AtB rules are a big improvement over not having a set of campaign rules, but I really wish there was a better balancing mechanism short of manually deleting enemies or doing 10-20 reloads roughly every other week of the campaign.

I must have missed that line about infantry inside transports not counting for lance unit numbers; thanks for the clarification.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 15 March 2016, 11:58:00
As it stands, I've gone through 30+ reloads on MANY occasions just to get a single battle that's even "playable": either one side is more than double the BV of the other (my underweight Light Lance - at 95 tons - against a "Medium" lance that includes 3 Heavies, plus reinforcements), my Hover lance ends up on a Dense Woods map and I can't even deploy the whole lance in the single non-wooded hex available, my Heavy Lance and Dropship face off against 3 Vedettes and a Scorpion tank, or some other pointless exercise in frustration and wasted time while the campaign reloads.....again.

I feel your pain. Last week AtB decided to ambush my Slayer with a Locust, a Wasp and a Flea.

A heavy Aero fighter vs. three light 'Mechs, most of them not even having weapons capable of reaching my ship unless I stop paying attention to my altitude.

Leaving aside the fact that an Ambush still requires you to kill off half of the OpFor to win the scenario instead of, you know, to simply run away ...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 15 March 2016, 17:31:45
Decided to finally start using SPAs, toughness, and edge.  I haven't found anything in the AtB rules about what/or when you would gain points in toughness or edge other than:

Edge points cost 10xp and if you roll an ability that the mechwarrior already has, he/she gains instead an edge point.
When reaching a Veteran or Elite skill level the mechwarrior gains a “free” ability - “free” abilities ignore requisites.
Very Rare skills cost the same as the requisite skill and Very Rare Gunnery skills substitute the requisite skill.
Jumping Jack substitutes Hopping Jack. A mechwarrior with Hoppping Jack can buy Jumping Jack for 40 Xps.

So, when would a pilot get +1 in toughness or edge?  Or do I have to just arbitrarily assign those points and based off what criteria so that it makes sense?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 15 March 2016, 17:49:46
Never actually... buy Toughness and Edge are separate purchases.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jh316 on 16 March 2016, 01:25:36
I really need to stop underestimating the amount of supplies I need to bring on raids. Two months in and I'm stripping my legged mechs of their armor. I've got two companies and probably a quarter of them are down due to either leg actuator damage or missing legs.  Trying to capture mechs by punching so I can salvage their legs, since 90% of my salvage normally comes from me kicking legs off. And I've got a wolverine that's down because I didn't bring any spare side torsos.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 17 March 2016, 00:57:44
My idea is to give a pilot +1 in toughness when they come back from a scenario wounded and after they recover.  They will be a little bit tougher the next time around or else I'm kinda stumped on what the criteria should be to apply to MekHQ.

For edge since turning it on 3 years already into the campaign I just rolled 2D6 and went off the SPA table and anyone who rolled a 10-11 received 1 pt and a 12 received 2 pts.  Might have them gain 1 in edge when they re-enlist after four years.  And changed under campaign options the 1xp for every "x" months in service on a 2D6 roll of "y" or higher to every 3 months when not on contract in the rear conducting training exercises and on a roll of 10+ so, if they make that successfully they will get an edge point as well.  Will change to every 1 months when on deployment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 17 March 2016, 09:20:09
It has been my experience that more than 2 points of edge gets really excessive. I only allow 3 for my unit commander and maybe one other pilot.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 17 March 2016, 12:11:41
Alright, Ill try making the 1xp for every 3/1 active months on a roll of 12 also net an edge point.  Since there is only one possibility of rolling a 12 I rationalize it will mean they must have done something worth it to gain that 1xp and an edge point.

Toughness I guess I could try having them get +1 after a scenario where they have been KO'd and after recovery.  With the +1 meaning they "learned from it" and maybe will position themselves differently in the cockpit or brace for it next time to resist being knocked out so easily.

And SPA's, I use the SPA table in campaign options and rolled for each pilot and every new pilot upon creation 10-11 as 1 ability, 12 as 2, and then the 1D100 roll in the AtB rules to select the ability.  Only because for officers once they become veteran pilots they will be moved to the battalion level and never get to use any ability they gain.  Along with enlisted personnel reaching elite they would also move to battalion level as a SGM or MGYSGT and no longer participate in battle.

Does this make sense or does anybody have a better way other than having to do imaginary stuff to make the decision.  I just like having the game create the conditions. Seems more logical to me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 17 March 2016, 22:01:26
You could always just assign your command staff to a permanent Defense or Training roll.
They would still see combat occasionally (20% & 10%) and they would also be available as reinforcements.
Given that it's not unusual in the Battletech universe for regimental or even corps commanders to take the field that would replicate what you want and still keep the feel of the universe.
   
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jh316 on 17 March 2016, 23:21:36
You could always just assign your command staff to a permanent Defense or Training roll.
They would still see combat occasionally (20% & 10%) and they would also be available as reinforcements.
Given that it's not unusual in the Battletech universe for regimental or even corps commanders to take the field that would replicate what you want and still keep the feel of the universe.
 

Only Scout and Fight can reinforce.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bongfu on 17 March 2016, 23:42:01
Is there anyway to, like in Alpha Strike, treat cargo space as room for infantry in Megamek? I have all these awesome things I use as infantry transports in my Alpha Strike games, but they cannot be used in Megamek. I am just wondering if there is a setting I am missing or if its something that is not possible at the moment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 18 March 2016, 00:51:37
Different set of rules. In Total Warfare you can't unload cargo during gameplay I believe
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 18 March 2016, 04:36:12
Only Scout and Fight can reinforce.

Yeah, sometimes I forget that I house rule some things.
Basically, I allow my defense lances a chance to reinforce in combats where I'm the defender. 

   
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 March 2016, 09:23:34
You can edit the units you want in MML. Remove the Cargo Equipment and use the space for Troop Storage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 18 March 2016, 11:07:31
Is there anyway to, like in Alpha Strike, treat cargo space as room for infantry in Megamek? I have all these awesome things I use as infantry transports in my Alpha Strike games, but they cannot be used in Megamek. I am just wondering if there is a setting I am missing or if its something that is not possible at the moment.

Are there rules in TW/TO for this?  I'm not aware of any such rules.  As it is now, I think the only way units can transport units is via "troop space."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bongfu on 18 March 2016, 14:43:20
You can edit the units you want in MML. Remove the Cargo Equipment and use the space for Troop Storage.

That is a great idea! :P However, I cannot seem to find "Troop Storage" listed anywhere in the lab.

Are there rules in TW/TO for this?  I'm not aware of any such rules.  As it is now, I think the only way units can transport units is via "troop space."

I remember now that was a house-rule of ours from back in the day. It being in the errata for AS made me think it was now in TW as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 March 2016, 15:31:31
Cause it is on the first page LHS middle.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 20 March 2016, 10:44:04
Woof. Well, thanks to my work, that was a good few months vacation from any ATB or MHQ fun. Anyone either put in more of the ATB rules to MHQ yet? Failing that, is there a newer version of MHQ that's actually stable to run a good-sized ATB campaign without crippling crashbugs?  :)) I barely code, but even I can see what a nightmare getting all that stuff to play together in a release is.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 20 March 2016, 10:56:44
3.25 is running pretty fine right now. Just remember to turn on Allow Illegal Units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 28 March 2016, 10:30:56
Had a new idea for toughness; add a line in their log when they start out "Toughness +0: 0/3" and every time they come back injured and after recovery they will get 1xp towards the next level of toughness.  Going off the "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" idea.  So, when they get 3/3xp they will now have +1 in Toughness and for +2 they will need 9xp, +3 18xp, etc.  At least that way its a lot harder/slower to level in toughness and not everybody will have it.  Edge I'm still using the 1xp for every month of active service on a 2D6 of 12 or higher will also net an edge point.  Anyone have another idea for determining toughness and edge?  Other than the AtB 10xp for an edge point.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 March 2016, 10:48:38
Had a new idea for toughness; add a line in their log when they start out "Toughness +0: 0/3" and every time they come back injured and after recovery they will get 1xp towards the next level of toughness.  Going off the "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" idea.  So, when they get 3/3xp they will now have +1 in Toughness and for +2 they will need 9xp, +3 18xp, etc.  At least that way its a lot harder/slower to level in toughness and not everybody will have it.  Edge I'm still using the 1xp for every month of active service on a 2D6 of 12 or higher will also net an edge point.  Anyone have another idea for determining toughness and edge?  Other than the AtB 10xp for an edge point.

Not sure I like this idea. People who suffer repeated injuries tend to be weaker not stronger.

As for Toughness I'd handle it just like AtB handles Edge. Maybe lower the XP requirement to 5/10/15, since it only really applies to KO rolls.

However, I may be getting ahead of myself. Could one of the Devs look over the Code and tell us what effect Toughness has right now? What rules is it using? aTow? MW 2nd?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 28 March 2016, 11:14:07
However, I may be getting ahead of myself. Could one of the Devs look over the Code and tell us what effect Toughness has right now? What rules is it using? aTow? MW 2nd?

Unless I'm mistaken, about the same effect as the biography - at least as far as MekHQ is concerned.

In MegaMek, it modifies the target number for staying conscious when taking a hit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 March 2016, 11:33:11
Unless I'm mistaken, about the same effect as the biography - at least as far as MekHQ is concerned.

In MegaMek, it modifies the target number for staying conscious when taking a hit.

By what? MW 2nd Edition Rules = best 2 of 3d6. aToW rules = almost certainly not used. Some special unofficial Rules?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 28 March 2016, 15:36:58
By what? MW 2nd Edition Rules = best 2 of 3d6. aToW rules = almost certainly not used. Some special unofficial Rules?

Roughly as per the AToW BOD attribute: Toughness shifts the target to roll to stay conscious by one point down per point of Toughness (... or one point up per point of negative Toughness).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 March 2016, 15:41:06
Roughly as per the AToW BOD attribute: Toughness shifts the target to roll to stay conscious by one point down per point of Toughness (... or one point up per point of negative Toughness).

OK so unofficial stuff then.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 28 March 2016, 21:57:03
I can use toughness as is.  My only problem is that no character is ever generated with either toughness or edge. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 28 March 2016, 22:19:54
And you never will if it isn't a skill or SPA. Would probably be fairly easy to add but I think both of those should remain out of the equation for now.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 29 March 2016, 01:40:36
I can use toughness as is.  My only problem is that no character is ever generated with either toughness or edge.

I'm pretty sure you can at least get characters generated with Pain Resistance, which functions almost exactly the same as Toughness 1 (it modifies the roll by one to a maximum of 12 and not the target number, but that only matters when your target number is 13 ...).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 29 March 2016, 08:14:23
Out of interest has anyone ever tried to create a preferred weight distribution table for the Clans?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 05 April 2016, 11:57:17
The spreadsheet is going to need an update for new SPAs some time soon.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Heretic on 11 April 2016, 22:08:07
Anyone have the current ruleset? The link in the thread OP gives me a 404.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Towtow59 on 11 April 2016, 22:54:26
The first post on page 2 has a working download link.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 13 April 2016, 12:22:28
So, let me see if I get the company creation rules right:

You start off with 88 people.

1 CO (rank: OF-2, Captain?), -1 Gunnery, -1 Piloting, 2 skill points randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy (those that don't have a skill point are skill level 0, not "missing", right?), set the "Commander" flag

3 officers (rank: OF-1, Lieutenant?), -1 Gunnery or -1 Piloting, whichever is higher, 1 skill point randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy. Since we're talking three lances here, I set up two as Lieutenants SG in charge of one lance each (Bravo and Charlie) and the third as Lieutenant LG in the commandant's (Alpha) lance.

9 enlisted MechWarriors (rank: OR-6, Sergeant?)

10 'Mech technicians (rank?). I set up the head technician as OR-8, Master Sergeant, two as OR-4, Corporal, and the remainder as OR-2, Private. The OR-8 and the two OR-4 are in charge of one "support" infantry platoon each.

1 doctor and 1 admin (random type: command, transport, logistics or HR). Right now they are all OR-2, but I have the feeling the medical corps should have higher ranks ... possibly officer ranks even, I typically see them as OF-2 level, but then MekHQ puts them in charge of the "support personnel" infantry platoon instead of the OR-8/OR-4 technician. I'll probably need to reconfigure it so that the medical staff has its own five-person squad ...

60 astechs (rank?), 4 paramedics (rank?), possibly all OR-1, Recruit.

All grouped in 3 'Mech lances and 3 (support) infantry platoons (and possibly a medical "infantry" squad).

So - is that about what such a company looks like as-written? How are you interpreting the current AtB rules?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 April 2016, 12:50:18
When you say OR-NN do you mean E-NN? Enlisted?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 13 April 2016, 13:08:37
So, let me see if I get the company creation rules right:

You start off with 88 people.

1 CO (rank: OF-2, Captain?), -1 Gunnery, -1 Piloting, 2 skill points randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy (those that don't have a skill point are skill level 0, not "missing", right?), set the "Commander" flag

3 officers (rank: OF-1, Lieutenant?), -1 Gunnery or -1 Piloting, whichever is higher, 1 skill point randomly between Leadership, Tactics and Strategy. Since we're talking three lances here, I set up two as Lieutenants SG in charge of one lance each (Bravo and Charlie) and the third as Lieutenant LG in the commandant's (Alpha) lance.

9 enlisted MechWarriors (rank: OR-6, Sergeant?)

So - is that about what such a company looks like as-written? How are you interpreting the current AtB rules?

Its 12 MechWarriors total.  1 Commander, 3 officers and 8 Enlisted.  That's how I read it.  Ranks are up to you personally.  But I use custom ranks with a Captain, 3 Lieutenants and 8 MechWarriors.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 April 2016, 13:14:21
The 60 AsTechs and Medics don't actually count towards the total number of bodies in AtB. Otherwise... yeah that is an AtB 2.31 version Start.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 April 2016, 13:25:18
The 60 AsTechs and Medics don't actually count towards the total number of bodies in AtB. Otherwise... yeah that is an AtB 2.31 version Start.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.

Like this guy :D. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 13 April 2016, 13:50:09
The "OR-N" ranks are NATO "other ranks" designations, since most people should be familiar with those as opposed to the US-specific E/W/O trio.

And yeah, it should be 8 enlisted MechWarriors, not 9.

But this is the important part... almost no one uses the Standard start.

I need to start somewhere if I want to understand how those rules work and where MekHQ is lacking. And best to start with the beginning ...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 April 2016, 14:29:03
Sorry, just figured out you are in Germany. And, my bad, remembered that OR-NN thing a bit to late and didn't have time to repost.

Forgive me Neoancient...
There are a hell of a lot of bugs and features already ticketed in Git and SF.

This one for instance has been out there for about a year and a half...
https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/issues/45

Most of the XP related fields seem limited to 100 or less...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/354/

This one is coming up on a year and a half as well...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/119/

Speaking from experience... the Standard Start section of AtB is rarely used. Quality of Life and bug fixes for AtB are well over due. Heck just getting the code up to AtB 2.31 would be neat.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 13 April 2016, 14:43:30
Most of the XP related fields seem limited to 100 or less...
https://sourceforge.net/p/mekhq/feature-requests/354/

That one's ... actually fixed in v0.3.26 (and I marked it as such). I just didn't realise there was a Feature Request for it as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 April 2016, 14:46:11
I think its pretty good currently, its customizable and flexible which is good.  Those company creation rules are not rigidly enforced on the player which I think is a good thing since everyone will have a different idea about how a unit will be made up and whos in charge of who.  Especially compared to players from a US military background to Canadian, German, etc will all have different ideas based on what they are used to.  The "save presets" for the campaign options doesn't save your custom ranks but, its easy enough just to make and save a template campaign file.  Would be nice though if (and I'm not the only one) you could start out at lance level and have AtB adapt its forces to your # and skill level.  Which is what all my crap is about in my excel file to try to make AtB more flexible and adaptive allowing you to have a lance, or company, or however big you want.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 13 April 2016, 16:35:26
Yeah I start at with only a lance for AtB sometimes with 1 extra mech and 2 extra pilots. So 5 mechs, 6 pilots, 2 techs, 12 astech, and the CO as the initial admin until I can hire another usually after the first contract. Contracts are raid only until I hit company size then I start taking on garrison missions.

AtB needs bugfixes first then worry about adding all the elements missing from 2.31
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 13 April 2016, 16:55:37
The "save presets" for the campaign options doesn't save your custom ranks but, its easy enough just to make and save a template campaign file.

If you go the universe folder in Data, there is an XML for ranks.  I just overwrite the Custom or Star League ranks to fit my Merc campaign so I don't have to add the ranks or the pay multiplier for new campaigns.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jh316 on 13 April 2016, 17:18:30
Man, you know your planetary assault is going poorly when you're excited about salvaging a pair of shadow hawks.

I've got some Mercenary's Star stuff going down here.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 April 2016, 17:39:17
Man, you know your planetary assault is going poorly when you're excited about salvaging a pair of shadow hawks.

I've got some Mercenary's Star stuff going down here.

+1 for truth!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 April 2016, 18:15:49
If you go the universe folder in Data, there is an XML for ranks.  I just overwrite the Custom or Star League ranks to fit my Merc campaign so I don't have to add the ranks or the pay multiplier for new campaigns.

Why didnt I think of that.  I could prob go in and just add in my own set instead of it being labeled as custom, thanks.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 13 April 2016, 19:29:08
Yeah, I added tech ranks in my campaigns. Thinking of doing some ranks for tankers/infantry but haven't decided yet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 April 2016, 21:05:06
If you go the universe folder in Data, there is an XML for ranks.  I just overwrite the Custom or Star League ranks to fit my Merc campaign so I don't have to add the ranks or the pay multiplier for new campaigns.

Ok problem....I made an 18th rank system but, it will not show up in my current or a new campaign under the campaign options.  Is HQ only allowed to have a max of 17 ranks???????

<rankSystem>
            <!-- US Military -->
            <system>18</system>
            <rank>
               <rankNames>Recruit,-,-,-,-,-</rankNames>
               <officer>false</officer>
               <payMultiplier>1.0</payMultiplier>
            </rank> <!-- E0 "None" -->

[more of the same]

                <rank>
               <rankNames>-,-,-,-,-,-</rankNames>
               <officer>true</officer>
               <payMultiplier>1.0</payMultiplier>
            </rank> <!-- O20 -->
   </rankSystem>
</rankSystems>
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 13 April 2016, 21:06:05
saving over a pre-existing set does work.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 14 April 2016, 03:42:57
So the consensus seems to be that nobody even uses the AtB company creation rules (and consequently, the whole first sheet can be removed). Which do you guys use then? Something based on the old FM: Mercenaries or the IO Beta "Creating a Force" PDF?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 14 April 2016, 05:13:51
On the contrary.  I have used the creation rules for all four of the campaigns I'm running.

 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kutagh on 14 April 2016, 07:00:43
It depends on what I want to start with. The company creation rules are a good guideline for newbies and if I want a company-sized force, I do use it as a guideline.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 14 April 2016, 08:51:01
Ok problem....I made an 18th rank system but, it will not show up in my current or a new campaign under the campaign options.  Is HQ only allowed to have a max of 17 ranks???????


Yeah sorry, forgot to mention you can't add a rank system, you can only edit the other ones.  I personally edit the custom one. 

So the consensus seems to be that nobody even uses the AtB company creation rules (and consequently, the whole first sheet can be removed). Which do you guys use then? Something based on the old FM: Mercenaries or the IO Beta "Creating a Force" PDF?

I use the first page any time I build a Merc from scratch.  Most of the time though I start a new game as a famous merc company.  Playing as Snord's Irregulars, the Gray Death Legion or the Black Widow company is fun as hell.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 14 April 2016, 09:10:22
I was USMC so, I base my off unit a Marine infantry unit but, obviously has to be modified for Battletech since pilots go through 2-3 years of training to become a pilot in a House unit for example.

Lance 4 units

Commander: Staff Sergeant-Gunnery Sergeant(admin HR) / 2nd Lieutenant - 1st Lieutenant(admin Command)
+ three Corporal - Sergeants

Company 3 lances + HQ lance(below)

Commander: Captain - Major(admin command)
Executive Officer: 1st Lieutenant (senior)(admin logistics)
Senior SNCO: 1st Sergeant(admin HR)
Ops Chief: Gunnery Sergeant - Master Sergeant(admin logistics)
Company WO: Warrant Officer - Chief Warrant Officer 2(admin command)

Battalion 3-5 companies + HQ lance(below)

Commander: Lieutenant Colonel - Colonel(admin command)
Executive Officer: Major(admin logistics)
Senior SNCO: Sergeant Major(admin HR)
Ops Chief: Master Gunnery Sergeant(admin logistics)
BN WO: CWO2 - CWO3(admin command)

1 tech / mech (use bring all astech teams to full strength) Enlisted
1 doctor(admin HR) / lance (medics at full strength) Officer
1 admin transport / lance (w/scrounge & orders the parts) Officer
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 14 April 2016, 11:28:51
For me, the unit creation rules are a guideline, and I extrapolate heavily from there.  While I MAY run a company-sized unit, and MAY use the creation rules largely intact, it's certainly not the norm.

For example, I started one unit as a combined arms lance: LCT-V1, STG-3R, J. Edgar, and Galleon, with a Veteran CO and vehicle commander, the rest Regular, and a Green dispossessed MechWarrior and spare driver and gunner.  One 'Mech tech was Regular, the rest of the support crew was all Green.  Salvaging an old pair of Shadow Hawks, which the one poster derisively considers irrelevant, would have more than doubled the unit's effective strength.

Another unit started out with one 'Mech company, one vehicle company, a company of infantry, and an aero lance.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kentares on 14 April 2016, 11:41:10
I know its a stupid question but Im not following CBT since the last Jihad book. Whats the oficial current unit creation rules? IO or FMMercs or other?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jh316 on 14 April 2016, 11:51:52
Still FM:M(r). Or Total Chaos, if you want to go with that system. But you can look at the old IO beta rules for force creation. It wasn't finished since it didn't include everything needed for contracts and actually running the unit, but for creating one it worked fine. Those rules are getting pushed out in campaign operations, due out who knows how far in the future.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kentares on 14 April 2016, 11:53:44
Still FM:M(r). Or Total Chaos, if you want to go with that system.

Still!? Wasnt supposed IO have updated rules for this?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 14 April 2016, 12:54:48
Still!? Wasnt supposed IO have updated rules for this?

It was but IO got too big! Way too many pages. So they decided to do a separate book, Campaign Operations.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kentares on 14 April 2016, 13:24:41
It was but IO got too big! Way too many pages. So they decided to do a separate book, Campaign Operations.

Oh... ok. When is expected for that to be released?

Edit = Or youre talking about Campaign Companion in the coming releases page...?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 14 April 2016, 13:28:29
Oh... ok. When is expected for that to be released?

CGL doesn't give release dates till they have an in the warehouse ready to go date.  Best anyone can say is its on the Coming Releases page which means it will happen.

http://bg.battletech.com/books/upcoming-releases/

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 15 April 2016, 09:41:31
I have used, in the past:

-The ATB company creation rules
-The IO Beta force creation rules
-FM:Mercenaries (revised)
-FM:Mercenaries Supplemental- the one with the point buy (it made it easy to make a big force)
-The OLD AtB company creation rules from way back in the day


I like 'em all for different purposes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 17 April 2016, 16:52:35
Yeah sorry, forgot to mention you can't add a rank system, you can only edit the other ones.  I personally edit the custom one.

So I did this editing the custom rank file and had set my staff NCOs and warrant officers to count as officer=true as well but, does not count towards the unit rating for the command section.  Im guessing the points for tactics and all those skills under command is trained to O1-..... only?  Why not have it count for any ranks where officer=true?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 17 April 2016, 17:25:41
In AtB the only Leadership skills are = the 1 Commanding Officer.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 17 April 2016, 18:09:52
:\ And I guess thats in a sourcebook as well that states that?  IMO I would like it to count all the officers, a unit with more senior officers and staff NCOs would be better and have a better rating but, it's not real important.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 17 April 2016, 21:48:19
:\ And I guess thats in a sourcebook as well that states that?  IMO I would like it to count all the officers, a unit with more senior officers and staff NCOs would be better and have a better rating but, it's not real important.

I actually second this for purposes of what can be brought to the field.  That would then represent the ability to delegate authority and allow lower ranked personnel to take the initiative in the absense of the commander. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 18 April 2016, 06:41:08
Looking into making some of my own personal RATs for AtB. Thinking of going off the MUL and adding a bit of variety. I want to start around 3039 or 3050. When a new mech, vehicle, etc. is introduced that year, I will add it to the A class unit's RAT with a small chance to roll it. Each year the chance of rolling that mech will go up on that RAT. After so many years, was thinking (3-4?), it gets added to B rated RATs. Doing this till after so many it ends up on the F rated RATs. Also after so many years and new designs come in I want to phase out older models.

I think on the RATs a number is that many more times likely to roll a unit. Correct me if I am wrong, but a 2 would be 2 times more likely to show up than a 1? Like in the following the Centurion would be rolled 2 times more often than the Hunchback Ex. Hunchback,1Centurion,2

A rated unit
Other Factions RAT,1
New model year,1
1 year old,2
2 years old,3
3 years old,4...

So anyway. How many years should I wait before moving it to a lower rated unit RAT? Should I limit the number of units on each RAT? How long before I start removing Intro designs from A,B,C? Going to leave a chance D & F to get Intro tech. Not too concerned for actual canon, it's more, "Get the toys out there and see them used either by me or against me". Bit of work. One RAT, per type, weight, faction, and year. So Major IS Powers for now.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 18 April 2016, 08:58:08
Yes, 2 equals twice the chance of 1. Just as 4 equals twice the chance of 2.

The question of when to move them around is tricky. Some mech designs are still built almost by hand in 3039. Some are cranked out in near perfect automated factories (Hesperus). If you aren't worried about Canon then I'd say every 3 years would work for actually being able to see the effect of units becoming more common and then phasing out during play.

Have you tried Neoancient's RATs. They work pretty well for me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Zellbringen on 18 April 2016, 11:12:23
:\ And I guess thats in a sourcebook as well that states that?  IMO I would like it to count all the officers, a unit with more senior officers and staff NCOs would be better and have a better rating but, it's not real important.

If you are using the FM:Merc(rev) option for unit rating.  In the section that calculates unit rating it states to just use the commander's skills.  I'm haven't read the IO unit rules yet so I don't know if they change the rating.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 19 April 2016, 00:01:16
Yes, 2 equals twice the chance of 1. Just as 4 equals twice the chance of 2.

The question of when to move them around is tricky. Some mech designs are still built almost by hand in 3039. Some are cranked out in near perfect automated factories (Hesperus). If you aren't worried about Canon then I'd say every 3 years would work for actually being able to see the effect of units becoming more common and then phasing out during play.

Have you tried Neoancient's RATs. They work pretty well for me.

I normally use both Xotl's and Neoancient's RATs. Both work very well. Neoacient's RATs are the reason I was thinking of building my own. Thing I am seeing though is that there is a 5-7 year gap after 3050 between each subsequent RAT. Which means that my A+ House or Merc unit cannot access things like IS Standard Battle Armor or other new mechs/vehicles until the Next TRO year instead of intro year. The other thing is that they do not cover new units introduced after 3067. The next RAT is not until 3085, after the Jihad. Though there are plenty of WOB tables for that period. Every year is going to be a bit of work. I expect to be doing a lot of copy pasting to build each subsequent RAT. Mostly doing just the 5 Houses and Merc General.

Going to look at the current published RATs also and see what is incomplete/missing from those. Have most of the books and the 2d6 tables seem pretty easy to convert.

Edit: Should I get to a unit that is sold to both Allies and Mercs/Periphery/General. When the unit is added to B rated unit list make for sale to Allies? C list to sell to Mercs/Periphery/General?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: gloowa on 19 April 2016, 02:19:13
Can i ask for reupload of the rules somewhere? The link in the OP gives me 404, as do links in other threads (to prev versions)...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 19 April 2016, 02:27:18
There is a link a couple pages back. Try... pg 14 or 15? I know someone asked for a link recently so it shouldn't be too far back.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 April 2016, 10:20:55
Can i ask for reupload of the rules somewhere? The link in the OP gives me 404, as do links in other threads (to prev versions)...

Here you go...
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=45803.msg1058978#msg1058978
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 19 April 2016, 10:37:15
So personal pet hate but why the heck do we need a tech per mech/vehicle? We have a man hour system so shouldn't it be minute dependant to determine how many techs we need?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 19 April 2016, 10:41:03
Like concerning the unit rating if it says your 100% for your support personnel?  I know you can assign one tech to more than one mech/vehicle.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 19 April 2016, 10:48:24
Like concerning the unit rating if it says your 100% for your support personnel?  I know you can assign one tech to more than one mech/vehicle.

Yup exactly that, I just find it kind of annoying that we can utilise the hours to ensure everything has proper maintainence but the rating doesn't show it. Having one tech per unit is kind of an ideal luxury rather than a daily essential that mercenary or house units would care about, I mean it keeps costs down for a start.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 April 2016, 11:05:07
I may be wrong but I think that rating counts for Docs and Admins as well. I know I have fewer than 1:1 but I'm still getting the 100% rating.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 19 April 2016, 11:18:12
Funny thing about the official rules, but if I've got one 'Mech with a single 'MechWarrior, he's got to hire a tech and 6 astechs, and a doctor with 4 medics just to keep himself and his 'Mech in shape.  If he fills that force out into an entire Company, he'll probably need 2-4 more techs and a lot more astechs to increase the available maintenance hours, but the doctor and four medics are still WAY more than enough.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Akjosch on 19 April 2016, 11:19:16
So personal pet hate but why the heck do we need a tech per mech/vehicle? We have a man hour system so shouldn't it be minute dependant to determine how many techs we need?

Because that's how the rules are written, that's why. :)

The are a lot of different rule sets for how to calculate how much support a unit needs and AtB is simply on the far end (with 100% needing seven techs per 'Mech) while (over-)simplifying a lot of this stuff and allowing you to recruit a near unlimited amount of support personnel at the spot no matter your current location or situation.

For example, Mercenary's Handbook has different support points generated depending on the skill level of the tech and different support requirements depending on the unit type and condition (a single Elite tech can easily keep two light 'Mechs in mint condition running, while it takes up to 45 greenhorns to keep a badly patched up assault 'Mech from not falling apart at the next best moment on the far end of things) as does FM: Mercenaries (where the requirements are even lower: an astech and a Green technician can easily maintain a 'Mech up to 50 tons in working order, a Regular technician and an astech is enough for any 'Mech up to 100 tons; the AtB team of one Regular tech and six astechs generates enough points to keep three heavy 'Mechs fully maintained).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 19 April 2016, 11:42:27
Hmm, I guess there is the fact that we don't have a rating system in place for the AtB rules yet that's more or less the heart of my issue. It's just rather annoying seeing the available minutes not factoring into the Support rating, not sure if I could homebrew anything though to satisfy my discontent with but I'll probably have a look at the IO rules and see what I can think up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 April 2016, 11:45:44
Hmm, I guess there is the fact that we don't have a rating system in place for the AtB rules yet that's more or less the heart of my issue. It's just rather annoying seeing the available minutes not factoring into the Support rating, not sure if I could homebrew anything though to satisfy my discontent with but I'll probably have a look at the IO rules and see what I can think up.

AtB uses the FMM:R or IO Beta rules to generate the Rating. So it isn't AtB. It is the Canon Rules which for the moment is FMM:R with IO as an option.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 19 April 2016, 13:18:15
Funny thing about the official rules, but if I've got one 'Mech with a single 'MechWarrior, he's got to hire a tech and 6 astechs, and a doctor with 4 medics just to keep himself and his 'Mech in shape.  If he fills that force out into an entire Company, he'll probably need 2-4 more techs and a lot more astechs to increase the available maintenance hours, but the doctor and four medics are still WAY more than enough.

That doctor will quickly get stretched thin with a tank or infantry-based unit though.

Hmm, I guess there is the fact that we don't have a rating system in place for the AtB rules yet that's more or less the heart of my issue. It's just rather annoying seeing the available minutes not factoring into the Support rating, not sure if I could homebrew anything though to satisfy my discontent with but I'll probably have a look at the IO rules and see what I can think up.

The Dragoons rating should be based off of minutes and you should be able to get to 100% with fewer than 1 tech per unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Brainburn on 19 April 2016, 21:36:48
Hey all,
I am actually having a bit of a time finding the actual download location for the AtB ruleset.

Could someone be kind enough to post a link?

Thank you,

Brainburn
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 19 April 2016, 22:02:04
The second post on this 19th page by scjazz has the link for the AtB ruleset download.  And I will also attach it below.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Brainburn on 20 April 2016, 13:35:22
Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 20 April 2016, 15:02:26
I normally use both Xotl's and Neoancient's RATs. Both work very well. Neoacient's RATs are the reason I was thinking of building my own. Thing I am seeing though is that there is a 5-7 year gap after 3050 between each subsequent RAT. Which means that my A+ House or Merc unit cannot access things like IS Standard Battle Armor or other new mechs/vehicles until the Next TRO year instead of intro year. The other thing is that they do not cover new units introduced after 3067. The next RAT is not until 3085, after the Jihad. Though there are plenty of WOB tables for that period. Every year is going to be a bit of work. I expect to be doing a lot of copy pasting to build each subsequent RAT. Mostly doing just the 5 Houses and Merc General.

(snip)

I understand what you want to do and why, but trying to get too detailed can have a signficant impact on performance. When I put out my collection a bit over a year ago, the first version was IIRC about five times the size of all the other RATs put together. I had to do some trimming, including removal of minor factions and some of the eras in the 2800s just to get it down to its current size, which is still a bit unwieldy. I think closing the gaps between those eras could have a significant impact on performance but if you want to try it out, my RATs are machine generated based on some frequency numbers I've compiled, so I can generate tables for any era in a few minutes. I've generated some for you for every year from 3050-3067. This set by itself is about five times the size of my distribution, but if you're willing to do a little work to manage it you can have just the year of your campaign in the data/rat folder. You will also need to replace the data/universe/ratinfo.xml file with the one linked below for AtB to use it.

At some point I'll work through the later TROs to expand beyond 3067. In the time since I prepared the set that's in MM I have worked on the earlier eras, so I could produce RATs going back to about the middle of the Age of War, though anything before the beginning of the Star League is pretty sparse.

RAT 3050-3067 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5wV7Xx3yIk7dFR0NjI4LU5iVkE/view?usp=drivesdk)
ratinfo.zip  (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5wV7Xx3yIk7LVBLQldVdVc4UVE/view?usp=drivesdk)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 22 April 2016, 01:26:17
I understand what you want to do and why, but trying to get too detailed can have a signficant impact on performance. When I put out my collection a bit over a year ago, the first version was IIRC about five times the size of all the other RATs put together. I had to do some trimming, including removal of minor factions and some of the eras in the 2800s just to get it down to its current size, which is still a bit unwieldy. I think closing the gaps between those eras could have a significant impact on performance but if you want to try it out, my RATs are machine generated based on some frequency numbers I've compiled, so I can generate tables for any era in a few minutes. I've generated some for you for every year from 3050-3067. This set by itself is about five times the size of my distribution, but if you're willing to do a little work to manage it you can have just the year of your campaign in the data/rat folder. You will also need to replace the data/universe/ratinfo.xml file with the one linked below for AtB to use it.

At some point I'll work through the later TROs to expand beyond 3067. In the time since I prepared the set that's in MM I have worked on the earlier eras, so I could produce RATs going back to about the middle of the Age of War, though anything before the beginning of the Star League is pretty sparse.

RAT 3050-3067 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5wV7Xx3yIk7dFR0NjI4LU5iVkE/view?usp=drivesdk)
ratinfo.zip  (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5wV7Xx3yIk7LVBLQldVdVc4UVE/view?usp=drivesdk)

This is pretty much exactly what I wanted to do. No programming skills, so all of it would be by hand.  #P

It didn't even dawn on me that it will have to search all of the RATs to find the one for that year, faction, and weight. What kind of performance hit are you getting using this?  Mondays slow to generate op4, or seems to hang on Sunday until you save and reload?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 22 April 2016, 07:50:54
Mostly loading times but also more memory usage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 22 April 2016, 22:52:00
There is a new commit that helps with RAT loading and memory in for the next release. Not exactly sure how it works but... may help with what everyone is discussing.

Also, neo why do your dependents start with the astech skill. Is it intentional? If not I am planning on having all dependents run through the same creation function (procreation, random marriage, atb) to try and start consolidating some of the various functions in HQ/AtB that can be shared.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 23 April 2016, 00:01:06
There is a new commit that helps with RAT loading and memory in for the next release. Not exactly sure how it works but... may help with what everyone is discussing.
There is a point at which further detail is not worth the additional overhead. I have chosen an amount of detail that seems reasonable to me for a general purpose approach. Providing as much detail as I think anybody might want would probably take about 10-20 GB of files.

Quote
Also, neo why do your dependents start with the astech skill. Is it intentional? If not I am planning on having all dependents run through the same creation function (procreation, random marriage, atb) to try and start consolidating some of the various functions in HQ/AtB that can be shared.
The AtB rules state that dependents are represented as astechs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 23 April 2016, 00:32:01
So free astechs  :P Not the smartest rule around.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Padraig Tseng on 23 April 2016, 14:35:35
I always pay mine, so not really "free"
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 23 April 2016, 22:01:52
Speaking of Astechs, where would I find the rules for the astech skill. If there is any point in leveling it, or if I should give them others skills when they get enough xp?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 23 April 2016, 23:30:57
Other skills. Raising the astech skill does nothing except waste xp. If allowed at all (never tried).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 24 April 2016, 01:56:48
I think the "astech" skill is a carryover from the 1st ed days.  As I had learned it, an astech was essentially a 0 level tech.  upon getting 1st level you then chose which type of tech you wanted to be. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kentares on 24 April 2016, 05:08:32
I think the "astech" skill is a carryover from the 1st ed days.  As I had learned it, an astech was essentially a 0 level tech.  upon getting 1st level you then chose which type of tech you wanted to be.

Yeah. A sort of young padawan... errr... i mean apprentice.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 24 April 2016, 21:48:41
Thanks. Was wondering why I could level them up. Did not add time to the pool or anything so had me wondering. Up until recently I have just been using, "Bring all tech teams to full strength", instead of keeping them on parole. Doesn't assigning them to secondary jobs take away from the total work hours pool, like with actual techs? i.e. Admin Logistical/Mech Tech gets 240 minutes a day to work on mechs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 28 May 2016, 23:53:50
AtB needs an update to its SPA list and costs.
New SPAs include
Forward Observer
Eagle's Eyes
Foot Cavalry
Urban Guerrilla
Golden Goose

Not merged yet includes
Shaky Stick
Oblique Artilleryman

These last two might be in the next release. Waiting on Arlith to let me know if I need to change anything else or not.

In the works
Terrain Master (missing Drag Racer and Nightwalker)
Ground Hugger (missing double strike/strafe)

Most likely next to work on
Range Master
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 23 June 2016, 06:35:11
Can you have these dependents learn piloting etc skills? Have them grow up to be an ace mechwarrior etc?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 23 June 2016, 06:54:32
Well my dependents look like they're getting 3-5 exp a year so that's enough to give them a kickstart when they get to piloting age.

That or use the exp to give them an advantage.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 24 June 2016, 02:47:56
Ok, so I just finished a contract against the Clans.
Usually at the end of a contract I release all my prisoners and get my MIA's back.
We all know that's not how the clans work.
So my question is how have people been handling that situation?

I'm kind of thinking that I will declare my MIA's from Clan missions as KIA's.  Lets face it they are not going back to their families any time soon so paying out their death benefits is probably the best option.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 24 June 2016, 03:19:55
<snip>So my question is how have people been handling that situation?<snip>

Your people are gone, though death benefits I think would be an optional thing since they legally aren't dead (though they might end up declared dead after x number of years, lol).

Quote from: AtB 2.31 Rules
"Also, Clans do not ransom back captured mercenaries or get back their own captured 'MechWarriors, so  you do not receive any bonus for captured enemy warriors and any of your own that is captured is not ransomed back. Captured Clan warriors that “defect” to your unit are instead “Bondsman”. They will work for you during 3 contracts (not counting the one where they were captured) and, after the end of the 3rd contract you should provide them with a working 'Mech (any will do) and do a 1d6 roll: If 6 they remain in the unit, if 5 they remain in the unit if you grant them officer status, 4 to 1 they leave the unit and take the 'Mech with them. If you do not give a 'Mech to a Bondsman after the 3rd contract, no more captured Clans will “defect” to your unit and all clanners currently in your unit will immediately retire taking with them their current 'Mechs."

Though, I would count those Clanners that didn't defect as free AsTechs for the 3 mission Bondsman period.  And keep lots of Locusts and Fleas around for those Clanners.  Nothing about the type, size, nor condition the mechs are in.  I would RP it away as "Hey, here's your going away present if you leave, but if you stay, you get to pilot X mech."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 24 June 2016, 03:42:27
Do you know if the 3 mission bondsman period is coded into MMHQ or is it a manual thing?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 June 2016, 06:18:10
Turn some of the clan prisoners into bondsman and leave your own people as MIA. They could very well escape on their own or you could RP getting intel on where they are either being held or what clan unit they are now serving with (as they could have been taken as bondsman). Great opportunity for some random dice rolling or RP. Or.. you can write them off as dead, depends on how you want to handle it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 24 June 2016, 09:46:54
I normally wait until the end of a contract to resolve prisoners and MIA.  Any who have defected and don't retire or quit at the end of the contract are retained as full members.  Until then, where they have a chance to freely walk away (and be dropped off on some neutral planet along the way, not where they can simply walk back to their former unit), putting them in a 'Mech or vehicle to fight their own countrymen or friends is a bad idea.

Once they've survived a retirement roll and voluntarily stuck with the unit for another contract, they've committed to being a part of the unit just like any new hire.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 24 June 2016, 20:34:52
Turn some of the clan prisoners into bondsman and leave your own people as MIA. They could very well escape on their own or you could RP getting intel on where they are either being held or what clan unit they are now serving with (as they could have been taken as bondsman). Great opportunity for some random dice rolling or RP. Or.. you can write them off as dead, depends on how you want to handle it.

While your still in the contract, extractions and recon raids would be good for this.
After the contract has ended well...........maybe I need to look at making a Great Escape table.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 24 June 2016, 20:58:11
While your still in the contract, extractions and recon raids would be good for this.
After the contract has ended well...........maybe I need to look at making a Great Escape table.

You could do 1d3 Recon Raids (to find your people) and then an Extraction (to get them).  The Extraction has to be done within 7 days of the first Recon Raid (otherwise they move the prisoners).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 28 June 2016, 17:57:05
Going off the atb2.31 rules where finding a drop/jumpship goes off your logistics admin skill, why not the transport admin?  Transport admin only has the ability to re-rolll the transportation clause with negotiation but, Logistics already has re-roll support(i know that isnt in HQ yet, i want it), parts availability and I think something else IRC?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 28 June 2016, 19:34:08
Going off the atb2.31 rules where finding a drop/jumpship goes off your logistics admin skill, why not the transport admin?  Transport admin only has the ability to re-rolll the transportation clause with negotiation but, Logistics already has re-roll support(i know that isnt in HQ yet, i want it), parts availability and I think something else IRC?

The problem with your idea is that DS/JS/WS are only puchased infrequently. While different AtB Campaigns play out differently, I only have 3 Dropships in mine for 19.5 years of game play. Which means only a handful of rolls per year.

Additionally, I think you might be unclear about Parts Acquisition. Every single Admin gets 2 rolls every 1 days. All of them, not just Logistics.

Reference: AtB 2.31 Campaign_System G:297

Somewhere in these 19 pages of posts there was conversation about changing all of this, or it could be in another thread entirely. I'm convinced that something better can be done and I think that finding that original convo would be a start.

Or we could just say the hell with it and start a new one :)

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 28 June 2016, 19:47:44
No I said parts availability level which depends on your logistics admin skill and the contract your in.  (my acquisitions are set to scrounge but, would really be nice to designated who orders parts first so that my high level admin isn't hogging all the xp but, anyways).

               When not in a contract, the availability level will be          
Contract                   Level      according to the merc rating+logistical admin:         
Guerilla                        0      Rating   Level   Admin   Modifier
Raids                                1      F   0   None                   -2
Planetary Assault/Relief Duty      2      D   1   Green           -1
Pirate Hunting                3      C   2   Regular            0
Other Contracts                4      B   3   Veteran           +1
Not in a Contract             Rating   A   4   Elite                   +2
From 2950 to 3040 apply a -1 modifier               From 2950 to 3040 apply a -1 modifier   

*I cannot figure out for the life of me how to properly insert a spreadsheet section into posts on here.  Insert table???  ^ looks fine when creating this post, then gets all jumbled.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 29 June 2016, 10:48:24
Can anyone point me how to make a boneyard file as buying all the spares I need when starting is taking hours of clicking and selecting :)

Am going to make a FR in HQ for allowing us to shift or ctrl click multiple parts in the parts in use tab of HQ and just add GM.  Anything that makes running/setting up a unit faster regardless of how big I think we need.  And if we dont make an issue on github it will be forgotten.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ice_Trey on 01 July 2016, 11:52:53
A little question.

I would download 2.31, but I don't think that it's what I need to resolve my issues.

I am running my 2.30 AtB campaign in the Dark Age period (~3160+) and while that's fine and well, I do run into a problem every now and again... In many instances, I've found that the Dark Age stuff hasn't been included in the existing versions of Megamek that came with AtB. It's also likely that a lot of the units that used the new tech shown in Field Manual 3145 (Like TSEMP) weren't incorporated into the game at that point. I've had more than a few instances where the match-maker simply shows red text where the enemy unit would be telling me that it can't find the unit in question, or that there was an error (Sorry, it's not showing up atm, because I ended up re-adding the xotl tables to make sure nothing went missing - which I removed in the first place because it felt like in spite of being at the bottom of the list, having it there caused way too much 3025 tech to be spawned)

Now, How would I go about tinkering with this in order to get all the support I need for playing in the Dark Age era?
Side-note, did 2.31 remedy some of the issues with save-file corruption I'd heard about with Battle Armor squads? I want so badly to include BA in my forces, but am terrified I'd corrupt the game files.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 01 July 2016, 11:56:56
What version of MekHQ are you using? Or if no HQ, which version of MegaMek
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ice_Trey on 01 July 2016, 12:15:20
What version of MekHQ are you using? Or if no HQ, which version of MegaMek
I'm just using everything stock, trying my best to follow the instructions to make AtB work properly.
So Mek HQ 0.3.6
Megamek 0.39.3
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Jayof9s on 01 July 2016, 12:36:05
You're using an extremely old version of MHQ. Most of that equipment and those units have been implemented in later versions. Additionally, AtB has been incorporated into MHQ so most of those rules have been automated.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 01 July 2016, 12:43:06
AtB in HQ is still being fixed, tweaked, and having missing rules added in. I *think* HQ uses 2.30 and neo was in the process of getting 2.31 added before he got sucked up by RL and lack of an internet connection.

For the most part though atb works in HQ and sets up everything for you, handling all the mission rolls etc. I am working on getting atb to play nice with the new IO rating and rules but juggling so much atm has me a bit swamped so its slow going.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Netzilla on 01 July 2016, 12:47:31
Something to keep in mind is that Princess won't know how to use equipment introduced after about the FCCW era.  So, expect her to be even worse at handling more advanced units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Ice_Trey on 01 July 2016, 19:45:09
You're using an extremely old version of MHQ. Most of that equipment and those units have been implemented in later versions. Additionally, AtB has been incorporated into MHQ so most of those rules have been automated.
Had not heard that AtB has since been built into the MHQ program. That is a relief. I'll try duplicating my save files and see if it runs without major errors, first.

Have BA squads been stabilized/made to work yet? Supposedly they used to corrupt save files... so...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 July 2016, 20:32:29
Had not heard that AtB has since been built into the MHQ program. That is a relief. I'll try duplicating my save files and see if it runs without major errors, first.

Have BA squads been stabilized/made to work yet? Supposedly they used to corrupt save files... so...

If you are using MHQ's last stable there is nearly a 100% of errors in trying to move your Campaign to a new version. Many units, weapons etc have been updated. You might be better off just starting over.

The rules implemented in MHQ are from around version 2.17 of AtB, IIRC.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 02 July 2016, 10:02:23
The rules implemented in MHQ are from around version 2.17 of AtB, IIRC.

The first bersion of MHQ with AtB was based on AtB 2.29. The prisoner capture code, such as it is, was based on an older version (2.18, I think), since it was not in the 2.29 version. I've implemented some of the changes in 2.31 (fatigue, for example), and I've always used thenlatest set of rules when adding anyhing or fixing bugs. Infantry missions are the biggest part of 2.31 that remains unimplemented, but I would have to go through the two rule sets side-by-side to see what other differences there might be.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 02 July 2016, 10:39:41
Have BA squads been stabilized/made to work yet? Supposedly they used to corrupt save files... so...

These should have been resolved a couple of versions ago.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 02 July 2016, 13:13:11
The first bersion of MHQ with AtB was based on AtB 2.29. The prisoner capture code, such as it is, was based on an older version (2.18, I think), since it was not in the 2.29 version. I've implemented some of the changes in 2.31 (fatigue, for example), and I've always used thenlatest set of rules when adding anyhing or fixing bugs. Infantry missions are the biggest part of 2.31 that remains unimplemented, but I would have to go through the two rule sets side-by-side to see what other differences there might be.

Heh yeah... sorry... it was the Prisoner thing that stuck in my head.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 24 July 2016, 11:40:54
So, Campaign Operations has been out for a while now.  Has anyone figured out how to incorporate any of the stuff in there into out AtB campaigns?  I'm still going through it myself, but it seems to run on some very different assumptions that what we're doing.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 24 July 2016, 15:46:31
So, Campaign Operations has been out for a while now.  Has anyone figured out how to incorporate any of the stuff in there into out AtB campaigns?  I'm still going through it myself, but it seems to run on some very different assumptions that what we're doing.
Which stuff in particular? Contract generation is already pretty close, since Makinus changed it to the CO system back when it was IO Beta. I haven't looked at the changes between IO Beta and CO side-by-side, but it looks like unit reputation is better integrated, and it would be good to implement it as proper alternative to dragoon rating rather than the forced fit I put in.

I would also like to overhaul (or at least provide alternatives for) the way the opfor is generated, and CO provides a bit more guidance in putting together coherent units. I still have a lot of background work to do to make that happen, but I've been working diligently on it.

There have also been several great suggestions made in this thread because I've been wanting to hold off until after thnstable release, but it's fairly clear that an unintended consequence of incorporating AtB into MHQ is that it has hindered further development of the system. It appears to me that in order to continue the growth and improvement of AtB I'm going to have to implement proposals in a series of unofficial playtesting releases. I probably won't be able to get to it for at least another month as my children are out of school for the summer and I have another significant feature I've been working on dilligently and want to get finished.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 July 2016, 18:32:09
Your a little behind neo, I already fixed AtB for the CO reputation. I would have to look but it is either complete or partial as I haven't delved deeply into the AtB unit rating just the base CO rep rating for contracts.

School starts for us on the 8th of August. My poor poor kids... 1st and 4th grade  }:) >:D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 24 July 2016, 22:56:45
Your a little behind neo, I already fixed AtB for the CO reputation. I would have to look but it is either complete or partial as I haven't delved deeply into the AtB unit rating just the base CO rep rating for contracts.
You came up with a better way to map the reputation onto the dragoon rating for contract payments. I'm hardly behind, since I approved pulling that update in a chat exchange with Hammer as he was getting ready to build a release. I put a note in that PR to take responsibility for it. I was actually referring to the chart on CO, p. 42 that gives contract clause roll modifiers for the unit's reputation. The official system gives one or more bonuses (A-C) or a penalty (F) to random clauses based on dragoon rating.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 25 July 2016, 01:26:30
err... shoddy memory.. ima go crawl back under a rock then.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 25 July 2016, 11:40:38
Oh, nothing in particular.  I was just assuming there would be a lot there for us to plunder, as it were.  But you're right, the contract stuff hasn't changed much since the beta.  I was really hoping for some more concrete guidance on what exactly Operations Tempo means - how many fights we should be having per week, or w/e.  Stuff like that.

Very much appreciate the work you all have been doing!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 25 July 2016, 16:25:00
The operations tempo is already accounted for in thenpayment multiplier for contract type. One thing that CO adds is an additional bonus for high risk or covert operations. The rule of thumb given in the text is that high risk is any operation in which the enemy BV is at least twice that of the player. Since AtB doesn't have a fixed enemy force, the hih-risk modifier doesn't really apply. At some point in the (hopefully near) future you will have the option of having the opposing forces set at the beginning of the contract, and it would then become a meaningful option. I don't see covert operations fitting into AtB, but with the more sophisticated victory conditions Ajkosch has been working on, that might become a real possibility.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: daskindt on 30 July 2016, 12:50:38
Link to the 2.31 AtB rules here:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/megamek-games/campaign-rules-against-the-bot-thread-4/?action=dlattach;attach=29623

The link gives me a 404 error.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 30 July 2016, 12:57:42
scjazz has a good link in his sig.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 30 July 2016, 13:37:28
My comment... look at my sig :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: daskindt on 30 July 2016, 14:18:57
scjazz has a good link in his sig.

Coolio. I think I've seen that then. Wanted to be sure I had the right info.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: daskindt on 30 July 2016, 14:22:24
Can I GM edit the starting world? If I want to focus on a particular area of space?

Can I GM edit the date? Say I begin the campaign setting in 3025, then decide I want to start a few years earlier. Can I edit that choice or do I have to start a new campaign?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 30 July 2016, 14:40:16
Yes you can edit the world you are on at anytime with the GM mode.  Go to your interstellar map and right click your desired world and GM move to this planet or however it is worded.

In the campaign options the first tab allows you to change the date at any time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Crl1981 on 12 August 2016, 23:34:02
I recently downloaded the most recent version of MegaMekHQ version 40 I think, where can I download Against the Bot?  I can't seem to find it anywhere, can anyone provide a link?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 12 August 2016, 23:36:56
MekHQ has AtB not MegaMek. https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/releases
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 17 August 2016, 17:03:25
I've created a long-overdue AtB preset for MHQ. If anyone wants to double-check it before I add it, I would appreciate it. Unzip the file into the mmconf/mhqPresets folder and try it out.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eugee on 19 August 2016, 10:49:11
Will anyone be updating AtB when the moratorium on Campaign Operations passes by?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 19 August 2016, 11:44:12
Will anyone be updating AtB when the moratorium on Campaign Operations passes by?
Some of it already is, based on the beta releases that have been out for over a year. If there is anything in particular you would like to see, feel free to make suggestions or requests.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eugee on 19 August 2016, 13:34:51
I'm still reading CO at the moment, so I'm not the point that I can point out anything directly yet--we did start a new campaign using the CO force generation though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: kuttsinister7 on 20 August 2016, 14:15:11
What is MekHQ and how does it work? Is it like Alpha Strike or Battleforce?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Obvious on 20 August 2016, 16:00:12
MekHQ is for managing a campaign.

Full description: http://megamek.info/mekhq
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 20 August 2016, 17:53:15
What is MekHQ and how does it work? Is it like Alpha Strike or Battleforce?

Its designed to work with BattleTech TT rules not Alpha Strike.  One day we would love to do a MegaStrike but we need a lot more experienced Java coders to make that happen.

MekHQ is for managing a campaign.

Full description: http://megamek.info/mekhq

As Obvious mentioned that links gives a good snapshot of what MHQ is.  Another way to see some it is on YouTube her:

Let's Megamek Season 0 (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLbDnCvS8khy17pg2-iroT80Y4zIRe90W)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Vampire_Seraphin on 23 August 2016, 22:53:15
Would be nice if the AtB code had an option to randomly generate init bonuses and advanced pilot skills for the opfor units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kieri Rochon on 26 August 2016, 15:24:05
Hello all,

I am in a Pirate Hunting contract and every time I take prisoners, it adds the entire Opfor roster to my unit (even the ones that escaped).  I then have to go through my Financial page, line by line, and manually delete all of those transactions.  Did I miss a setting or something?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 26 August 2016, 15:30:27
Yep, the newest release. That has been fixed for awhile.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 07 September 2016, 10:34:56
Took a contract on (FWL) Alula Australis and should have bought double the armor and ammo before taking this (28 days from jump point so, I set the min delivery time to whatever the planets travel time is from the jump point)....this is going to be tough watch me roll a comstar interdiction or something ****** like that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 07 September 2016, 23:30:39
How do you get deliveries while on a mission? I realize you can turn that on off but I thought for realism sake it was to be off? Is there another way?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 07 September 2016, 23:56:12
I would imagine it would depend on the mission type.  A garrison or planetary whatever would be easier to get parts than, say, a guerrilla warfare, or recon raid would be. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 08 September 2016, 09:27:08
You can always order and receive parts while on any mission as long as you have a high enough skilled admin to keep your part availability above 0 if using the AtB rules.  Or else that would really suck lol.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 08 September 2016, 09:47:18
Scjazz has these rules for download in his signature

(http://i.imgur.com/iLRXvkv.png)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 08 September 2016, 13:21:29
Two questions:

First, in an ATB campaign (3025 era) should I expand my company with infantry? I can see vees maybe being useful, but I'm less sure about infantry.

Second, I've had group members die, but they still need to be paid off in shares? And even after I managed to remove one from the rolls, the info window keeps popping up anyway? Is this a bug?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 08 September 2016, 14:44:42
1. Is a matter of opinion, I hate infantry and find them worthless in BT even vehicles, ASF yes are usefull but, were free to design our force however we want.

2. Inside campaign options under the AtB tab you can check to use or not to use the shares system and also whether to do retirement rolls after contracts, can all be customized to whatever makes sense to you.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 08 September 2016, 16:22:33
I, on the other hand like infantry.  If I could code, I would set up a custom optional atb setting where you could have two to three times the encounters(already in system) but where said encounters would likely be 50% or 75% chance of infantry units, with or without other types of support. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 08 September 2016, 20:26:41
Scjazz has these rules for download in his signature

(http://i.imgur.com/iLRXvkv.png)

I have those fules, just thought this particular item was already implemented in game
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 08 September 2016, 21:05:24
They are in a sense. I forget what neo did exactly to get that in. I don't think it follows 100% with the spreadsheet though it has been so long since it was discussed I'm not 100% sure on how it works anymore. So whenever neoancient can break away from RL for a spell maybe he can explain it again or link to the post that does.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 08 September 2016, 22:57:15
Trying to cover every part in exact conformity to the spreadsheet would have been:
1. A monumental task.
2. Full of errors, just from the amount of work it would take and the statistical near-impossibility of getting it perfect.
3. Fragile, in the sense that any changes in the way either MM or MHQ handle parts could break the parts availability system.

Instead I did some work based on general categories of parts which result in something that I would estimate is in at least 95% conformity, and can apply the general system to parts that aren't listed in the AtB rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 09 September 2016, 07:04:09
2. Inside campaign options under the AtB tab you can check to use or not to use the shares system and also whether to do retirement rolls after contracts, can all be customized to whatever makes sense to you.

But with the shares system, do I still have to pay dead people?
I don't mind paying people who buy out, or quit - but paying people who are dead seems confusing to me. ???
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 09 September 2016, 07:58:27
But with the shares system, do I still have to pay dead people?
I don't mind paying people who buy out, or quit - but paying people who are dead seems confusing to me. ???

We pay the families of our troops who die in battle. Why not theirs? I believe that is what the system is doing.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 09 September 2016, 09:15:51
Campaign system tab starting at line 325 explains the shares system.  I dont like shares and I dont use it.  I only pay out to my personnel when they successfully reenlist then they get a bonus like what is done in the real world military.  Not part of the program and have to do it myself but oh well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Colonel Sanders Lite on 09 September 2016, 10:04:44
But with the shares system, do I still have to pay dead people?
I don't mind paying people who buy out, or quit - but paying people who are dead seems confusing to me. ???

IRL:

In share based ventures, shares are inheritable by next of kin.  A share is literally ownership in the company or some specific part of that company (like all profits due to an expedition) and depriving a next of kin of their share is fraud and can lead to legal action.  A share is valid until the company buys that share out or the company goes defunct in some way.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 09 September 2016, 10:48:03
See, detail like that we never covered by books or games, so I got a little wierded out by that one. Cheers.

E: New question - I've got a ton of prisoners. And the collection keeps growing.
Should I just start an actual prisoner collection ('I've got one from this world, one from that one, one from over there, but I haven't gotten one from there yet...' *invades*), or just start freeing these mooks?

I've managed to recruit one (surprisingly good mechwarrior), but the rest of them are firmly choosing to remain prisoner.
It's cluttering up my personnel listings. Is there something like a repatriation/ransoming system (it gets mentioned in the lore a bunch, so...?) Or is it a case of I'm stuck with either keeping them or freeing them? Or is there some kind of option for me to recruit them via negotiation or something? (Also - if I somehow survive the next 49 years, given the propensity for the RNG to keep hitting my ammo, do I get bondsmen?).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 09 September 2016, 12:01:39
You can just delete them from the roster. You will get Bondsmen fighting the Clans.

The real reason for Prisoner Capture is to allow an extra way to get personnel via the Defection roll, some extra cash on the side, and some tasks for your Doctors. After that they serve no purpose. Do whatever you want with them. This is left intentionally vague and you can RP any solution you like.

Generally speaking, I remove all prisoners at the end of a contract and I kind of keep score with them.

Still the answer is... delete them when they get annoying.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 09 September 2016, 13:09:13
I guess I'll  'free' them and rp wise they're  passed on to my employers to deal with. Except for the ones that sign up i guess.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 09 September 2016, 13:21:32
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=42191.0 What do I do with these prisoners.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 09 September 2016, 15:31:47
Nifty thanks. I've got 3 mia and it would be nice to get them back
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 10 September 2016, 01:14:11
Campaign system tab starting at line 325 explains the shares system.  I dont like shares and I dont use it.  I only pay out to my personnel when they successfully reenlist then they get a bonus like what is done in the real world military.  Not part of the program and have to do it myself but oh well.

Not many folks get reenlistment bonuses in the military. In fact, the vast majority do not. Critical positions do (some, not all). Like Mechwarriors, perhaps.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 10 September 2016, 03:25:37
Okay, so I maybe found a bug?
I tried customising my banshee, but realised there was a better way, so I cancelled the customisation after having started it.
However, it now prevents the meklab from coming up at all when I click the "customise mek in meklab" option, so I can't customise it anymore.
Is there a fix or workaround for this?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 10 September 2016, 09:07:36
I was talking about in the real world military (was USMC 1/9) a majority if not all MOS's offered reenlistment bonuses.  Which is how I conduct my HQ campaign, just saying.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 10 September 2016, 09:44:11
Oh I know what you meant. It's just not that way anymore. During the height of the war it was more prevalent, but that is long past. I got a bonus a couple times but not these days.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 10 September 2016, 10:14:55
Okay, so I maybe found a bug?
I tried customising my banshee, but realised there was a better way, so I cancelled the customisation after having started it.
However, it now prevents the meklab from coming up at all when I click the "customise mek in meklab" option, so I can't customise it anymore.
Is there a fix or workaround for this?

Revert to a previous save is probably the easiest. Deleting the Banshee itself and then GM adding a new one will probably work.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 10 September 2016, 10:21:46
I'm  a bit unsure of doing that just yet as it's  missing an arm and a ppc. Maybe once i get or salvage the parts to fix it i guess.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 10 September 2016, 10:38:22
yep.  I have found that you can only customize a unit if it is whole. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 10 September 2016, 11:08:53
I'm  able to customise broken units - I'm  currently customising my one-legged  lancelot. I just can't  customise a unit where I've  cancelled a customisation immediately after having given the order to customise it. But to play fair I'll  wait until I've  completely  repaired my banshee before i gm fix the problem. I'm  playing this tun as pseudo ironman.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 10 September 2016, 14:42:46
Oh I know what you meant. It's just not that way anymore. During the height of the war it was more prevalent, but that is long past. I got a bonus a couple times but not these days.

Re-enlistment bonus is the bonus the USMC pays out when you chose to serve for another four years.  It is still that way today.  Not a bonus to pay while your serving, only when you decide to lengthen your contract for another four years.

http://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/Messages-Display/Article/897238/mcbul-7220-fiscal-year-2016-fy16-selective-reenlistment-bonussrb-program-and-fy/
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 10 September 2016, 20:35:50
Might not apply to other branches though BW.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mighty midget on 11 September 2016, 07:54:29
Might not apply to other branches though BW.

The US Navy does the same, based upon your rating (what other branches call MOS) your re-enlistment bonus changes.  An example of this is that personnel that operate the nuclear power plants generally get a larger re-enlistment multiplier than cooks.  I'm relatively certain that similar things happen in the other US military branches but I don't know about other countries.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 11 September 2016, 12:39:03
Yeah in the US military all branches offer re-enlistment bonuses, maybe not for every MOS (job) but, its a retention program to give people incentive to either stay in or lateral move in a field that the military considers a priority at that time.  But I know this is off subject never mind.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 11 September 2016, 16:30:16
I've been in the USAF for 18 years. That's what I'm saying; it depends on your MOS/career field, and at this point most do NOT pay a bonus anymore. Critical career fields (EOD, pilots, Spec Forces, Nuclear, and other critically/low-manned fields) offer bonuses, and that applies to all branches. It's all about timing. Height of the war it was more common/prevalent across all branches. Now it's less common, particularly in the Army, as they are trying to pare down to post-WW2 manning levels. I'm not just making crap up ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 12 September 2016, 01:42:50
I've been busy over the past few months putting the finishing touches on a random unit generation system that gives a lot more control over the types of units generated than the standard RAT. This is not an announcement of that, but I state this as the background for what follows:

In preparation for the new option I've been reworking the way MHQ handles the RATs to make it more efficient and allow some of the benefits of my new system. In the process I had the idea of changing the way the RAT metadata (what MHQ uses to figure out which one to use) is stored. The new format has several advantages:

* More efficient: MHQ will only load data for the ones it is configured to use.
* Easier to maintain
* Easier to customize
* Provides additional options for custom RATs (such as the ability to have mixed unit types).

The only downside I can see is that some people are working with custom RATs and will have to redo the work required to make them available in MHQ. If anyone has put enough work into it that changing the format would be a great inconvenience, I can provide some automated conversion.

I have attached the file for Xotl's RATs using my proposed new format. Feedback and suggestions are welcome.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: SirMegaV on 15 September 2016, 07:43:08
Hi Neoancient, can you post the auto RAT conversion? I have quite a few of them that require conversion to your new format.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 15 September 2016, 08:02:08
Sounds very cool, thanks neo!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 17 September 2016, 18:43:12
The permanent injuries really pile up when the infantry gets hit.

Just had to transfer 8 soldiers to admin duties; 5 right arms and 3 left legs amputated!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 17 September 2016, 23:02:42
The permanent injuries really pile up when the infantry gets hit.

Just had to transfer 8 soldiers to admin duties; 5 right arms and 3 left legs amputated!

Yes, combat really is a hurtful, deadly thing. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 18 September 2016, 06:13:16
Strange problem.

My saved game corrupted as some point over a few saves.  It seems to be something to do with the Hanger, as the graphical refresh hangs and "advance day" adds events inline instead of clearing the previous day.

Old (working) save and latest (corrupt) save attached.

Reloading the old save seems to fix the problem.  Between the two versions I took a lot of casualties and totally destroyed mechs, as well as added "Administration" to 90% of my combat personnel.

The save file is now over 4MB, so I presume that is also normal for a long game.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 18 September 2016, 10:43:59
That was either fixed(if it had to do with C3 or the dates for engines) in the latest version of HQ or there is a work around if the problem is java9 https://github.com/MegaMek/megamek/wiki/Known-Issues-and-Workarounds.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 19 September 2016, 08:58:59
Tried the workaround ( megamek.l4j.ini file in my version ) and didn't seem to make a difference.

I've gone through all my saves and narrowed it down to the resolution of the battle on the 20th.  All saves prior to that battle are fine; everything after has a corrupted Hanger tab.

I tried turning off "parts by year", since the OpFor seems to be using 3039 RATs currently, but no change there.  As I'm on exchange, the only changes to the hanger are my own casualties.

I'll just revert and delete that particular battle before continuing, as it seems particular to that save point onwards.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 20 September 2016, 11:39:58
Hi Neoancient, can you post the auto RAT conversion? I have quite a few of them that require conversion to your new format.
It's not some independent utility I can share. I set aside an interim version of MHQ that does the conversion when it loads up. If you send me your data/universe/ratinfo.xml I can do the conversion and send it back in the new format, which is used in the latest release.

If your custom tables fill in areas that were missing in the previous selections, you might try out the generated RAT option in the latest release. It covers all eras from 2398-3150, and handles in-between years in a way that the older system couldn't.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 20 September 2016, 13:53:10
Strange problem.

My saved game corrupted as some point over a few saves.  It seems to be something to do with the Hanger, as the graphical refresh hangs and "advance day" adds events inline instead of clearing the previous day.

Old (working) save and latest (corrupt) save attached.

Reloading the old save seems to fix the problem.  Between the two versions I took a lot of casualties and totally destroyed mechs, as well as added "Administration" to 90% of my combat personnel.

The save file is now over 4MB, so I presume that is also normal for a long game.
It is a bug associated with an engine part. I did not look into it in detail because I found that it works in the latest version. The bug was likely fixed by Ajkosch while he was reworking repair code.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 22 September 2016, 09:20:58
New MekHQ and updating Java appears to have fixed it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Downslide on 22 September 2016, 15:46:58
Yes, combat really is a hurtful, deadly thing. 

Especially for infantry when they're fighting against big, stompy robots.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 22 September 2016, 17:59:06
If I was an infantryman I sure as hell wouldn't want to be put up against mechs, "Screw this, this is battletech what are you doing commander?"
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 29 September 2016, 12:00:29
Feeling a bit dense as I can't get the game to cooperate.

How do you give Field Guns to an infantry unit?  Tried buying, tried modifying in Mechlab, tried modifying on game launch but just can't seem to find it.

I even created a new game and loaded multiple types of infantry to check.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 29 September 2016, 12:48:51
So MML can't build a field gun unit.

They have to be created by hand or by some other obsolete Unit Editor.

They do exist and can be used in MM. However, their tech level is set to Advanced and the Year to 3050.

Please find attached the field gun units with the Year set to 2750.

Have a nice day :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 29 September 2016, 13:06:39
So MML can't build a field gun unit.

They have to be created by hand or by some other obsolete Unit Editor.

They do exist and can be used in MM. However, their tech level is set to Advanced and the Year to 3050.

Please find attached the field gun units with the Year set to 2750.

Have a nice day :)
hmmm...I hadn't noticed that I'll get those dates in MM changed.  I know they made a canon unit available in 2500
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 29 September 2016, 15:13:12
Make sure the field guns don't have tech with a late intro. There are LAC5 field guns don't forget.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 29 September 2016, 15:33:55
Make sure the field guns don't have tech with a late intro. There are LAC5 field guns don't forget.

Not my first rodeo.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 29 September 2016, 20:33:02
Thanks.

Had to change the allowed units for the campaign to get them to come up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 30 September 2016, 15:32:50
Thanks.

Had to change the allowed units for the campaign to get them to come up.

Yeah regardless of the year thing they are still Advanced Tech.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 30 September 2016, 17:17:51
OK so... it is time for Formal Introductions.

My name is scJazz, I have been given the honor to continue to add to the AtB Rules. Makinus has handed over the reigns and Neoancient is on board. I did not want to just "jump in". However, it has been generally known for a few months now over the half dozen other Forums, Chats, and Channels.

One of the top items in my to do, is balancing IS vs Clan combat. To do it though, I need IS Forces (CPNX and Customs) that I can use to test IS vs Clan balance.

If you have a Campaign fighting IS vs Clan, please send me the CPNX, along with any customs I might need to load it.

Thank you!

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Mukaikubo on 01 October 2016, 13:36:04
Yay, it's public! Looking forward to seeing what you do with the rules, and like I said in the PM a while back if you ever want to chat with someone else who has kicked these rules around a lot I will cheerfully jabber.

Don't have any active forces, but what I do have is some of the old math I did when I was trying to figure out just how unbalanced things were. I actually calculated out roughly what BV a player light, medium, heavy, and assault lance could expect to face on average against a clan force rolled per the ATB rules, all 3/4 pilots, and drawn from Xotl's 3050 Clan Wolf RAT. It came out in the order of:

Light lance: ~15-16k BV
Medium lance: ~20-21k BV
Heavy lance: ~27-28k BV
Assault lance: ~35-36k BV

Made a lot of assumptions to get there back in the day- most of which I remember- but having that as an initial point may save you some time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 01 October 2016, 14:06:25
Yay, it's public! Looking forward to seeing what you do with the rules, and like I said in the PM a while back if you ever want to chat with someone else who has kicked these rules around a lot I will cheerfully jabber.

Hi,

If you join the MegaMek Slack (https://megamek-public.slack.com/) we have dedicated channel for AtB for that purpose.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 October 2016, 14:59:15
Hi,

If you join the MegaMek Slack (https://megamek-public.slack.com/) we have dedicated channel for AtB for that purpose.

And I would like you to join!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 October 2016, 16:44:52
Yay, it's public! Looking forward to seeing what you do with the rules, and like I said in the PM a while back if you ever want to chat with someone else who has kicked these rules around a lot I will cheerfully jabber.

Don't have any active forces, but what I do have is some of the old math I did when I was trying to figure out just how unbalanced things were. I actually calculated out roughly what BV a player light, medium, heavy, and assault lance could expect to face on average against a clan force rolled per the ATB rules, all 3/4 pilots, and drawn from Xotl's 3050 Clan Wolf RAT. It came out in the order of:

Light lance: ~15-16k BV
Medium lance: ~20-21k BV
Heavy lance: ~27-28k BV
Assault lance: ~35-36k BV

Made a lot of assumptions to get there back in the day- most of which I remember- but having that as an initial point may save you some time.

Get on the Slack so we can talk about Large Force Rules!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 01 October 2016, 17:32:10
OK so... it is time for Formal Introductions.

My name is scJazz, I have been given the honor to continue to add to the AtB Rules. Makinus has handed over the reigns and Neoancient is on board. I did not want to just "jump in". However, it has been generally known for a few months now over the half dozen other Forums, Chats, and Channels.

One of the top items in my to do, is balancing IS vs Clan combat. To do it though, I need IS Forces (CPNX and Customs) that I can use to test IS vs Clan balance.

If you have a Campaign fighting IS vs Clan, please send me the CPNX, along with any customs I might need to load it.

Thank you!

This is the second request.

The number one issue is IS vs Clan balance. I want to fix it!

I can not do it without examples of IS forces (CPNX) vs Clans as played in AtB. What are your  problems with IS vs Clan scenarios? Please send info!

Let me know!
scJazz
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: chichengunga on 12 October 2016, 15:16:09
Whats the benefit of buying your own jump and dropships? I have my entire unit and cargo contained by my own ships but still am charged almost a million c bills per jump.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 12 October 2016, 16:43:51
Whats the benefit of buying your own jump and dropships? I have my entire unit and cargo contained by my own ships but still am charged almost a million c bills per jump.

They increase your Unit Rating which in turn increases your contract pay. Depending on the transport clause of your contract you can be reimbursed for using your own transport. 50% equals a one way trip from your current location to your contract location.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 21 February 2017, 06:52:23
Hi,

If you join the MegaMek Slack (https://megamek-public.slack.com/) we have dedicated channel for AtB for that purpose.

Can I get an invite on slack too?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 21 February 2017, 07:48:59
Have you registered on slack yet?

As for JS/DS, having a JS lowers how much you have to pay out for travel in addition to the increase in unit rating. Same goes for DS, though renting dropships is far more expensive. Not sure how accurate the DS costs are when rentings but most contracts should reimburse part of all of that amount.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 21 February 2017, 14:09:45
Can I get an invite on slack too?

You should just be able to send an email request.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 22 February 2017, 04:58:23
You should just be able to send an email request.

There is no such option. All i get is

"Don't have an account on this team yet?
Contact the team administrator for an invitation"

But I can't do this through slack.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: arlith on 22 February 2017, 09:20:55
Try this URL for joining the MegaMek-Public slack: http://megamek.org:3000/.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 28 February 2017, 10:09:02
Managed to join slack using the last link, thanks. I will be lurking there.

Couple of Atb questions after 2 contracts.

1. Do you people go to hiring halls after completing a mission, or just get a contract from the current planet you finished your previous one? It seems a waste of money travelling to Galatea or wherever...
2. Does mek parts quality make any difference (besides getting damaged if their quality falls way down)?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 28 February 2017, 20:56:25
1. I tend to set course and begin traveling towards a hiring hall after each contract. You have a better chance of finding a contract at a hiring hall. Though if in rout I see a contract I like, I will divert and head straight for the new contract planet. The contract's begin and end dates should automatically adjust if you do not reach the planet by the begin date due to things like, a jump drive still charging after accepting the new contract causing you to be slightly late in reaching the planet.

2. As far as I know just what you stated, and I believe the overall mech quality rating has to do with the sum of all the parts quality then averaged out. Or something like that.
Edit: If I recall correctly, quality also determines the difficulty in repairing that item if it becomes damaged.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pfarland on 01 March 2017, 10:45:47
1.)  Pretty much like Stormforge unless I'm WAY out in the boonies (because of a sweet contract) and then I'll use a mediocre contract with good transport terms to get closer.

2.)  Again agreeing with Stormforge here.  Also there is a price modifier (only when selling as you only ever buy D quality) with higher/lower quality parts/units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 02 March 2017, 13:15:09
I have found out that if you dont set your officer's rank correctly you are messing up the shares system, since it's officer rank gives +1 shares.

I used to have Commanding General for my commander, and captain for each other officer. My commander ended having 12 shares (shares due to mech excluded) and officers had 4 shares on average. I don't know how this would affect my campaign.

How do you set your officer ranks? Commander is Rank 2 and the other officers are just Rank 1?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 02 March 2017, 23:17:04
 Took ten minutes to create a force and find a fight with the Clans.................my light lance (2 Panther, 2 Jenner) versus 2 Clan Heavy Stars and a Elemental Star.

 The serious lopsided nature is my main issue with IS vs Clan. Now I could tolerate 1 Clan Star versus mine. But facing basically a Nova or Trinary with a lance is a bit much.

 Now of I could figure out how to post a cnpx file I will post it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 03 March 2017, 04:59:34
You need to game your lance weight in order to be just barely below each category.
Light is 0 - 130 tons
Medium is 135 - 200

So, if you are light, try to stay near 125.
If you are medium, try to stay near 195..
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 03 March 2017, 09:35:50
Wow.  I finally ran another fresh unit after about a year of not actually playing AtB...something DOES need to be done about the number of units the bot gets, at least at the lower difficulty levels.  It still makes stupid moves often enough, but it's smart enough that it does NOT need all the units it gets.  "Green" difficulty is waaaayyy too hard for a truly green player.  The units it's generating now should be worth about a "Veteran" difficulty - and that's without doubling vehicles!

I know, some of us are tactical and strategical geniuses who don't have a problem with the opposition generated.  I'm also well aware of the "pay attention to the task objectives" guideline and that we can just remove some forces manually (which makes me feel like a cheater).  But seriously, a 3-unit Light lance faces almost an entire company plus a reinforcement lance in a Probe attack?  That's just beyond the pale.

I'd recommend cutting the bot's forces at least by a quarter, if not half, for Green difficulty as a baseline.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Padraig Tseng on 03 March 2017, 11:52:16
I have found out that if you dont set your officer's rank correctly you are messing up the shares system, since it's officer rank gives +1 shares.

I used to have Commanding General for my commander, and captain for each other officer. My commander ended having 12 shares (shares due to mech excluded) and officers had 4 shares on average. I don't know how this would affect my campaign.

How do you set your officer ranks? Commander is Rank 2 and the other officers are just Rank 1?

Depends on the size of the unit....A starting company would have a Captain in command and 3 LT's as XO and Lance Commanders.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 03 March 2017, 18:01:12
*STUFF*

Nice to see you back Snimm!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 23 March 2017, 13:12:10
This has probably been talked about before at some point, but when you get the Big Battles, like Convoy Attack, it says the OpFor is 8 Mechs.  What weight should they be?  Just roll based on the general Inner Sphere weight tables for each Mech?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 24 March 2017, 03:17:57
This has probably been talked about before at some point, but when you get the Big Battles, like Convoy Attack, it says the OpFor is 8 Mechs.  What weight should they be?  Just roll based on the general Inner Sphere weight tables for each Mech?


I would roll on the AtB weight tables based on the heaviest lance you deploy. Still under 8 mechs roll again for the second heaviest lance you are deploying until you reach 8. Not sure how MekHQ handles this.

Wow.  I finally ran another fresh unit after about a year of not actually playing AtB...something DOES need to be done about the number of units the bot gets, at least at the lower difficulty levels.  It still makes stupid moves often enough, but it's smart enough that it does NOT need all the units it gets.  "Green" difficulty is waaaayyy too hard for a truly green player.  The units it's generating now should be worth about a "Veteran" difficulty - and that's without doubling vehicles!

I know, some of us are tactical and strategical geniuses who don't have a problem with the opposition generated.  I'm also well aware of the "pay attention to the task objectives" guideline and that we can just remove some forces manually (which makes me feel like a cheater).  But seriously, a 3-unit Light lance faces almost an entire company plus a reinforcement lance in a Probe attack?  That's just beyond the pale.

I'd recommend cutting the bot's forces at least by a quarter, if not half, for Green difficulty as a baseline.

Could try running with the attached atbconfig.xml. Find the battles a bit more bearable as it is weighted towards fighting a lance of the same weight with steadily decreasing chances of rolling increasingly heavier Opfor. The old .xml in MekHQ/data/universe needs to be moved somewhere safe and replaced with the below.

Comparison showing old and new tables. Still tweaking them a bit. Tested with IS 4 Mech Lances.

Atb Standard
Code: [Select]
Lance Weight

<botForce org="IS,CLAN,CS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="9">M</entry>
<entry weight="7">LL</entry>
<entry weight="4">H</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="5">LL</entry>
<entry weight="5">H</entry>
<entry weight="10">ML</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="3">LLL</entry>
<entry weight="4">MM</entry>
<entry weight="2">A</entry>
<entry weight="3">HL</entry>
<entry weight="4">MLL</entry>
<entry weight="4">HM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="4">MML</entry>
<entry weight="3">HLL</entry>
<entry weight="2">HH</entry>
<entry weight="2">AL</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMM</entry>
<entry weight="3">HML</entry>
<entry weight="2">AM</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botForce>

Lance Composition

<botLance org="IS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="3">LLLL</entry>
<entry weight="2">LLLM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="1">LLMM</entry>
<entry weight="2">LMMM</entry>
<entry weight="2">MMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMH</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="1">MMHH</entry>
<entry weight="2">MHHH</entry>
<entry weight="2">HHHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">HHHA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="2">HHAA</entry>
<entry weight="3">HAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">AAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>

<botLance org="CLAN">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry>LLLLL</entry>
<entry>LLLLM</entry>
<entry>LLLMM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="1">LLMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="2">MMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMHH</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="1">MMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="2">MHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="2">HHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">HHHHA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="1">MHHAA</entry>
<entry weight="2">HHHAAA</entry>
<entry weight="2">HHAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">AAAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>

<botLance org="CS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="1">LLLLLL</entry>
<entry weight="2">LLLLLM</entry>
<entry weight="2">LLLLMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLMMM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="1">LLLMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMMHH</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry>MMMHHH</entry>
<entry>MMHHHH</entry>
<entry>MHHHHH</entry>
<entry>HHHHHH</entry>
<entry>HHHHHA</entry>
<entry>HHHHAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="2">HHHAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">HHAAAA</entry>
<entry weight="2">HAAAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">AAAAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>

Mine
Code: [Select]
Lance Weight

<botForce org="IS,CLAN,CS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="12">L</entry>
<entry weight="8">M</entry>
<entry weight="4">LL</entry>
<entry weight="1">H</entry>
<entry weight="1">ML</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="12">M</entry>
<entry weight="8">LL</entry>
<entry weight="8">H</entry>
<entry weight="4">ML</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLL</entry>
<entry weight="4">A</entry>
<entry weight="2">HL</entry>
<entry weight="2">MM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="16">H</entry>
<entry weight="12">ML</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLL</entry>
<entry weight="12">A</entry>
<entry weight="8">HL</entry>
<entry weight="8">MM</entry>
<entry weight="2">MLL</entry>
<entry weight="4">AL</entry>
<entry weight="4">HM</entry>
<entry weight="1">HLL</entry>
<entry weight="1">MML</entry>
<entry weight="2">HH</entry>
<entry weight="2">AM</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="20">A</entry>
<entry weight="16">HL</entry>
<entry weight="16">MM</entry>
<entry weight="8">MLL</entry>
<entry weight="12">AL</entry>
<entry weight="12">HM</entry>
<entry weight="4">HLL</entry>
<entry weight="4">MML</entry>
<entry weight="8">HH</entry>
<entry weight="8">AM</entry>
<entry weight="2">HML</entry>
<entry weight="2">MMM</entry>
<entry weight="4">AH</entry>
<entry weight="1">AML</entry>
<entry weight="1">HHL</entry>
<entry weight="1">HMM</entry>
<entry weight="2">AA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botForce>

Lance Composition

<botLance org="IS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="10">LLLL</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLLM</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLH</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="10">LMMM</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMMM</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMMH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="10">MMHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">HHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">MHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">HHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="10">HHAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MAAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">HAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">AAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>

<botLance org="CLAN">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="10">LLLLL</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLLLM</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLLH</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="10">LLMMM</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLLMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLLA</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLMMH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMMA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLHA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="10">MMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="10">LMMHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLHHH</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLMHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMA</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMMHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="10">MHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="10">MMHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="10">LMHAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLAAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">HHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">MHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMAAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">HHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MHHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>

<botLance org="CS">
<weightedTable weightClass="L">
<entry weight="10">LLLLLL</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLLLLM</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLLMM</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLLLH</entry>

</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="M">
<entry weight="10">LLLMMM</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLLLMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLLLA</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLLMMH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLLHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLLMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLMMA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLLHA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="H">
<entry weight="10">MMMMMM</entry>
<entry weight="10">LMMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLMMHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLMMMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLHHH</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLLMHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLLAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMMMMH</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMMMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMMMA</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">LLMMHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLMAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMMHH</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMMA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMMHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLMHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMMAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLLHAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
<weightedTable weightClass="A">
<entry weight="10">MMMHHH</entry>
<entry weight="10">MMMMHA</entry>
<entry weight="10">LMHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="10">LMMHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMMMAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="10">LLMHAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LLLAAA</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">MMMHHA</entry>
<entry weight="1">MMMMAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="7">LMMHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLMAAA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MHHHHH</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">MMMHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LHHHHA</entry>
<entry weight="4">LMHHAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LMMAAA</entry>
<entry weight="1">LLHAAA</entry>
</weightedTable>
</botLance>
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 27 March 2017, 19:55:19
Have we ever had a discussion about the viability of gun emplacements within AtB?  I have a Base Attack against a pirates home base.  Is there any way to put gun emplacements in a game, or does MM not even support those yet?  I've noticed there are no gun emplacement units I can add from the Add A Unit button.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 27 March 2017, 23:10:27
AtB used to include gun emplacements in Base Attack missions. With the latest dev build, the RATs and unit files don't seem to match up in regards to turrets anymore. Instead of turrets, I find the defender will end up with 4-6 'Entry not found' units.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 28 March 2017, 00:35:59
Yeah, that's what happened to me.  I figured I could add the turrets manually, but I suspect there's no files for them.  I can select the Gun Emplacements category, but find no units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 28 March 2017, 02:44:05
You can manually add the turrets, I just did this last night in the stable.  You have to use the Add A COmbat Unit button - they aren't in any of the RATs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 28 March 2017, 11:49:11
Only have years 2500-3025 done so far. (works with HQ/MM 0.42.0)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 31 March 2017, 16:08:11
Nice RAT!  So, I just got a Mule from a Base Attack.  My group is still very small - we pretty much don't hire anyone.  We train up from within, ya know?  Can Dropships be sold on the markets like Mechs, or only through the in-game menu?

I figure I either sell it, or install a bunch of Mech bays for the bonus to my Merc rating.  What do y'all end up doing with captured Dropships?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 31 March 2017, 17:05:26
 Sort of depends on what I capture and can support. I captured a Union C once and sold it instead of keeping it, one because it was Clan Tech and in 3052 was too hard to keep running, two I was offered a sizable amount for it. Enough to fully upgrade my Mech Battalion and buy a Jumpship.

 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 03 April 2017, 16:39:54
Wait...you can get a Dropship for a base attack?

Is that a houserule or is that actually in the AtB rules (and implemented in MekHQ)?

----
Also hello, my first post here, that just sounded so intriguing that I had to ask.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 03 April 2017, 18:47:39
 You have to edit the current battle generated to add it as loot for winning a battle. If I roll a big battle of the 2 pirate bands against my company or a base attack (as the attacker) mission versus pirates, I will always roll a dice, 1-3 I get a dropship as loot, 4-6 I get nothing like that. I usually don't do it against house missions but have done it against Clanners. Then as much as I want to select a Overlord C I resist and keep it a Broadsword or best case a Union C. Even though I really would like to capture a Sassasand for the BA carrying.

 If I roll a dropship, I then use the dropship list in Merc 3050 manual with no modifier to roll up the dropship I capture. Usually it is a Leopard or Union.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Sharkapult on 03 April 2017, 21:57:00
If you /kick the bot, open a new Megamek, and rejoin the game using the enemy's name you can then eject from the dropship and claim it as salvage too.

That's what I used to do to salvage a dropship before being able to set units as loot in MekHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 04 April 2017, 05:08:53
Can the AI use a dropship? Seeing how it fails with VTOLs I somehow doubt it. Or do they not try to take off if it is a landed ship?

Getting a dropship from pirates is a better idea than what I had in mind for my merry mercs until now.  O0

I know about the kicking and joining, I tried to use it to place turrets, but those were not attackable by my mercs then. And I placed the enemy lances in my last battle myself, so I wouldn't run into the target mech first.

Maybe the next mission will be against pirates. (It is for an AAR, so I curate more than I would otherwise.)

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 04 April 2017, 05:10:22
When I remember, I just have the dropship start with velocity and altitude zero.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 07 April 2017, 06:54:37
A little advice please, I'm running a campaign where I started from scratch, won some money/companions from Solaris7 and as such have a rag tag bunch of mercs. We've been scraping along for a good 5 years, loans and captured vees featuring heavily, sometimes having to field half repaired mechs etc.

Finally managed to get my feet under me and a sweet garrison contract, with some subcontracting going on, meaning I'm finally able to afford the odd Awesome etc. the only problem is, the contract was 2 years long, and I've already routed the enemy, within 4 months. If I finish the contract there, I stand to earn about £90m cbills which is quite frankly ridiculous, is it a bug to rout an enemy so quickly? What would you do to resolve this? I'm thinking maybe complete it and manually remove all of the extra funding I'll get for completion, save maybe a £10m job well done bonus or something.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 07 April 2017, 08:35:03
I'm on a 3 year Garrison, and I'm already on my 4th enemy!  Each time you rout an enemy, you get 1d6-3 months of peace before rolling the next one.  It's in the Morale rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 07 April 2017, 17:32:46
A little advice please, I'm running a campaign where I started from scratch, won some money/companions from Solaris7 and as such have a rag tag bunch of mercs. We've been scraping along for a good 5 years, loans and captured vees featuring heavily, sometimes having to field half repaired mechs etc.

Finally managed to get my feet under me and a sweet garrison contract, with some subcontracting going on, meaning I'm finally able to afford the odd Awesome etc. the only problem is, the contract was 2 years long, and I've already routed the enemy, within 4 months. If I finish the contract there, I stand to earn about £90m cbills which is quite frankly ridiculous, is it a bug to rout an enemy so quickly? What would you do to resolve this? I'm thinking maybe complete it and manually remove all of the extra funding I'll get for completion, save maybe a £10m job well done bonus or something.
As Shin Ji said, routs on Garrison contracts will reset to normal morale (and more opponents) in a few months. I'd just sit with it and enjoy the lack of battle damage until then. :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 April 2017, 05:40:20
Good time to refurbish things or modify Mechs to your liking.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 09 April 2017, 05:17:46


Finally managed to get my feet under me and a sweet garrison contract, with some subcontracting going on...

How do you handle subcontracting thought MekHQ?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 09 April 2017, 08:33:46
Every so often on the contracts screen there'd be a (subcontract) mission.

Thanks for the help guys!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 09 April 2017, 15:04:09
Subcontracts only appear while you're on either garrison or cadre type contracts, and only if your mercenary rating is high enough.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 10 April 2017, 08:55:38
Be aware that taking *too* many sub-contracts can be an issue with keeping enough units active.

I had one with with three sub-contracts running I took some heavy casualties and couldn't fill the unit roster for a while.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 18 April 2017, 10:12:59
One relatively minor change I'd like to see for the AtB campaigns in MekHQ would be to make it possible to reduce the experience point gains of administrators to something below 1 point per week, without making it zero.

The campaign really needs the option to alter the "Points per week" to something above zero but LESS than one. It currently allows only 0, 1, or values HIGHER than one.  This can probably be done relatively easily by altering the "X points per week" to "X points per Y weeks", with "Y" being selectable, or by allowing "X points per YYYYY", with "YYYYY" being either "week" or "month".  The administrators need some way of acquiring SOME experience beyond the generic "X points per Y months on a roll of Z or higher", which affects ALL of your troops, yet without getting 5-10 times as much experience as everyone else.

My current campaign: first contract for 9 months of Pirate Hunting.  I show up a couple of days before the end of the month, and on the first of the new month, the pirates drop down to Low morale before I've even had a chance for a battle.  No fights occur all month.  Next month, their morale plummets to Very Low, and the only battle is an Ambush scenario against a couple of Wasps, one with a totally incompetent pilot...which is a one-sided turkey shoot even for my green pilot in a Locust.  Three months into the campaign, the pirates rout, and I sit there for the rest of the contract with a total of one more random encounter, which turns out to be roughly the same sort of "clubbing baby seals" act as the first.  9 months, 2 minor scuffles, 4 kills between 2 pilots and none for the rest of the company, and my Administrators have gained something around 40 points of experience and gone up two levels.  Ridiculous.  If I had set the weekly gain to zero, they'd spend close to a decade to go up a level based on just the low semi-monthly chance for an experience point.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 18 April 2017, 11:28:14
The campaign really needs the option to alter the "Points per week" to something above zero but LESS than one. It currently allows only 0, 1, or values HIGHER than one.  This can probably be done relatively easily by altering the "X points per week" to "X points per Y weeks", with "Y" being selectable, or by allowing "X points per YYYYY", with "YYYYY" being either "week" or "month".  The administrators need some way of acquiring SOME experience beyond the generic "X points per Y months on a roll of Z or higher", which affects ALL of your troops, yet without getting 5-10 times as much experience as everyone else.

We already have that dude what version are you using???
(http://i.imgur.com/Osp4jmc.png)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 19 April 2017, 06:56:12
I am on my first ATB campaign.  Currently on my 3rd contract, an objective raid, and I have found that I am always outnumbered by the BOT OpFor. Is this the norm? I have a pending battle for my medium lance (1 heavy, 2 medium, 1 light) where its gonna be fighting against 3 lances worth of enemies (2 vehicles lances and 1 lance of light/medium mechs). I have set me campaign difficulty as Green.  Every single battle thus far has seen my forces being outnumbered.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 19 April 2017, 07:49:55
Yep, that's fairly normal.
It helps balance out the fact the the bot is fairly dumb.
Wait until you get a contact against Comstar or WoB, that's always interesting.

Try and keep your lances at the top end of the weight ranges 130/200/280/390
Terrain, lighting conditions and weather are your friend as well especially if you have a fully jump capable lance (that's just my experience, I'm sure others have a different way around it)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 19 April 2017, 07:57:14
It's very common to be outnumbered, yes.  This is to compensate for the AI's lack of intelligence, for lack of a better term.

Don't get me wrong, the bot has gotten MUCH smarter as it's been developed; it doesn't really need double the enemy vehicles to be competitive at this point.

However, pay very close attention to your objectives!  You never need to kill more than half of enemy forces in any given fight (except special missions or base battles) and often less than that.  Remember that the idea is to survive, not necessarily win.  But what can seem like a difficult fight might suddenly seem winnable when you realize you can isolate part of the opposition and kill it to win.

In terms of what constitutes killing "half," or "25%" or whatever, I usually use BV% because it makes for more varied outcomes and usually fewer destroyed units, adding to the challenge of maintaining/growing through salvage.  You can of course use unit count instead; for me, it got to be too easy to score a cheap win by just destroying a number of lighter vehicles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 19 April 2017, 08:31:00
By default, AtB bot forces will outnumber you. This can be adjusted somewhat in the settings by reducing the difficulty down to Green or Ultra-green (fewer bot units also means faster turns if you're playing on an older computer or less powerful tablet/laptop).


 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 19 April 2017, 10:38:38
Thanks everyone.
@JenniferinaMADI have been playing at Green based on the info I have found around various forums. I was not entirely sure about the being outnumbered bit.
@Snimm Yes, the bot seems a bit... focused in rushing to combat at times. I believed I will try to utilise the mission objectives more and if its kill related, will use BV% as recommended.
@Random It will be a while before I get to Comstar/WoB as my fav era are the SW. So, my campaign starts in 3028. I have been keeping to the upper end of the lance weights to maximise my deployment strength. I am slowly learning how to make use of jump jets, terrain and weather conditions. I recently fought a battle in gale conditions and while it troubled me a bit, it save my butt as the OpFor turned out to be missile heavy while I tend to run energy heavy.

A few more questions if all of you don't mind.
a) I have not captured any MW thus far but plenty of vehicle crews. I have set ejected MW to flee in MM settings. If this the reason why?
b) How do you end MM when objectives are reached? I am not sure where's the manual end game. As a result, its been 'kill them all' in all of my battles.
c) Are units only damaged from cascading engine failures or is there a setting whereby ammo explosions would cause damage to nearby units?
d) I have currently set kill XP to 1 per kill. Is that too much? Or would 2 or 3 per kill a more balance setting. I like to see my company grow in a gradual manner and not have a team of vets after only after a few years.
e) What is the purpose of transport and command admin?
f) I am currently playing with the stand 1:2:3 ratio. Is this a fair representation or should it be set to something more mech heavy?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 19 April 2017, 14:29:16
Quote
Yes, the bot seems a bit... focused in rushing to combat at times.
You can also edit the bots settings for things like aggressiveness, self-preservation, etc... I think these need to be changed in MekHQ before you start the battle, or otherwise in the MegaMek deployment screen when adding a bot manually. Could be worth experimenting with.

Quote
How do you end MM when objectives are reached? I am not sure where's the manual end game. As a result, its been 'kill them all' in all of my battles.
The simplest way is to type "/victory" into the message prompt at the bottom of the screen (and then type it again to confirm). This will automatically end the battle at the end of the current round. This provides a sort of "fade to black" feel that might or might not be to your liking. If you dig the whole SW-era symbolic combat, limit destruction sort of ethos, it works pretty well from a narrative standpoint.

I've heard other people will kick the bot, take over control and manually retreat with all the units. This gives you the player some extra chance at salvage and kills. I know that the bot also has an automatic "forced withdrawal" option, but I've only see it kick in on individual units, not an entire force. I'm not sure if there is a way to do that in MM as things stand now, but if not it might be an interesting feature request.

Quote
Are units only damaged from cascading engine failures or is there a setting whereby ammo explosions would cause damage to nearby units?
Game Options -> Advanced Combat -> TacOps Ammunition

Quote
I have currently set kill XP to 1 per kill. Is that too much? Or would 2 or 3 per kill a more balance setting. I like to see my company grow in a gradual manner and not have a team of vets after only after a few years.
In my experience, if you regularly fight hordes of tanks you will be leveling up at a fairly decent rate at one per kill, even if you have vehicle crews abandoning vehicles and it not counting as a kill for whoever crippled it. Getting Regular pilots up to Veteran doesn't take long, but your mileage may vary. A couple of years can actually fly by pretty fast in the game, depending on the kind of contracts you end up on.

Quote
What is the purpose of transport and command admin?
Increases the likelihood of getting better contract terms.

Quote
I am currently playing with the stand 1:2:3 ratio. Is this a fair representation or should it be set to something more mech heavy?
I think this is mostly personal preference; for what it's worth I like it, the large number of tanks to stomp makes Mechs and Mechwarriors feel "special," which scratches the fictional itch for me just right.

But I'm a firm believer that you should never feel bad about changing things to get the kind of experience that you want to create out of a wargame, though, so if it doesn't feel right to you, change it until it does.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 19 April 2017, 16:11:16
You will always end up capturing more vehicle crew than mechwarriors. Vehicles tend to be more numerous and have more than one crew each, so the odds are simply higher that any given prisoner won't be a mechwarrior.

AtB rolls randomly for each enemy to see if they're captured, and with vehicle crews often outnumbering mechwarriors 6-10 against 1, that's simply a stacked deck.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 19 April 2017, 16:36:57
To make the bot flee you could type "/kick 1" (and "/kick 2" if there are reinforcements) and then replace the bot with the game menu. There you'll be asked for the bot behaviour, and can set it to fleeing, just make sure they are going to the correct map edge by setting that as home.

If you train the negotioation skill with your admins you also get to reroll certain contract clauses (depending on which admins with negotioation you have, salvage can never be negotiated).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 20 April 2017, 02:29:48
Thanks everyone for your explanations and advice.  O0
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 20 April 2017, 05:39:42
Logistics admin is responsible for ordering parts, I always make sure they're the most experienced, as an inexperienced logistics person will be unable to order some parts til a contract ends sometimes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 20 April 2017, 05:56:25
Yeah, I found that out the hard way. I started with a green logistic person. Luckily, half way through my first contract, an elite logistics person appeared in the market.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 22 April 2017, 05:50:08
I have now completed three contracts, paid off my debts and decided to spend some time refitting my company and repairing some captured mechs. I decided to try and customise a captured Wolverine (mostly just to play around with customisation). 

I selected the mech in Hangar and sent it to customize in MekLab.  I made all the changes, I have the spare parts in hand, then I hit the begin refit button (which was previously greyed out). Advance the day and nothing happens.  I tried again with just a minor change (I moved one point of armour) and hit the begin refit button again.  Once again nothing is happening.

The mech is a spare mech (fully repaired) and not assigned to anyone. I tried assigning it before trying to customise and still its a no go.

Please advise which step I am missing out on. Thanks lots.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 22 April 2017, 06:15:19
In 42.1 customizing in the MechLab doesn't work.
You could probably load the save in 42, customize, and reload in 42.1. I just went back to 42, so I know for a fact that the save is backwards compatible, at least if you haven't done a lot. I was at a similar point as you are now.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Orangsemut on 22 April 2017, 08:22:53
Thanks, I will try that. No, I have not used 42 before this,  I only just discovered MekHQ and ATB.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 23 April 2017, 19:38:05
I'm using the development version 43, MML works correctly in there.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 06 May 2017, 09:04:13
Short note on Base Attack battles:  The AtB rules aren't entirely clear on what deployment edge you should use for gun emplacements.  I would presume we should establish that these should be deployed in a CTR deployment.  However, in a dense urban environment, you could theoretically see emplacements just about anywhere in the city.  Should we force gun emplacements in a CTR deployment zone, or allow ANY placement?

Keep in mind that the attacker would have to kill said far-flung turrets in a base attack battle, which is a challenge for a player and probably a complete fiasco for an attacking bot.  The fact this could present a unique strategic/tactical challenge for attacking players (stay tight or go after the dispersed turrets?) might make for interesting scenarios, which is why I pose this question to all the AtB players.  Maybe even make a poll out of it or something?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 06 May 2017, 09:21:24
Igniting building hexes that turrets are on works pretty well for blocking their LOS and then a crit roll every turn.  Eventually something is going to get hit and the fire will kill the turret.  But Princess still does not rotate the turret so you almost need to play against a human if the opfor is going to have turrets.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 06 May 2017, 18:55:46
I don't know, the bot seemed to deploy them intelligently enough in this base battle I had and had them all faced correctly.  Particularly nefarious was the fact 2 were  medium lasers and 2 were SRM 6s, all within about 6 hexes of each other or so.  Made for quite a kill zone, except the allied army, with 3 3/5 JVN-10Ns, was amazingly efficient in mowing those suckers down and only sacrificing two Stingers in the process.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Twin_81 on 17 May 2017, 13:14:29
I'm loving MekHQ so far, but I've never really used vees and infantry. So, I've got a question about the 'support' role of 'Search and Rescue' I've bought a motorized platoon specifically for that. But how exactly do I appoint them in MekHQ? Do I have to deploy them or just consider that they are doing the job and roll the rescue dice manually?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 18 May 2017, 09:05:01
I believe that still must be handled manually.  I'm sure it's on the to-do list somewhere, but likely not a high priority.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Twin_81 on 21 May 2017, 08:43:05
Thanks for the clarification. Anyway, another question. I've bought some battle armor and want to try it out for the first time. Is there a way to deploy it with my mechs? Do I use them as a reinforcement sub-force or how exactly is it done? Does it affect the lance weight and unit limit if deployed as a part of the mech lance?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 21 May 2017, 19:41:42
By default, AtB as implemented treats any unit in a lance as a full unit and uses its real weight for lance weight.

A default lance can have up to 6 units and 390 tons, that's enough for 4 mechs and 2 BA squads.*
You can also remove the weight and/or number limits in the campaign options, AtB tab, if you want 4 mechs and 4 squads.

Anything else, you'll need to manually deploy reinforcements and adjust their arrival times as needed.

*Keep in mind that contract lance requirements are based on total number of combat units on your TO&E chart. If you switch to 6 unit lances, it will ask for more deployed lances and leave you with very little to no reserves.
 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Eliijahh on 11 June 2017, 07:17:52
I've just started a new game with MekHQ, creating a merc company with a lance worth of meks. I'm in the process of accepting the first contract, but I'm not sure how to read the contract difficulty. How do I convert the enemy rating (eg. Green/F) in terms that I can understand?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 11 June 2017, 08:25:09
Are you letting MekHQ do the work for you?  If so, don't sweat it.  F just means the lowest tech level, and Green is the lowest skill level.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 12 June 2017, 01:44:15
So, currently playing a Merc campaign during the Jihad.

I have absolutely no idea what to do with the RAT to give a good experience, I could either go for RAT generator, or the traditional RAT.

But RAT during Jihad is kinda limited with years apart but the RAT generator also gives some weirdness like the sheer amount of IS mech being deployed by Clan Diamond Shark.

So I just...have no idea.

Also, how do you guys deal with all the Base defense? There's so many units and I have to wait a long time just to get them all deployed...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 12 June 2017, 12:41:19
But RAT during Jihad is kinda limited with years apart but the RAT generator also gives some weirdness like the sheer amount of IS mech being deployed by Clan Diamond Shark.

For most Clans it is not at all unusual to find a large number of Star League 'Mechs in the second line forces, with Solahma and garrison often more than half IS tech. But Clan Diamond Shark is not most Clans, and is particularly well-equipped. I reviewed the data and found that the approach I used for relative tech proportions doesn't work for some of the less typical Clans, and I've just revised all the Clan tech proportions for Solahma and garrison ratings (corresponding to IS D/F).

The fix will be in the next release, but you can get it now by unzipping this file into the data/forcegenerator folder: generator.zip (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5wV7Xx3yIk7QzdqR2pMVUlETnM)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 13 June 2017, 23:15:15
The other thing I wondered if why does my enemies still used obsolete battlemech with single heatsink?

A way to simulate logistic failure and not enough upgrade?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 14 June 2017, 05:56:31
The other thing I wondered if why does my enemies still used obsolete battlemech with single heatsink?

A way to simulate logistic failure and not enough upgrade?

Or privately owned mechs that were never able to afford an upgrade, or reserve/training units pushed into active service due to pressing needs, or a mech not considered worth upgrading due to accumulated mechanical issues, or a unit deliberately kept low tech for maintenance ease, or someone piloting and older piece of junk while their real ride gets a sweeeet upgrade, or its a remote garrison that never made it onto the upgrade to do list due to perceived lack of need.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 14 June 2017, 10:34:45
The other thing I wondered if why does my enemies still used obsolete battlemech with single heatsink?

A way to simulate logistic failure and not enough upgrade?
If you're playing in the Jihad, you're going to see a blend of very high tech and very low tech. While the Succession Wars saw a loss of technology, the Jihad saw destruction on such a massive scale that production could not keep up with demand, and it was more important to get something on the field than to field the best tech. So you even saw a return of primitive tech because you could convert a warehouse into a factory to churn out Age of War-era units.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 15 June 2017, 22:48:21
Thanks for the answer.

I'm also wondering if it's possible to use ASF for some fire support in the current game even if the AI can't use ASF of their own at all.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 16 June 2017, 18:23:33
That is absolutely possible, though the AtB rules don't really go into detail about it yet.

The AI will shoot your ASF, so it's thankfully not like shooting fish in a barrel, but as you're essentially guaranteed air superiority, ASFs will punch very much above their BV most of the time.

You'll want to set the MegaMek option that allows ASFs that fly off the map to return later, though. Otherwise most AtB maps are too small to maneuvre.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 17 June 2017, 12:31:58
For what it's worth, I set up Air Support like a dedicated reinforcement lance that doesn't roll for weekly battles (player reinforcements used to work like this in an older version of the AtB rules). A roll of 5 or 6 means they can deploy as reinforcments in any particular battle. 2 fighters per wing, and I personally have a thing for lighter craft so it doesn't end up being overpowering. I consider the cost for pilots, techs, maintenance, bombs/ammunition, transport, and their effect on AtB rules regarding force size (minimum deployed lances, retirement rolls) to be a fair offset for the slight boost in firepower they occasionally give, but if I were using Eisensturms (or even Stingrays) instead of Sparrowhawks it might feel more cheap than it does.

I think of their "availability" (the reinforcement chance roll) as a way of abstractly representing whether they are able to gain air superiority in the first place enough to add fire support to a battle. Maybe it would be more fair (and/or more realistic) to incorporate random damage every time you want to deploy ASF, to represent them scrapping with enemy fighters off the map.

Something like [2D6 - (Safe Thrust)] (possibly modified by enemy skill rating and the pilot's Piloting skill) 5-point clusters to each craft whenever they don't make their reinforcement roll, and 1XP for each pilot? I'm not sure how the math on that pans out, I just pulled it out of nowhere. That would probably screw over conventional fighters to the point of making them unusable, though...maybe give them a bonus for better maneuverability than regular ASF.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 19 June 2017, 15:58:09
So, here's a quandry. I've got a mechwarrior "missing in action", and, frankly, I'd like to rescue him (seeing as how he's a badass elite mechwarrior and all). But, there's not really any mechanism in AtB to handle that. How have people been dealing with that kind of situation (aside from just setting the guy's status back to normal in MekHQ, which feels mildly cheap)?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 19 June 2017, 16:03:55
I usually go for some kind of prisoner exchange.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: jedidino on 20 June 2017, 01:44:27
So, here's a quandry. I've got a mechwarrior "missing in action", and, frankly, I'd like to rescue him (seeing as how he's a badass elite mechwarrior and all). But, there's not really any mechanism in AtB to handle that. How have people been dealing with that kind of situation (aside from just setting the guy's status back to normal in MekHQ, which feels mildly cheap)?

Here is how I have been handling it.

VTOL Rescue
Green Pilot -- Roll 8+
Regular Pilot -- Roll 7+
Veteran Pilot -- Roll 6+
Elite Pilot -- Roll 5+
VTOL Shot Down/Lost -- Roll of 2

Roll once per VTOL owned per missing person.  If you lose all VTOL's before you find all missing persons then you lose anyone not found along with the VTOL. I have also been granting 1xp for every 3 persons recovered.  Still playing around with the target numbers but it has been working so far.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 20 June 2017, 08:14:18
So, here's a quandry. I've got a mechwarrior "missing in action", and, frankly, I'd like to rescue him (seeing as how he's a badass elite mechwarrior and all). But, there's not really any mechanism in AtB to handle that. How have people been dealing with that kind of situation (aside from just setting the guy's status back to normal in MekHQ, which feels mildly cheap)?

I believe the AtB rules have ransom rules for taking prisoners and releasing them? If the enemy captures your soldier, they might well ransom your pilot back to you at the same or similar prices (at the end of the contract, of course).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 22 June 2017, 05:14:53
Logistics admin is responsible for ordering parts, I always make sure they're the most experienced, as an inexperienced logistics person will be unable to order some parts til a contract ends sometimes.

As far as I understood it, if you set your "skill used for odering parts" in the campaign options to "administration", all your personal with administration skill can be used to order parts. MHQ starts rolling for the highest skilled administrator first for aquiring parts working it's way down to the bottom as you are try to order more parts. So basically, if you want to train your low level administrator by aquiring parts (25 successes for one XP) you have to buy a lot of stuff to get your low level admin to a higher rank.
Assigning different jobs to your admins (i.e. administration, logistics, command, transport) ist just for getting better contracts.

BTW, i just have returned continuing my 2950 campaign after seeing a lot of videos on youtube about the new upcoming Battletech game. I paused for about two years and had some doupts if I can handle all the necessary stuff to upgrade to the newest version of MHQ, but really no sweat.
A big (!) thanks to the guys who continue put so much time and efford into the developement programm.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 22 June 2017, 09:22:53
As far as logistics go, I like to play around with which skill is required to acquire parts.  If I'm not in a contract, I'll use Administration.  If I'm in a raid or guerilla war contract, I'll use Scrounge, in an effort to make another skill useful and have greater variety among characters.  Plus, you can't normally acquire parts in a guerilla contract.  This at least gives you a chance to find something useful occasionally.  At least, I think it does.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: bluedragon7 on 22 June 2017, 17:03:28
So, here's a quandry. I've got a mechwarrior "missing in action", and, frankly, I'd like to rescue him (seeing as how he's a badass elite mechwarrior and all). But, there's not really any mechanism in AtB to handle that. How have people been dealing with that kind of situation (aside from just setting the guy's status back to normal in MekHQ, which feels mildly cheap)?
I always have VTOL and a squad or platoon of commandos for exactly that purpose
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 23 June 2017, 02:44:46
After playing a couple years in-universe campaigns, I felt like I should turn off option for night and day modifier or maybe weather too.

Because having moonless night cause my enemies to not be able to move at all and the only thing I can use to do anything is mechs with jumpjets, limiting my options to quite a short list.

And for some reasons, I kept getting night missions all the time. So it's really annoying...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Tegyrius on 23 June 2017, 06:45:38
Night missions in heavy urban are the absolute worst.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 23 June 2017, 21:15:39
Map with loads of mud is horrible too.

Literally the only way to get through anything is with jumpjets.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 24 June 2017, 00:13:23
Yeah, it's to the point where you should probably prefer piloting skill to high gunnery skills so you can avoid making a mistake where you're under fire from most of the bot's guns.  Even a well-armored lance just doesn't last long when it can't move much.

Myself, I like to play with many optional rules, including weather and planetary conditions.  I'm not afraid to use ground-bound units, but I will usually ensure that at least half the units in a lance can jump, and that ALL my scout elements are jump capable (in case they get to reinforce a given battle).  This way I at least have SOME offensive capability in night time.

Remember, too, you can put searchlights on your units, and on some of the bot's units.  I will often put searchlights on scouting-type bot units so that there's actually some weapons fire going on.  You can torch woods and buildings to create light and deny cover.

Lastly, however, you can turn off weather and planetary conditions.  Feel free to do so!  The idea of Against the Bot is that you play it the way you want to play it.  Change rules you don't like, come up with your own subsystems where you want more realism or options in your campaigns (like finding a way to use Scrounge), experiment!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 13 July 2017, 14:30:10
You can get around the "moonless night" and "pitch black" movement restrictions by using reckless movement on your mechs. It requires a piloting roll, but if you need to get somewhere in a hurry without jump jets, you can do so at a minor risk.

Question:

Within the AtB rules, when promoting officers, do non-mechwarrior combat personnel (vehicle guys, infantry) count as personnel for the purposes of "maximum 1/3 rounded down can be assigned officer rank"?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 13 July 2017, 20:49:03
Probably, but you shouldn't need more than one officier per lance/platoon same as mech formations. For infantry it would really depend on how you organize. If you follow normal doctrine each platoon of conventional infantry should have a Lieutenant, or 3 platoons to a company (2 Lieutenants and 1 Captain). If you are using Campaign Operations or Alpha Strike formation building you would have a Lance of 4 platoons or 3 Sergeants and 1 Lieutenant.

I use the older method of 3 platoons per company rather than 12 platoons per company.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 15 July 2017, 10:12:06
Apparently Campaign Operations doesn't actually mean what it clearly says:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=53961.0 (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=53961.0)

Quote
There is no change in the systems.

A standard IS Squad is 7 Troopers and is equal to 1 BattleMech, Tank or ASF- This size unit is not a playable unit in standard TW play

A standard IS Platoon is 4 squads or 28 Troopers- This is the standard "Unit" or miniature used in TW play. The only "Unit" which represents multiple individual "Units" in standard game play.

A standard IS Company is 3 Platoons or 84 Troopers

Platoon and Lance are interchangeable words in BattleTech. Platoon is usually used for infantry and armor and Lance for BattleMech and Aerospace. Infantry
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: pheonixstorm on 15 July 2017, 19:46:31
That section was probably a direct copy from Alpha Strike Companion as there is a fair bit that looks like a copy paste from AToW or ASC
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: firedude1218 on 26 July 2017, 15:38:44
I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but I'm new to the forum and can't find out why I can't look at the new AtB rules. I'm a new fan of battletech and really love doing AtB campaigns, but I've got some pretty out of date rules. Whenever I click on the link, it directs me to the forum board, or tells me I'm not allowed to look at or download attachments in this board.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 26 July 2017, 16:36:18
I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but I'm new to the forum and can't find out why I can't look at the new AtB rules. I'm a new fan of battletech and really love doing AtB campaigns, but I've got some pretty out of date rules. Whenever I click on the link, it directs me to the forum board, or tells me I'm not allowed to look at or download attachments in this board.

Can't address the forum issues, but I think the admins have it set at you need 10 posts to be to do anything.

The rules spreadsheet is in the Docs folder of each release.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: firedude1218 on 26 July 2017, 16:39:12
Thank you kindly! Will be sure to post stuff. Maybe that will fix it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 28 July 2017, 13:42:06
Since Princess appears to handle aircraft on ground maps just fine, I was wondering if there are any plans on updating AtB rules to include:
a) The possibility of aircraft in allied/enemy forces
b) The possibility of aircraft in player forces
?

I'm thinking something like:
"The player can have active one lance or faction-appropriate unit of aircraft (aerotech or conventional) per rank of commander strategy, with no lower bound on the number of aircraft per lance. Such a unit must be led by an officer. The player may deploy this air lance once per battle per week as reinforcements - the arrival turn is calculated by the same means as any other reinforcements."

Also:
"An opposing force may include aircraft. Any time reinforcements are rolled, there's a (some percentage, maybe 25% by default), there's a chance that a ground-based reinforcement lance is instead replaced by an air lance of equal weight units. Additionally, any time the player deploys an air lance as reinforcements, there is a chance (again, let's say 25%) that the opfor deploys a reinforcement lance of aircraft of roughly equivalent weight, if they haven't deployed one already."

What do you guys think?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 29 July 2017, 01:44:09
Princess can handle aircraft now? Sweet! How good is it at avoiding flying off the map, though? AtB maps tend to be on the small side, as far as aero assets are concerned.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: firedude1218 on 29 July 2017, 04:37:28
Do you have any suggestions for aircraft? Even with really heavy ones laden with bombs, I still can't get them to be useful, since they can make one, maybe two runs before I have to send them away for a while, and they often come back too late to do anything.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 29 July 2017, 19:39:39
Based on my experience, she'll readily fly aircraft off the map, but as long as you have "Allow Aircraft to Return" (or whatever it's called) checked off in the game settings, she'll bring them back. I just did some testing and she's... not terribly effective with aircraft. Like, she'll just fly them off the board (I used a 34x32 board, a 17x16 board even I can't stay on the board). So maybe we hold off on generating AI-controlled air lances for now. I have seen her attack aircraft in larger air-to-air fights, so who can say, really.

As far as good aircraft usage, it's tricky. I haven't really gotten the hang of it entirely yet, probably 80 to 90% of my fights involving aircraft, they get shot down (or overheat and crash). So far, I've had success loading them up with HE or cluster bombs and dive-bombing to get one or two kills on tightly clustered units by dropping all the bombs simultaneously. Of course, I'm playing mostly 3025 right now, so there may be better options available later on. The trick is not to expect it to be as effective as a battlemech afterwards - unless the bad guys are all over the map, I can usually only manage an attack once every two or three turns. Which is why I'm suggesting that they be made available as a support unit rather than part of a player's primary lances.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 29 July 2017, 21:24:39
Do you have any suggestions for aircraft? Even with really heavy ones laden with bombs, I still can't get them to be useful, since they can make one, maybe two runs before I have to send them away for a while, and they often come back too late to do anything.

Princess barely handles anything that flies.  Just don't.  She'll crash, freeze up, take hours to take turns. Fire on dumb things not fire at dumb things.

Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: firedude1218 on 30 July 2017, 17:57:44
As far as good aircraft usage, it's tricky. I haven't really gotten the hang of it entirely yet, probably 80 to 90% of my fights involving aircraft, they get shot down (or overheat and crash). So far, I've had success loading them up with HE or cluster bombs and dive-bombing to get one or two kills on tightly clustered units by dropping all the bombs simultaneously. Of course, I'm playing mostly 3025 right now, so there may be better options available later on. The trick is not to expect it to be as effective as a battlemech afterwards - unless the bad guys are all over the map, I can usually only manage an attack once every two or three turns. Which is why I'm suggesting that they be made available as a support unit rather than part of a player's primary lances.

That sounds about like what I've been doing, and your suggestion sounds like a good one. I often can't justify the cost of aerospace, since they are expensive to buy, transport, or repair, since you need an entirely separate crew for them, both logistically and on the field, and they're so easy to kill. One stray shot, and that's all she wrote, if they miss their pilot check.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: bluedragon7 on 30 July 2017, 18:51:38
I tend to be quite good with it, possibly because so far Princess is not very good at countering them
First and possibly second attack run as a cluster bombing, while the enemy is still grouped nicely, then switch to strikes.
Considering the speed of the units I have them appear in turn 0-3, so I often still have the bot in a larger group, two fighters can easily halve the enemy BV in a couple of turns
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: firedude1218 on 31 July 2017, 16:30:23
Sounds like cluster bombs are really the only way to go, then. Does anyone use any of the other types of bombs?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: bluedragon7 on 31 July 2017, 16:40:40
Other bombs would work, but as long as Princess groups together a cluster will be like an artillery strike hitting multiple units,..if your fighters arrive later, then  you might have to pick single targets anyway and normal bombs offer more damage.
I still prefer to unload all bombs in the first few passes to gain maneuverability back
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JenniferinaMAD on 01 August 2017, 02:47:10
With decent gunnery, HE bombs are the way to go, as they concentrate damage better.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 01 August 2017, 07:40:33
I use cluster bombs with the occasional inferno bomb.  Best use is clearing out the horde of vehicles that turn up sometimes.  They tend to group up that even the misses will hit something. 

Level bombing spreads the damage out, but also generates more crit rolls.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 14 August 2017, 21:03:33
Wow this has changed a lot. I haven't messed around with MegaMek/MekHQ since 2012 but the new Battletech game drove me to download the latest version and I have been having a blast with the Against-the-bot integration! You guys have been doing amazing work!

My campaign has been going pretty well, but I have some questions.

1st is how exactly unit rating is determined and some of the quirks with it. I did a long Garrison Duty contract that went okay and got me to a B rating. I decided I was ready to tackle maintenance so I turned that on and took at Recon Raid contract, 3 months long. Since I had a lot of extra 'mechs I mothballed a bunch to save on the maintenance and it dropped my rating to a C! I was counting on the B rating to let me use the Field Workshop site instead of In the Field for repairs.

Looking at the unit rating report for Quality I have a 20, Average skill rating of Veteran. When I unmothball some of my units it jumps to ASR of Elite, for 40, bumping me to the B. I have 6 Regular, 10 Veteran, and 1 Elite. Average of Veteran seems right, not sure why the mechs are bumping me up. Should I change to the Campaign Ops rating system?

2nd is about the TO&E. How should I organize that? Only put 'mechs in the lances I'm going to deploy? Should I have a 'standby' force for all my other units?

Sadly the only rules books I have are Total War and Tech Manual. I would like to get some of the others eventually  :D

Read the last 10 pages or so of the thread was fun. I think trying to use some aerospace support would be neat, I might have to try to figure that out in the future.

Edit: I forgot a couple of questions. I see IS2 being mentioned and I'm not sure how to tell what mechs and equipment that tech level applied to. In the same vein my campaign started in 3067 and is currently in 3069. I set Max Tech Level to Advanced, but wasn't sure what all equipment fell into each tech level.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 15 August 2017, 03:45:45
In the report tab in MHQ there is a breakdown for your unit rating and how it is calculated.
There is a threshold number for your unit rating, but I don't know the exact numbers. I am pretty sure that the threshold for A-rating is 120. Accepting a Raid or Guerilla contract when your unit rating has just increased is very risky - one lucky crit on your better MechWarriors can drop your unit rating down which are the tied around your ankles when it comes to maintainance ;)
I have only accepted short term Raid contracts before I got B rating and had aquired a Dropship.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 15 August 2017, 11:43:29
Yeah, I saw the Unit Rating report, was hoping to find out what the rules governing that actually are. A quick google search didn't seem to have them listed anywhere, and it seems a waste to purchase a book that I'm guessing is largely outdated, if I can even get it anymore outside of used.

I think the Recon Raid was a mistake. I had just spent 6+ months custom refitting my heavy/assault lance with C3 computers and increased firepower and wanted a short test contract as a field trial. Seems choosing the field new gear against the Word of Blake is going to turn out to be an extremely stupid decision. As I saw mentioned here in the thread my lance is a very heavy assault lance with two assaults (a Devastator and Zeus) and two heavies (Crusader and Cestus) and I'm seeing why that was discouraged.

I'm still learning so I haven't been very good at accepting battle results and tend to replay them. It's especially annoying when Assaults get headcapped by gauss rifles in pitch black conditions.

My light lance had a really bad time of it as well in their first mission. Seems I need to read the fiction. I had gotten an idea that the Word of Blake weren't very friendly with the Jihad and all, but man they are kind of scary on the field, even as a bot!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 15 August 2017, 13:21:56
The unit rating rules depend on if you're using the "Field Manual: Mercenaries" or "Interstellar Ops" rating. I have no idea about the Interstellar Ops rules, and I forget the exact Field Manual Mercenaries rules, but part of it is dependent on the proportion of high tech units you have, which is why mothballing and reactivating certain mechs will affect your rating. "IS1" is basic 3025 stuff - standard PPCs, lasers, autocannons. None of this "double heat sink", "ferro fibrous armor" and "ER PPC" stuff. If you have a mech that's got the advanced tech as part of your TO&E and you take it out and mothball it, you affect your proportion of IS2 mechs and thus your Dragoons rating.

Your TO&E affects the payment you get offered for contracts. So, before accepting a contract, you want to put every mech you've got there, otherwise you'll have contracts that pay zip.

As for contract difficulty, you need to stick close to lance weight limits. 130/200/280/380. Don't go "a little bit over", because then your employer will send your "just over medium" lance against a bunch of assault mechs. The other important thing is to keep a real close eye on enemy skill levels when taking contracts. Having learned the hard way, I will almost never accept a contract against enemy skill levels higher than regular. Had a contract against veteran opposition, and just got completely schooled each mission. Lose a mech here, lose a mech there... got lucky and the last mission was a base attack though so I auto-won when I won that, even though the contract score was like -8.

The other thing that helps is to properly manage your lance deployment. It might be tempting to deploy your lances on "scout" missions, but then you get 60% odds of a fight each week. Just deploy the minimum number of lances on scout missions, and try "defend" or "training" instead for fewer fights.

AtB also features a *lot* of tough terrain missions in crap conditions, so I tend to favor jump jets. Otherwise, you're either making PSRs for reckless movement or moving two hexes a turn.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 15 August 2017, 14:42:21
Thanks for the information. Now I know what to look for as being IS2, so that should help. I also think I need to break up my assault lance. I put both assaults i had in there, but now I think I'll make two lances, each with one assault and the rest heavies. I'm not at home so I can't look at my unit makeup, but in total I have 2 assaults, I think 4 lights (they tend to go boom) and the rest is a fairly even mix of mediums and heavies. 25 is my total count I believe.

I know what you mean about the enemy rating. I rolled a special mission, civilian rescue. One of my officers deployed, I think he was 4/4. One of the 3 pilots he faced was an elite in a Falconer FLC-9R packing a gauss rifle and an ER PPC. Did I mention it was raining? Mud everywhere. No jumpjets. I couldn't MOVE to get any target modifiers.

I left the civilians to their fate.

A question about training lances. I saw in the AtB rules it says in a battle Green pilots get 1 xp per turn. Reading other places it sounded like they might also get xp from just being in the lance for a week? Without a battle? Is that the case?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 15 August 2017, 15:16:03
Correct, green pilots will get 1XP per week as long as their lance is deployed on "training" assignment, regardless of whether there's a battle or not, as long as the lance leader is an officer and at least veteran.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 15 August 2017, 17:10:13
I suppose this is more of a MekHQ question, but when a Tech does maintenance does that count as a task for the 1xp/25 tasks?

I want to use my Vet Techs for maintenance, but one has over 30 xp and I want to get him to Elite.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 15 August 2017, 18:38:39
One important thing to know about training lances: the program does not check of you have enough XP to advance from green to regular, just if the pilot is currently green. So they will keep getting XP until you assign those. I happened to forget about a training lance on a longer contract, and those guys were basically veterans afterwards. Or would have been, if I didn't GM their XP away. Maybe not all of it that was over the regular threshhold...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 16 August 2017, 04:52:27
I suppose this is more of a MekHQ question, but when a Tech does maintenance does that count as a task for the 1xp/25 tasks?

I want to use my Vet Techs for maintenance, but one has over 30 xp and I want to get him to Elite.

I too always assign my best Techs for maintainance. The better die roll modifier could make a difference between a damaged gyro right before a battle and avoid other nasty surprises.
I don't think that maintainance counts as a completed task for XP. Even if it does, lets do some math.
You need 40 XP to get from Veteran to Elite Tech. You need 25 tasks for getting one XP, netting you a whopping 1000 maintainance tasks. If you do maintainance checks once every 30 days and assuming that you squeeze 8-10 'Mechs into said MechTech's maintainance cycle, he will become Veteran in only about 100 month or so.
A good HR Admin paired with Paid Recruitment rolls really helped me out right from the start in my campaign.
 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 16 August 2017, 20:19:14
Here is a question more about playing against the bot rather than the rules.

Has anyone tried playing with sensors? Is there a way to hide units you don't have LOS to, but that will still show up on sensors if in range, and does that work at all with the bot?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 16 August 2017, 20:40:15
There's a setting in "megamek options" somewhere, under "advanced rules". It's "TacOps double blind" and "TacOps sensor rules". From what I understand, the AI basically ignores that setting and just plays as if it had perfect info. I could be wrong though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 18 August 2017, 19:47:10
do monthly maintenance checks count toward the task completion counter for XP for your techs?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 19 August 2017, 01:42:53
Princess doesn't handle Double Blind well.  Without a visible target, she just wanders aimlessly (or stands there).  Once a target is sighted, the entire team charges that target.  If you set an Objective in the AI lobby, she will go to that point (but still won't search for hidden targets).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bonepart on 22 August 2017, 16:26:53
How does everyone house rule the use of Aerospace? I like having a flight of ASF for support to make bombing runs, although it would seem a bit overpowered to use them all the time. Maybe treat them like reinforcements with a reinforcement role of 4+? Delay to deploy according to speed?

Playing around with them to get used to how they play on a ground map, it seemed like you really need to limit your pilots to veterans. One of my two fighters took some light damage and missed his control roll, causing him to lose 1D6 altitudes causing him to crash  #P

Bombing was kind of fun though!

Who is maintaining the Against-the-Bot rules now? Any plans to set some rules for the use of fighters?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 22 August 2017, 16:55:48
Yeah, I generally allow myself to deploy one IS fighter lance (that's I think a max of two fighters per unit) per unit commander strategy level. That lance can then reinforce one battle per week and do not count in any way, shape or form towards victory conditions. The fighters deploy with the standard reinforcement delay (8 - local commander strategy or something like that).

The fact that you can lose the fighters so easily is enough of a disincentive in my opinion, without further artificial limitations on their deployment.  Also, bombs are frigging expensive (a single HE bomb is 5k, which is comparable to the cost of an LRM/20 salvo, and don't even get me started on the other bombs).

Aircraft definitely are fragile. I've had pretty good success with the Lucifer R20. It a) never overheats and b) it can crash at low velocities and not be turned into scrap, due to the fact that it's basically all armor. But hey, it can still drop bombs just fine. The basic rule of thumb I use is PSR = crashed aircraft, so I tend to avoid those like the plague (manuevers? How about no. Overthrust? No thanks. Drop more than two altitudes? Pass.)

I'm actually working on allowing Princess to properly use aero units on ground maps. It's a non-trivial problem to solve, which is great because I love working on AI, but I wouldn't expect it coming out any time soon. Still, it's something I like to look forward to as my aero jocks strafe hapless enemy vehicles for the eightieth time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: bluedragon7 on 22 August 2017, 17:25:22
There is the option to use the strat ops advanced rules for fighters, only requiring a piloting roll once the armor threshold is beaten.

I have not seen suitable AtB rules but one flight per strategy per week seems a good rule of thumb, but considering their speed I would have them appear way quicker than mech reinforcements.

Looking forward to see princess using fighters as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 23 August 2017, 05:50:24
I use ASF as integral parts if my deployed lances, so they do count for the lance's weight calculation. This makes deployment of heavy fighters very difficult as you can easily cross the threshold number for weight limits and you basically exchange a 'mech for an ASF.
Yes, ASF are vulnerable. Even with the armor threshold rule enabled, pretty much anything with 5+ damage hitting the side or aft will cause a PSR, which is generally not a good thing. On the other hand, they are also very difficult to hit  - I try to keep velocity at 2 minimum - and as long as Princess has something else easier to hit it doesn't look too bad.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 23 August 2017, 09:02:20
I have decided to try a 3045 campaign which should be enough to randomized my mecrenary unit until Clan Invasion hits full on.

I then proceed to gain a Hunchback in a special mission and then proceed to lose two of my mechs because of freak of nature accident in first campaign.

Just barely made profit in the campaign and then I lost the profit when traveling back to Outreach.

Well, at least I didn't get wipe out.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 23 August 2017, 10:50:12
Those campaigns are the best. I crank the wages up by approx. 10x just to make sure I'm not fielding all heavy/assault lances within the first few years.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 23 August 2017, 11:09:54
I lost another mech to ammo explosion, AGAIN.

With the same pilot! She now have lost the unit three bloody mechs.

As soon as case is available, I'm shoving it in no matter what.

EDIT:

I think I finally understand why players that have been through introductory tech only quickly remove ammo dependence weapon as soon as they can.

I have lost another 3 battlemech to ammo explosion thanks to the sheer bad luck of this MechWarrior. At this point, I just ignore it and use GM power to restore the mech because screw this.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 24 August 2017, 07:13:46
You are doomed, dragonkidd!
"You shall no taketh away the fair share of salvage to the gods of battletech by using GM fiat!"
So speaketh the wise Blake

Prepare to face some nasty through-armor-crits, excessive number of head hits and poisoned PSR's. :D
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 24 August 2017, 07:29:48
I've been taking more decapitations lately than ammo explosions.

Last game:
Death 1: Large Laser + Medium Laser to the head (KIA)
Death 2: Ammo detonation (below 20% armour at that point, so no surpise)
Death 3: AC10 + LRM5 to the head (emergency eject)
Death 4: Failed PSR on sand dune, CT destruction.

All Heavy/Assault elements from my Command Lance (2 with Star League tech) vs a bunch of mediums and vehicles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 25 August 2017, 05:12:57
Okay, now I'm getting situation where my mechs outright doesn't appear and ended up having under weight lance fighting a dozen enemies.

This is getting kinda out of hand.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 25 August 2017, 10:15:34
Okay, now I'm getting situation where my mechs outright doesn't appear and ended up having under weight lance fighting a dozen enemies.

This is getting kinda out of hand.

Is this what you have run into?
https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/issues/242
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 25 August 2017, 12:30:18
Looks like it, restarting fix the issue easily.

I really feel that it is so easy to get overwhelmed by vehicles without using advanced tech stuff, simply because that double heat sink basically allow Battlemech to do twice the damage.

This run really gave me a different perspective in how introductory tech gameplay worked.

Which mean I'm going to get even more butthurt when Clanners start showing up.

Anyway, picked another contract and now I having base defense for practically months because my enemy morale decided to go from normal to invincible 3 days into the contract. My bad luck with this run seems to never end.

EDIT:

Also really wished the link at the front page didn't fail so I can download basic rule of AtB and consult it when thinga go wrong with megaHQ myself.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 25 August 2017, 13:21:30
The rules are in /docs/atb stuff in your MekHQ folder.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 25 August 2017, 14:01:02
There are three things you can do to make base defense missions a little better.

One is, a base defense will automatically be the *only* mission for that week. This means you should set all your lances to "scout" mode (except the minimum other assignments required by the contract) so you have a 33% chance of each of the other lances being able to reinforce.

Second, MekHQ currently fails to generate turrets and princess doesn't use them properly anyway (although I'm hopeful both of those will change in the next dev release, since I've already coded the fixes). So you'll want to manually generate six turrets for each base defense when you get to Megamek and give them to yourself. Turrets can only go on buildings, btw. I love it when I get artillery turrets, they're great against clumps of vehicles in urban environments.

Third, you can just manually edit the contract and set the enemy morale back to something normal if you're tired of having to deal with base defense missions all the time. I'd probably get sick and tired of it too if I had to deal with a base defense mission every week.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BlueThing on 25 August 2017, 18:43:27
How does everyone house rule the use of Aerospace? I like having a flight of ASF for support to make bombing runs, although it would seem a bit overpowered to use them all the time. Maybe treat them like reinforcements with a reinforcement role of 4+? Delay to deploy according to speed?

Playing around with them to get used to how they play on a ground map, it seemed like you really need to limit your pilots to veterans. One of my two fighters took some light damage and missed his control roll, causing him to lose 1D6 altitudes causing him to crash  #P

Bombing was kind of fun though!

Who is maintaining the Against-the-Bot rules now? Any plans to set some rules for the use of fighters?
I only have one Air Lance. I only bring it on missions where I'm greatly outnumbered to help make up the difference.

I also use the Strat Ops optional rule to reduce lawn dart checks after having a really bad run of luck with them.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 26 August 2017, 12:57:50
My initial fear for base defense is that megamek would run really slow due to loading so many units at once.

Turns out, the worry wasn't really needed and now my mechanics are working nearly everyday just to salvage useful scraps off all the vehicles I trashed in base defense so far.

You would think the local would have slower morale after some merc with a bunch of support and Capella militias pretty much kills off hundreds of you men along with several dozen million investment in military equipments.

And damn, really finding that RAT system to be quite flexible even with the limited amount of variety before 3050, I really can't wait to hit the Clanner and probably eat shit in the process soon.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 27 August 2017, 14:03:29
...
Anyway, picked another contract and now I having base defense for practically months because my enemy morale decided to go from normal to invincible 3 days into the contract. My bad luck with this run seems to never end...


Also happened to me.
I got a contract offer while enroute back to Outreach after completing my last contract and got offered a relief duty contract with 100% salvage. I usually try to plan my contracts that they start early in a month but not on the first day, so that I have enough time to get some victories under my belt before the next enemy morale roll is due. If you are lucky you can end contracts with an early victory because of enemy morale breakdown. Not possible here - I arrived at the end of the month, didn't get five victories = enemy is on steroids and attacking my base every weak. I burnt all hope for an early victory, I have a contract score of 27 just up the thrid month in this contract and enemy morale is still invincible, fatigue will bite my but when in comes to the next defection roll, but hey - the salvage is great :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 27 August 2017, 21:06:02
I basically have enough spare weapons and ammo for the next several dozens contracts if I ever did that many thanks to all those base defense.

And now it's 3049, starting to see more 'lostech' on the battlefield.

Also, does anyone know what is this Edge thing on the personnel section?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 28 August 2017, 06:32:53
I don't know the MW RPG, but in others it is basically a luck pool you can use either reroll something or to ignore/tone down something bad. You can also specify for what it is used somewhere.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 28 August 2017, 09:22:29
The"Edge Thing" is what saves your pilot's butts against ammo explosions and through armor crits. Like the get out shit card at Monopoly.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 29 August 2017, 02:23:58
Thanks for the answer.

Hmmm...

Currently in the Clan Invasion era and after several dozens reroll, I finally got a contract against Clan at a very poor salvage rating of 10%.

The contract was one month though, so I just went in there and kill everything on sight. It's a nice touch to see Clanner using a mixed of Star league mech with newer Clan design in their solahma or provisional garrison or whatever. Wish I could salvage everything though...

Still, that's a surprisingly low number of contract against Clanner in what is basically the Clanner invasion year.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 29 August 2017, 15:50:27
Thanks for the answer.

...
Still, that's a surprisingly low number of contract against Clanner in what is basically the Clanner invasion year.

You are welcome :)
About contracts where you got to fight against Clanners, I don't know if MHQ takes into consideration which area is hit by the invading forces, so maybe you should change your location that you get closer to the invasion corridor. Just a wild guess here.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 29 August 2017, 22:26:27
So, does anyone know how to directly edit the weight limit of each tier?

I kinda want to just put the weight limit of each weight tier to the max (Light-140, Medium-220, Heavy-300, Assault-400) because I have managed to salvage a few Stormcrow (Despite all my employers being bloody cheapstake when it's come to salvaging right against clanner.) but I can't use them because my current medium lance has 4 50 ton IS mechs with SL tech.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 31 August 2017, 06:49:37
Has anyone played the Noble rules? i'm looking in to them and they look interesting. any tips for the record keeping aspect? and how best to handle the different "contracts" landhold vs crusade?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 31 August 2017, 09:28:37
Is there a way to just unload the ammo from a unit in MekHQ? I want to sell some clan vees, but keep the ammo in them for my mechs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 31 August 2017, 10:02:40
Is there a way to just unload the ammo from a unit in MekHQ? I want to sell some clan vees, but keep the ammo in them for my mechs.

Right click and click salvage.

Now loot absolutely everything you want off those vehicles to pimp your mechs in fabulous Clan tech.

EDIT:

This actually bring me a problem though, can Clan weapon used IS ammunition and vice versa? I found mekHQ to be unable to distinguish ammo from different source because the gauss rifle ammo I purchased somehow become Clantech in the warehouse and still be usable by my Hunchback modified to have IS gauss rifle.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 31 August 2017, 10:52:35
I know about salvage, but I thought there might be an easier way than ripping out that whole ammo bin.
After a 9mths campaign I have quite a bit of clan-stuff that is hard to maintain (i need to use my elite techs for that), some of the vees (and mechs) I sell are completly stripped.

The game does differentiate between clan and IS armor, and I think it might for some ammunitions, but not all of them. LRM ammo can be used in both clan and IS launchers, but I am not sure about the special ammo like Artemis.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 02 September 2017, 03:40:59
 You need to "capture" a few Clan mech techs. Makes things a whole lot easier to maintain. Plus you can add in the skill Clan Tech Knowledge to the special skills list if using Dev 43.2 or higher.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 02 September 2017, 06:09:27
Testing up some new stuff again to potentially boost my force.

I'm interested in buying some Battle Armor but I don't have enough omnimechs to carry them and early BA is slow, so I will leave them aside for now.

But what I'm really interested in is artillery, specifically Arrow IV with TAG to give pinpoint targetting.

Except I have absolutely no idea how artillery phase worked, and using the ballistic artillery like Long Tom and Sniper is probably gonna get myself killed more often since nobody is trained in spotting skill.

So, does anyone one here know how to use artillery?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 02 September 2017, 06:44:49
You need to "capture" a few Clan mech techs. Makes things a whole lot easier to maintain. Plus you can add in the skill Clan Tech Knowledge to the special skills list if using Dev 43.2 or higher.

Ohh, I need to do that. Some of my techs should have enough XP already.


Edit: Does it even work yet? Because it won't show up for the tech in question, and it does not have description yet. In the maintenance report there is still a +2 modifier for clan tech.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 02 September 2017, 17:59:29
 I just know it is in there to be honest. My last campaign against the Clans was before that little tid bit was released and during Clan era, I always roll a dice during a Base Attack with me the attacker, if I win the battle. 1-3 I capture 2 die 6 Clan Techs, 4-6 I get 1 die 6 Clan techs captured. If fighting a front line Clan unit, they are all Mech Techs, if a second line or Garrison unit I halve the number captured and replace with Clan Mechanics. So if I capture 10 techs, 5 will be Mech, 5 will be Mechanics.

 If it is not working correctly, you could always "copy" one of your Techs as a freeborn Clan Tech. I have done that previously, used GM edit and literally copied him as a freeborn clan tech to simulate paid tech training with the Dragoons. The only thing I did do different was I lowered his skill level 1. That was to simulate the "difficulty" in repairing Clan Tech which is newish to him.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BrotherofRandis on 04 September 2017, 23:16:40
Does MekHQ ATB automatically roll for captured prisoners to defect or do we still need to roll that?

I haven't seen any defect yet is the reason I'm asking.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 05 September 2017, 00:16:08
If I remember correctly Akjosch set it that when a prison is willing to defect they will get a * next to their name (might have to widen the name column) and when you get back into HQ from a scenario it will say in your daily log "captured so and so.  Convinced to defect." or something like that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: devorao on 05 September 2017, 03:29:30
I think it only rolls if you set random prisoner capture, but I am not 100% sure about it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 05 September 2017, 08:37:42
Yep, you have to set this up in the campaign options.
if you pick up enemy MW there are not taken as prisoners most of the time.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: celem on 14 September 2017, 09:03:53
Trying to find my Unit Rating (the letter) and cant seem to locate it on the Dragoon's Rating tab.  On the info pane furthest down I see #(#) where the number in parentheses is my Unit Rep using InterstellarOp Beta rules. Cant figure out what the first digit represents.  Trying to work out if I can make for a industrial world and take care of some maint issues. (TLN-5V's engine is gonna go any day now and then it's RIP)

Secondly, can I not order specific Mechs from the factory?  Its 3034 and I have Limit Units and Parts by Year checked.  I can properly order parts and the Unit Market gets populated properly.  Yet its impossible for me to buy any unit whatsoever through Procurement, I get 'Unit not invented yet' even for PHX-1 or LCT-1V and similar items that should be fairly widespread.

I dont know battletech at all except through MMek really and own no rulebooks so a lot of this has been painful deduction and googlefu.  Been a lot of fun so far and managed to survive 5 years and reach Augmented Battalion in size.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 14 September 2017, 09:10:01
Your rating should be in the bottom left, visible from all tabs. Right next to your funds.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: celem on 14 September 2017, 09:12:09
Hmm yes, but thats a number.  In my case it's showing 2(24), but how do I translate that to an A-F?

edit: Aaaand, now I found the option to switch which system is used to score the unit and got a letter.  Thanks Rince wind.

edit2: Figured out procurement of new mechs too.  I just wasnt an important enough a unit to have access to the factories in the current era, managed to lift my rating to B and suddenly theres factory line units on the market and I can even procure a couple of toys.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 19 September 2017, 15:57:30
Anyone an idea how I can switch searchlights on turrets?
I added the quirk in the lobby but I can't switch them on in the battle.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 19 September 2017, 16:16:50
I last time I messed with searchlights they started out turned on, but you only seen them when you fired at a target and then MM would light up the hexes.  If its not doing that for you then since MM doesnt really have an end phase turning them on/off was moved to the movement phase as the only time they can be switched on or off.  If neither of that works then maybe they were never coded to use searchlights and Hammer will have to look at it.  I will notify him.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 20 September 2017, 09:01:08
Could be that turrets do not have a movement phase or a excluded from this phase, so your turrets either start switched on or off and you can't change it.
I have never seen Princess using searchlights at all, which would be a nasty surprise in some scenarios if she would ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 23 September 2017, 12:33:04
We really, really need to sort out the Clan opponent force building, they put 2/3x the weight and bv into every fight. It's very offputting for casual players like me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 27 September 2017, 07:51:03
MoleMan, you can set the difficulty level in the campaign setting. Default is Regular Setting, if you set this to green or ultra green you shouldn't get that man enemies.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 27 September 2017, 09:54:25
And you can just delete some clanners in the lobby.

Or, as I do it, go with 2 lances by default. If you drag and drop one lance on anothe in the TO&E and then only deploy the 1st one they'll both sent to any missions rolled without any reinforcement delay. The clans don't play fair, so why should you?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 27 September 2017, 10:01:07
With my scenario generator thing I'm working on making and then sharing I set it to where most of the time the clans would face your company for example with just a star (their bidding process) and in 3049 or around there a clan mech is worth at least 2-3 if not 4 IS mechs.

Clan # units/star:
5 = 1
4 = 2-3
3 = 4-7 (probabilities out of a randnumber between 1-7)

Clan # forces
3 = 1
2 = 2-3
1 = 4-7 (stars)
*for a company
*which then is multiplied if the player has larger than a company
*so player has a battalion, the clan # forces would be X 3 etc

IS opfor is reverse and more than likely to match your forces but rarely will you be outnumbered unless it is a relief duty mission where the player acts as the reinforcements for the ally bot who is facing x2 it's number.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Twin_81 on 27 September 2017, 20:22:28
Okay, I don't have an account on github, but I've probably encountered a minor bug in MekHQ. It seems that the 'Reinforcements' monthly event always immediately raises enemy morale by 1 rank. That could be a lucky dice roll by the enemy but this time I encountered it against Greens with A-rated company and without defeats in the month. They must've rolled 13 to achieve that morale raise.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 28 September 2017, 08:13:42
Okay, this has likely come up before, but google is being pants and not finding the forum posts/etc.

My MekHQ is generation missions, but is currently returning "No random assignment table found for faction".
I'm fighting Lyrans in 3000 on Zebeneschamali as a Guerilla campaign for 6 months in the employ of the dracs.
It pays well, but my supplies are screwed - my recon lance just got shattered, while my mediums won the fight, but it was a little bit phyrric. I faked the two battles out by using the MegaMek army generator, and subsequently added more RATs to my AtB tab in the campaign, but it's still not returning suitable forces.
Help?

E: okay so a bunch more searching shows that the option for the RAT Generator is more likely to work than the specific rat tables (which is wierd, as I did a campaign previously on MHQ0.42 (the one I'm using now) where I used specific tables, and it worked fine?).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: RahTol on 28 September 2017, 16:25:07
Had the same thing happen to me. Loaded the game with pre-defined RATs and it worked fine. Playing another game (with all the same settings) and I had to switch to generated RATs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: mcjomar on 10 October 2017, 06:20:48
Okay, so running for AtB MHQ 0.42 stable.
Retirement rolls - I saw in other threads I need to give bonuses to my commander to fix having my entire staff retire after one year, even when in the green?
Leadership bonuses?
Or other bonuses?
Where?
Or only on the roll window where I can customise the retirement TNs to modify the rolls for yearly retirement checks?

Is there a way to check personnel morale to see how likely they are to quit?

Is there a way to turn off retirement completely so I can manually retire members as they get too old/injured/have too many kids/etc in a way that seems to make more sense to me?
Do I have to turn off manual roll adjustment in the AtB section?
I already turned off rolling after every contract.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 10 October 2017, 08:35:58
I think there is a checkbox for retirements/defection in the AtB tab under Campaign Options.
Regarding your question for bonusses for your rolls:
If you play with shares you can pimp your rolls with a modifier up to +3, greatly increasing your chances for passing retirement/defection but you give up as much as 50% of your contract payment.
You can increase your positive modifier by +1 with an additional payout. This can become very expensive if you have an experiance Company of Vets/Elites.
These to options are all included in the basic AtB rules.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 11 October 2017, 09:45:12
There's a checkbox in the AtB options to allow modifications to Retirement Rolls.  That activates a line at the top of the retirement screen which allows you to set a global modifier.  For initial contracts, I generally set that to -2, and change that to -1 for the next 2-5 subsequent contracts, before setting it to the default "0", by which time you should have a high enough unit rating and Leadership value to help retain personnel.  Then you have the + and - arrows at the extreme right of each member's entry, which allows you to set different odds for the individual member, such as your overall unit commander (I HATE it when the overall commander decides to bug out and abandon his own mercenary unit after the first contract), which I change to a -1 for a couple of the unit founders.  Third, you've got check-boxes to allow a month's pay as a -1 reenlistment bonus.

The highest ranking officer's Leadership rating also affects the odds of retirement, and having more personnel than his rating allows will increase the odds of retirement.  Keep your personnel numbers down to a reasonable amount.

In my current campaign, I'm usually seeing retirement rolls of 3+ on Green personnel, with significantly worse odds for the Veterans.  I tend to hold off promotions for at least one or two Green techs in each category, so I can promote them to Regulars in case I lose too many Regular and Veteran techs, or my lone Elite (I avoid promoting more than one to Elite, because retirement becomes almost inevitable).  A mix of Regular and Veteran personnel, with enough Green to fill any critical gaps left by those who retire, seems to be the optimal solution, at least in my case.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 02 December 2017, 14:39:20
So in a battle my Orion took massive damage.  Now most of it is easily fixable, but the left arm shoulder actuator was ruined and MekHQ tells me I have to scrap the arm to fix this.

When I try to scrap the arm it tells me I have to remove all components first.  And yes there's a good laser on that arm...

How do I remove that so I can continue fixing the mech?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 02 December 2017, 17:05:46
Right click on the mech in question, change the Repair Status from "Repair" to "Salvage", select the left arm ("LA") from the drop down list in the repair bay (it should be located next to the target number calculation), then salvage/scrap all the parts installed in the arm.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 03 December 2017, 08:51:30
Thanks that did it!

Now to find a new left arm..
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 06 December 2017, 11:14:14
Well, probably not the thread to ask but does anyone know if it's possible for Megamek to use more RAM?

Game got real slow everytime high speed battlemech (especially those with jumpjets) get selected by the bot.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 06 December 2017, 11:57:08
Unfortunately, that's not really a function of memory, but an inherent problem with the current pathfinding algorithm. My suggestion would be to split off those fast mechs off under a separate bot.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Thom293 on 07 December 2017, 11:53:08
Also, if your game gets rea)y slow you can turn on TestBot. Its not as good as Princess but its far far faster.

On contracts : my rating is only 9 right now, but I have 4 admin 2 vets. I cant seem to roll a contract that makes me more than 1 million credits over a 6 month period. Most are projected lose 3-6M. Is that normal?  Only about 1 out of 10 is projected positive.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 07 December 2017, 13:58:18
 Yeah you will see that a bunch, it is the cost of transport that can kill you. If you have dropships and jumpships with 100% transport you can make a buck. It is the salvage that makes up the most of your profit.

 I rarely fix up mechs/vehicles I plan to sell, I just sell them. I tend to fight huge battles (battalion plus in size each side) so I can easily capture 40-100 mil worth of salvage in one battle at times. Way more than that is I am fighting Clan era. Heck a trinary worth of salvage can bring in 100mil easy.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 07 December 2017, 17:10:54
Contract payment depends on the price of the stuff in your TO&E. (but the more units you put there the more lances you will have to deploy)
So it is worthwhile to put your most expensive units into the TO&E when looking for contracts (can be changed anytime and current offers are updated), even if you don't intend to use them.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Thom293 on 07 December 2017, 18:05:56
Ahh maybe that is it.  When a contract ends I usually mothball my mechs until I get to the next contract so they are not in the TO&E anymore. Maybe that is what I am doing wrong.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 07 December 2017, 23:12:04
 He could also have "use payroll for contract" selected. I prefer payroll as it somewhat slows down my unit growth. The moment you get Dropships and Jumpships, if using TOE (and I always add my orbital stuff to TOE) it can really become a cash cow.

 Plus using payroll I don't have to keep mothballing and activating my equipment back into my TOE. Okay for small units, but Battalion plus and it becomes a major chore.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 08 December 2017, 19:10:30
Heh that was fun...

Chase Attacker against Pirates with 12 vehicles.  I had a single lance and two helpers.  The problem was, I had an Urbanmech.  And because I lost my custom Griffin due to an LRM ammo explosion all 3 remaining mechs had to get to the other side.  Including the Urbie!

36 turns...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 14 December 2017, 15:24:51
Do people use the Instant Mass Repair Salvage??

And if so, with what settings?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 15 December 2017, 06:55:35
Depends upon your Campaign settings.  I have 'MoF 5+' destroys equipment, so set the maximum autorepair to 7+.
Tried setting minimum autorepair, but it seems a bit flaky.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Demon55 on 24 December 2017, 13:55:16
So I can create a mission but I cannot add an OpFor or create a scenario.  What is the step(s) I am missing?

I try to generate a scenario and nothing comes up.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 25 December 2017, 06:51:16
yeah, I've been having problems with this my own self.  I really would like to know how this is done so I can run a good game and not have to export .mul files all the time. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 25 December 2017, 07:28:15
Make sure AtB is on. Go to the Briefing Room and add a New Contract, under Add Mission. Also works during a normal AtB contract. Select your Employer, Enemy, World, Pilot Skills, Unit Ratings, Mission Type, etc. Once everything is set to your liking, go to the world during the contract time frame, and hit [GM] Generate Scenarios (with GM Mode on of course). May have to hit it a few times as I think it is just doing the weekly battle roll for each button push, as in you may get a no battles result again.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Demon55 on 26 December 2017, 14:45:03
Make sure AtB is on. Go to the Briefing Room and add a New Contract, under Add Mission. Also works during a normal AtB contract. Select your Employer, Enemy, World, Pilot Skills, Unit Ratings, Mission Type, etc. Once everything is set to your liking, go to the world during the contract time frame, and hit [GM] Generate Scenarios (with GM Mode on of course). May have to hit it a few times as I think it is just doing the weekly battle roll for each button push, as in you may get a no battles result again.

Just what I was looking for, thank you.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 27 December 2017, 14:38:10
Heh I'm suffering bad attrition in my light mech heavy new AtB campaign (mostly because I'm really not good at this).  And I'm on a salvage exchange contract so I'm not getting replacements for anything...

But I just won a Quasit Militiatech as a bonus... 

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=52828.30

I think I will actually use it!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 27 December 2017, 16:37:31
Make sure AtB is on. Go to the Briefing Room and add a New Contract, under Add Mission. Also works during a normal AtB contract. Select your Employer, Enemy, World, Pilot Skills, Unit Ratings, Mission Type, etc. Once everything is set to your liking, go to the world during the contract time frame, and hit [GM] Generate Scenarios (with GM Mode on of course). May have to hit it a few times as I think it is just doing the weekly battle roll for each button push, as in you may get a no battles result again.

Me too.  thank you for the reply. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 27 December 2017, 23:20:58
Coming back to MM/AtB from a year hiatus (work/grad school) so I'm playing catch up.

I'm not familiar with the new RAT Generator; I always just loaded various RATs. If I wanted to play a Mercedes campaign that started in the 3060s and went through the Jihad (3070+), would the RAT Generator be sufficient? I thought I read somewhere that it stopped with 3067 but can't locate that information.

Edit: Also, is there a list somewhere that indicates what rules/rolls have to be manually completed in AtB? I know Ken of the references/guides indicates rules that are not implemented in MekHQ, but I was looking for something more specific. For example: reinforcements need to be picked/rolled, infantry support (avoiding battles) has to be completed manually, etc.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 28 December 2017, 15:16:26
The RAT generator uses availability data to generate custom RATS on the fly for any faction or era. The availability data is based on the master unit list with frequency determined from TRO entries and guess work.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 28 December 2017, 21:14:00
I figured that was how it worked; it’s quite nice. It seems like it should include damn near everything; have there been many observations regarding balance? I assume then that it goes through all the eras?

Man, I sure miss this board. I was never very active here, but I sure enjoyed lurking.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 28 December 2017, 23:30:34
 Balance can be rough against the Clans...........for some reason I always have a Lance facing a dang Trinary. The few times I fielded a Battalion versus Clan, well they basically got a full Cluster and wiped me out quickly.

 I have learned to pare it down once I hit the lobby..................unless I am looking for that unit defining defeat.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Dalthius on 28 December 2017, 23:32:24
I was specifically referring to the RAT, sorry. I meant does it do a fair job regarding rarity/availability, based on location/faction/date, etc
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 28 December 2017, 23:38:03
 Yeah it does a pretty good job. I played around with moving XTOL RAT off the top slot a few times when running my SLDF campaign and I seem to have gotten much better equipment hitting the market. Even a few Royal's hit the market every now and then.

 But overall, it does a good job.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 29 December 2017, 03:35:04
"This part is not currently available to your unit."

D-Rated mercs in 3025 with a regular Logistical Admin.  The part I can't get?  Standard armor...  I'm also still in an 80% Salvage(Exchange) contract which doesn't help...

Any better plans possible here to get armor to fix my mechs other than finding a Vehicle tech, buying cheapish vehicles and stripping those at this point?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 29 December 2017, 04:40:01
And too late for my poor Wolverine...

Code: [Select]
   SRM 6 at Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath); needs 8, rolls 9 : 4 missile(s) hit.

        Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) takes 2 damage to LT.
             10 Internal Structure remaining.
            Critical hit on LT. Roll is 10; 2 locations.
            CRITICAL HIT on +SRM 6.
            CRITICAL HIT on SRM 6 Ammo (8).
            *** SRM 6 Ammo EXPLODES!  96 DAMAGE! ***
                >Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) suffers catastrophic damage, but the autoeject system was engaged.
            
Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) must make a piloting skill check (landing in clear terrain).
            Needs 3 [4 (ejecting) + 1 (automatic ejection) - 2 (landing in clear terrain)], rolls 8 : succeeds.
                    The pilot ejects safely!
        *** Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) DESTROYED by ejection! ***
        *** MechWarrior Januari Wanvik (Lyran Commonwealth) was trapped in the wreckage. ***
                Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) takes 96 damage to LT.
                     SECTION DESTROYED.
        LIMB BLOWN OFF Left Arm blown off.
                86 damage transfers to CT.
                    Critical hit on LT.         Roll is 8;         1 location.
                    CRITICAL HIT on +SRM 6.
                Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) takes 86 damage to CT.
                     SECTION DESTROYED.
                Wolverine WVR-6R (Shakira's Wrath) has taken 6 engine hits this phase.
                Checking for engine explosion on 10, roll is 11.
                ***The safety systems on the engine fail catastrophically resulting in a cascading engine failure!
[code]
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 29 December 2017, 06:34:10
"This part is not currently available to your unit."

D-Rated mercs in 3025 with a regular Logistical Admin.  The part I can't get?  Standard armor...  I'm also still in an 80% Salvage(Exchange) contract which doesn't help...

Any better plans possible here to get armor to fix my mechs other than finding a Vehicle tech, buying cheapish vehicles and stripping those at this point?
Check your contract.  Some contracts don't allow purchase of ANY parts (Guerilla warfare and a few others)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 29 December 2017, 08:10:14
 Combat contracts, haul in mucho ammo and supplies with you. Nothing worse than having your heavy hitters sidelined due to damage or no ammo.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: neoancient on 31 December 2017, 01:00:32
I was specifically referring to the RAT, sorry. I meant does it do a fair job regarding rarity/availability, based on location/faction/date, etc
It doesn't do well in the early Age of War era due to lack of units to work with.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 31 December 2017, 11:14:17
I did go in with as much spares as I could buy without running out of money before reaching the contract site.  It wasn't enough by a longshot.

It's a Recon Raid but that still means very low availability of parts...  Getting a few "Parts" bonuses and buying and stripping a few vehicles helped a lot though.  At least the mechs I do have are in top shape again.

Oh well.  Down to eight functional mechs from the initial 12 and contract score at -6.  We didn't even lose all that often, but the -1 penalty every time an allied bot is blown up hurts...  Or deploying in the middle of heavy woods on a recon raid in a Tornado in Pitch Black...  My mechs couldn't move!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 31 December 2017, 13:12:25
 Get your tactics skill up on your Lance commanders, you can then reroll conditions. Unless I have jumpers, I reuse to fight pitch black because of that low movement. Also, try to avoid any contract, unless you reroll command rights, that is House Command, you want Liasion or Independent. That way YOU control the allied unit and can keep it from getting killed.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 02 January 2018, 12:05:36
Can someone help me with what effect a contract breach has on your unit rating?

I had a contract where I was almost completely wiped out within 2 months of starting a 6 month contract, so instead of just contract failing I thought it would be more accurate to record it as a contract breach, as I had essentially just walked away from it. I'm thinking this has had a lasting severe impact on my unit rating because despite having 7 successful contracts since, a decent commander, plenty of money and 2-3 IS2 mechs, I can't get my unit rating above a C, which I think is having significant impact on my ability to purchase equipment to repair my IS2's.

Does it permanently limit me?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 02 January 2018, 12:50:30
If you're using field manual mercenaries: revised ("FMM:R"), then each contract breach hits your dragoons rating for -25 points. So you need 5 successful contracts just to compensate for that. You need your dragoons rating to be at 85 for a B-rating. That takes some grinding even without a contract breach.

The other things that impact your equipment purchasing ability are the contract that you're on, or your logistics admin's skill level. If you can get them up to Veteran or Elite, that'll help.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 03 January 2018, 16:58:01
Heh I had to start over as the previous company fell apart at the retirement roll after that failed mission...

So I start over, get a pretty decent starting company (Yes I use the standard setup for AtB...)

First mission?  Star League Cache...  Luckily the Random Mechwarrior I rolled to do it was one of my 2 Elite Mechwarriors.

The SL Mech is an EXT-4D, I have an elite BJ-1.  We're up against pretty much regular Mechwarriors with..  CRB-20, WVR-6R, WVR-6R and... we'll win!!  :D :)) :o

Jeez AtB is great fun once you get used to it...  (PS..  Total noob at Battletech until 2-3 months ago..)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 03 January 2018, 17:08:54
Forgot to include my question in my enthusiasm...

We killed one Wolverine and the Crab...  The other WVR fled though...  I still win right? 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 03 January 2018, 17:23:21
And I take it I need to resolve the swap for the Star League mech manually?  It just ended up in my inventory...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 03 January 2018, 19:41:32
Forgot to include my question in my enthusiasm...

We killed one Wolverine and the Crab...  The other WVR fled though...  I still win right?

If that Wolverine fled because of the Forced Withdrawal Rules, i.e. it was crippled, then yes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Baktru on 19 January 2018, 19:28:10
Heh I started over again.  Once more...

Still tweaking how I want my ruleset to be, close to the original AtB, but just a tad easier as I'm really not that good at this.  (But I'm learning).

New company has an Elite in a WTH-1, that's nice!  And, rolling on Xotl's tables...  Four, i kid you not, 4 Shadowhawks. 

Oh well at least we won our first battle against a Hetzer, a Von Luckner, a Warhammer and an Archer.  We did lose our one custom mech though.  Poor thing took two AC/20s to the CT from the Luckner and the Hetzer...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 06 February 2018, 09:32:08
Interesting thing is that a lot of Mechs that are otherwise questionable tend to be pretty solid for campaign use when you consider ammo counts and parts availability.  The Shadow Hawk is one of those.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 06 February 2018, 10:52:59
I still prefer the SHD-2K variant. Ditch the useless AC/5 in favor of a PPC.

Only problem with that one is that it has a hard time up close and personal.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Taron Storm on 06 February 2018, 15:36:44
When running a fourth war campaign, I just about always faced griffins, shads,  wolverines, and dervishes. I collected the griffins and shads, stripped the others. Fast way to make a medium battalion.
As for the -2k, just strip out the launcher and replace with medium lasers.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 07 February 2018, 17:01:42
Or just rip out all the weapons and extra heat sinks and give it an AC/20.  One-trick pony, but what a trick!

Want to get really wacky?  Go play with the SHD-2D.  Without changing the armor layout...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 20 February 2018, 08:24:19
I'm looking again at Chase (Attacker) scenario deployments.  I realize there's already canon rules for this, but it seems to me it makes more sense to do it this way:

- Player forces deploy at Start of Game
- Enemy units that share the fastest speed deploy Before Round 1

This means the player can deploy their units without interference from the bot's deployment - who is chasing the player in this case - but they still effectively deploy at the "start of the game."

- Remaining bot units deploy at Turn (-1 MP for every MP slower than the first deployed units)

Now maybe this makes it a bit too easy for the player to escape, in which case it might make more sense to let the bot deploy everything of 6+ walk/cruise MP at Before Round 1.  But the idea of everything - including the player's unit - being so strung out just strikes me as odd.  Yes, it simulates that it's been a running battle, but then in that case, you'd think there should also be pre-existing damage.  In which case we're straying into extraneous setup.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 20 February 2018, 11:34:06
You'll be happy to know that there have been some internal discussions regarding that and we've also come to the conclusion that the "attacker" should deploy together. We're still testing out various ideas re: "defender" deployment.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 22 February 2018, 16:42:42
How is there still no tool for generating a new unit in mekHQ? o.O
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 22 February 2018, 17:22:21
What would you suggest such a tool include?  There is a great variety of "starting units" in size, function, and campaign purpose.  Start thinking about it, and it becomes a really, really big thing to code.  Not that that would stop this community, but has anyone even started trying to define what something like that would entail?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 22 February 2018, 18:34:17
Coding something to go with the AtB ruleset would reign it in, then if someone creates a new ruleset for it to work from or conform to then that could be used. For example "AtB Company Start, AtB Battalion Start, Taharqa Company Start", then using the user selected faction and year would define the pool it can draw from. That said I decided to have a bit of "fun" to simplify generating units for myself, I have some of the old tools people made but I use Libre these days so....

Unit Generation Tool (https://www.dropbox.com/s/rkl0605v4iqztwy/Unit%20Generation.ods?dl=0)
Might flesh it out some more with the actual skills for each person rolled and yes I tweaked the unit generation rules slightly, it's more for providing a basic framework. If anyone has some suggestions free to mention them.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Southernskies on 23 February 2018, 03:17:11
Probably just a reminder as part of the setup process would be enough.

"Reminder: You need to choose starting funds in 'GM Mode' and buy starting personnel.  The marketplaces can be used to fill the rest of your roster from this point onwards.  20M C-Bills gives an adequate amount for a 3025 Company-sized unit."
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 23 February 2018, 09:42:20
I actually never pay for my initial units.  I assume the company already had the necessary resources to acquire whatever units with which it starts a campaign, and take 10% of the total net worth of units as the starting capital.  Which I means I also have to immediately take out a loan.

This is the way Makinus had originally set up the rules, so that any given merc unit starting out would be behind the 8-ball at least a little bit.  Now, of course, there's no point in playing if you aren't enjoying yourself.  I enjoy that scenario.

But if you ask me, especially if you play with era modifiers, maintenance will put you in dire straits quickly enough, however you play it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 27 February 2018, 07:04:43
Coding something to go with the AtB ruleset would reign it in, then if someone creates a new ruleset for it to work from or conform to then that could be used. For example "AtB Company Start, AtB Battalion Start, Taharqa Company Start", then using the user selected faction and year would define the pool it can draw from. That said I decided to have a bit of "fun" to simplify generating units for myself, I have some of the old tools people made but I use Libre these days so....

Unit Generation Tool (https://www.dropbox.com/s/rkl0605v4iqztwy/Unit%20Generation.ods?dl=0)
Might flesh it out some more with the actual skills for each person rolled and yes I tweaked the unit generation rules slightly, it's more for providing a basic framework. If anyone has some suggestions free to mention them.

Hey, this was great, been meaning to do something similar myself for a while. I've added some further columns to help give each generated person some personality traits (background, wealth, confidence, likeability, IQ, marital status), just to help build a sense of attachment I was lacking with my pilots. I plan to run the personality part of it with each new pilot I hire too.

Feel free to alter as desired. (I know IQ is a crap measure, but it avoids non PC language/arguments).

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UJAfM7XQTTxC_13meAB8IIeF02BFFbQd

(is it just me or is the setting up a new company one of the most fun parts :D )

EDIT: Slightly edited to make it easier to paste the results straight into the biography of characters.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 27 February 2018, 08:14:49
Also, the 'Show GM tools' in the 'Manage campaign' dropdown at the top in HQ can generate mechs (RAT roller) according to the RAT's of the faction in question. I like that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 27 February 2018, 20:16:44
Creating a new company is one of the best things, yes. And I like to roll my dice personally. :D

The personality additions sound nice though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 27 February 2018, 21:28:54
Feel free to alter as desired. (I know IQ is a crap measure, but it avoids non PC language/arguments).

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UJAfM7XQTTxC_13meAB8IIeF02BFFbQd (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UJAfM7XQTTxC_13meAB8IIeF02BFFbQd)

(is it just me or is the setting up a new company one of the most fun parts :D )

EDIT: Slightly edited to make it easier to paste the results straight into the biography of characters.

Not bad, modified it some more (https://www.dropbox.com/s/46o8thp0jtxtbb6/Unit%20Generation%20v1.1.ods?dl=0) based on your alterations and expanded the scale of some of the options. Though not too sure about the weighting of the results just yet (for example Terran shows up too much for my liking so I may weight it up to d100).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 28 February 2018, 08:36:57
Very nice, I would increase the chances of rolling 'regular' houses by a significant amount if you did, lots of these exotic options coming up when i feel the vast majority should be 'boring' choices, otherwise its just overkill. If everyone is special, no-one is special.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 28 February 2018, 15:24:18
Agreed, I've shifted the weighting up to 100 for Origin and shifted Social Background up to 120. Which looks promising for now, also fixed an error with the Tech Levels that got introduced.

v1.11 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/sh8jlq31uzde1yw/Unit%20Generation%20v1.11.ods?dl=0)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 28 February 2018, 19:13:41
Which looks promising for now, also fixed an error with the Tech Levels that got introduced.

Same thing has happened with mech weight class
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 28 February 2018, 19:27:02
Fixed
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 04 March 2018, 22:15:26
Would any developers who listen in on this thread tell me if it's possible to edit the technology availability for an AtB campaign so that I could, for example, have a 3025 era that has all the technology that was "recovered" later than 3025 but otherwise could very well have been available for use?  Say, for example, I want Rifle Cannons and Rocket Launchers to be available in this time frame.

I realize I'm talking about messing with the inner workings of MHQ here, but is there a data file or library I could edit simply to change when certain technology is available?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 05 March 2018, 10:26:11
Unfortunately, all of the date availability stuff is done within the code (yeah, I know).

You can get around most of these restrictions by setting tech level to experimental/unofficial and allow purchasing of extinct parts?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 05 March 2018, 14:14:16
Yeah, that's what I was thinking.  So I'd have to also extrapolate parts availability/restrictions within contracts for those.

I have so many ideas just revolving around a...relaunching of 3025 given the recent design challenge AU thread I've been dominating lately.  Up to somehow creating a RAT table which includes a bunch of those designs.  It requires more energy than I'd ever have to implement, but maybe I can do the lite version of just extinct parts available.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Senorsuperman on 07 March 2018, 07:38:25
So maybe its just because I'm new on this forum, but it won't let me download the ATB Rules... I'm really itching to try it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 07 March 2018, 10:15:37
If you download the latest version of MekHQ (https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/releases/tag/v0.43.8), the AtB rules are in the docs/atb stuff subfolder.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 07 March 2018, 10:44:47
So maybe its just because I'm new on this forum, but it won't let me download the ATB Rules... I'm really itching to try it.

They are also in the docs folder in the release.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Senorsuperman on 07 March 2018, 11:29:13
ok thanks, I was using an older MekHQ
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 March 2018, 01:05:45
Here's a piddling aside question that I'm curious how people would or do handle:  If you're not using instant delivery, should parts and Mechs be able to reach you while you're in transit?  Or do you force yourself to wait and receive ordered items before dusting off for a new planet?

I realize that changing anything from how it's handled now is asking for a nightmare of micromanaging.  I'm just curious if anyone's spent much time dwelling on this.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 March 2018, 01:18:46
On an unrelated note, we're at a point where the pilot SPA tables need a serious reworking within the AtB rules, aren't we?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 08 March 2018, 12:08:21
I roleplay that I pick up the parts while the jumpships are recharging
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 08 March 2018, 14:13:19
 If I am heading to a Garrison contract, I just say the parts are there waiting on my arrival. If, on another type mission.......raid, assault etc, the parts are waiting on me at the LAST planet of my employer (my staging base), before entering enemy territory, for my arrival. Same for pirate hunting, closest planet of my employer is the location of my base of operations for that mission and that is where all my parts will arrive at.

 It is just easier for my thinking, than parts arriving will nilly all along my jump route. Since the current MekHQ cannot split units up, you deploy entire force. I head wave that a certain amount of my force is on the closest employer planet with all my dependents etc. Since I run large units, I don't need multiple regiments hunting pirates. But I rarely take those missions once I hit a certain size. My 2784-First SW units are large multi regiment in size, but I can head wave that the pirate force is some left over Amaris unit that went pirate after the fall.

 Some day, we might be able to deploy forces to multiple planets for different missions etc. And it is on my wishlist.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 08 March 2018, 14:43:12
On an unrelated note, we're at a point where the pilot SPA tables need a serious reworking within the AtB rules, aren't we?

I think most of us already houseruled a few in, I left them out of the spreadsheet but I've added all the SPAs into my campaigns.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 08 March 2018, 16:00:10
On an unrelated note, we're at a point where the pilot SPA tables need a serious reworking within the AtB rules, aren't we?

you can hit me up on my email if you want to take a look at the last proposed version of the SPA table. This is from the Slack #atb channel.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 March 2018, 17:17:54
2nd Acr, I think the term is "hand wave," but I have to admit I think I like "head wave" now that I've seen it. :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: 2ndAcr on 08 March 2018, 18:12:02
 I prefer head wave over head canon, or some times even hand wave. Hand wave I use when I err bad like..............forget all my infantry in 2784 are ex SLDF and have to go back in and arm them with Mauser 960 after a few years game time. Or like in one campaign I started in 2765, realized that mistake roughly 2773 and did the same thing.

 Head wave, is how I wrap my head around something like the supplies reaching me on time even when I am changing jump routes etc. It's either that or I am blessed with a Logistic's command that practices witch craft.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 08 March 2018, 22:49:39
Witchcraft.  Definitely.  What, the sacrificial chickens on order weren't a tipoff? ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BLOODWOLF on 09 March 2018, 00:51:18
For parts delivery I always setup it up to be min: transit time to the planet (or 1 day if traveling in space) and then + 2D6 - Mos.  And RP that the parts/units arrive on another jumpship and get transported to mine by dropship if I am recharging or just jumped into the next system.  Taking deliveries in space while docked to a jumpship always made sense to me.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 13 March 2018, 17:35:37
Is there any way to force MHQ to allow me to refit extinct parts?  I want to, for example, slap a Light AC/5 on a Dragon.  It isn't available for refit even though I have it in stock.  Game year is 2900.  I would suppose this is a hard-coded issue?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 13 March 2018, 18:14:41
All parts are all hard coded Snimm. Turn off every single control. Do not try a refit in MHQ. Make your design in MML and then do a Custom from there.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 19 March 2018, 00:05:37
Refresh my memory on how the Leadership skill affects retirement/defection rolls.

So at level 0 Leadership, you should be able to have 12 combat AND 12 support personnel with no penalty, correct?

The AtB rules state it's +6 per level of leadership, so
at level 1 Leadership, you should be able to have 18 combat and 18 support personnel, at a maximum, before penalties to the retirement rolls occur?  Am I correct?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: scJazz on 19 March 2018, 06:42:52
Refresh my memory on how the Leadership skill affects retirement/defection rolls.

So at level 0 Leadership, you should be able to have 12 combat AND 12 support personnel with no penalty, correct?

The AtB rules state it's +6 per level of leadership, so
at level 1 Leadership, you should be able to have 18 combat and 18 support personnel, at a maximum, before penalties to the retirement rolls occur?  Am I correct?

That is how it should work yes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 06 April 2018, 20:54:58
What does AtB require for a successful recon raid mission?  The mission brief states:

Quote
Victory Conditions:
One of player's units must reach opposite map edge and remain immobile there for 2 turns (not counting the turn when it reaches the hex) and then return to starting map edge while keeping more than 3/4 of force alive.

Observations:
Defender controls the battlefield after the battle unless the attacker destroys 50% of defender units.
If successful, attacker gains random bonuses.

I haven't had any random bonus applied at the end of one of these, though.  Is the bot looking for a particular mech to go to the opposite side or a particular hex for the destination?  What does it consider "immobile"?  I've had mechs just stand in one spot for 2-3 rounds after arriving, and I've had mechs shut down for two rounds.  Neither seems to count.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 06 April 2018, 21:45:01
This is one of those things that you have to keep track of manually (just like you have to keep track of force destruction percentage counts manually).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 07 April 2018, 01:28:52
Ah, okay.  Too bad there isn't a random bonus button under the GM tools.  I thought the BV count was one of the MM options, under the Advanced Rules tab, and requiring double blind to be enabled.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 07 April 2018, 06:57:00
Iirc it does work if you flee with the recon mech. It is probably enough to flee with any one mech, because I don't believe MM keeps track of that.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 07 April 2018, 10:58:03
I will have to try that.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Taron Storm on 07 April 2018, 13:47:34
If you are the attacker, you get the bonus if there is less than 50% of the enemy bv  left and you win the scenario.
That's what I've received numerous times. Haven't played much on the latest build yet.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 07 April 2018, 15:28:53
I don't know if MHQ is coded so you need to have battlefield control (50%+ enemy destroyed), but RAW it's 1d6-2 bonuses, so it's possible to win the scenario and still not get anything.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PurpleDragon on 02 May 2018, 18:25:54
Here's a piddling aside question that I'm curious how people would or do handle:  If you're not using instant delivery, should parts and Mechs be able to reach you while you're in transit?  Or do you force yourself to wait and receive ordered items before dusting off for a new planet?

I realize that changing anything from how it's handled now is asking for a nightmare of micromanaging.  I'm just curious if anyone's spent much time dwelling on this.

I actually have given this some thought.  Either I wait for things to arrive. Or, the enemy knows I'm coming and is waiting for me on arrival. 
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Lionel76 on 02 May 2018, 20:31:28
Hi, I was wondering if there was a Discord server for AtB development.

I'm trying to run a multiplayer co-op campaign of Battletech where one person handles MekHQ and battles are resolves via multiplayer. I'll likely have to use some house rules and maybe edit the existing rules as well. Is there a place I can get feedback/help on this and share my work?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 04 May 2018, 20:01:51
Question as to how the community thinks its best to handle a garrison contract when the planet changes hands?  Contracted by CapCon, Enemy FWL, but Hanse gave half the CapCon to his wife for a wedding gift...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Snimm on 04 May 2018, 20:24:55
I'd say the contract should probably terminate immediately.  Cleanest way to handle it, anyway.  You could either make it successful or just cancel it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: zulf on 04 May 2018, 23:58:01
right its got to be a breach of contract if you loose the thing I'm supposed to be protecting right?  lol
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Random on 05 May 2018, 03:23:53
All depends on the terms of the contract I expect.

It may be a garrison contract but are you garrisoning the whole planet or just part of it.
Is you employer the State (FWL, CC, FC.....) or are employed buy some functionary or organization in the name of the State so that they can fulfill there obligations to the state.
Under what terms did the planet change hands.

In general term I would say that in the unit has successfully fulfilled their contract up until that point (positive contract rating) then the contract ends and the unit moves on.

If the planet changed hands due to something that is outside the scope of their contract (and most mercenaries don't take part in diplomatic level talks) then I would say that it's not a breach.   
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 10 May 2018, 12:04:00
right its got to be a breach of contract if you loose the thing I'm supposed to be protecting right?  lol
If the thing you're protecting is destroyed or forcibly taken by the enemy, it may legally be considered due to your failure.  If it's handed over to the enemy in a larger political settlement, you protected it up until it was no longer in the possession of your employer, and you had no control over its change of ownership.  Contract no longer valid, and if successful up until that point, you can just cancel the remainder of the contract.  If the contract has been unsuccessful up to that point, then depending on the item in question and your role in defending it, you may held be partially or even fully responsible for it being handed over (your employer probably wouldn't have handed it over it you/they were winning), in which case it's a loss.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Iceweb on 10 May 2018, 20:06:46
If the property was turned over for political reasons and you weren't hired to fight against the people it's being turned over too, it is not inconceivable that your garrison contract is effectively bought out by the new owner. 

Like if you were hired to guard against a third party, say pirates, the new owner might be happy to keep you in place before assigning their own units. 

In this case however, maybe you didn't get the orders and are still defending the planet against the invaders who have tried to claim the planet?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Le_Petit_Lapin on 12 May 2018, 14:11:27
Is there a certain amount of posts you need to have on this forum before you can view the attachment of the first post?  ???

Just looking for the rules for reinforcements in an AtB game.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 12 May 2018, 14:14:16
The AtB rules are in the mekhq download anyway. /docs/atbstuff I think.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Le_Petit_Lapin on 12 May 2018, 14:27:25
The AtB rules are in the mekhq download anyway. /docs/atbstuff I think.

ah, ok, cheers!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Lazar Ghofiri on 27 June 2018, 19:52:19
So far so good with the Against the Bot campaign, but I have a few questions:

- For Cadre Duty, I get three allied mechs under my control. I've seen some people claim that you should reduce the size of your own lance to three mechs while on this mission, so you don't exceed the 6 unit cap.

Is that correct?

- I am accumulating a lot of bonus civilian units, like small APCs and flatbeds, etc. as well as a lot of cheap foot infantry from the personnel market. All these units seem weak and have very low BV values. In a tabletop game they'd be good support units.

Is there any effective way to use them within the standard ATB rules? They don't seem capable of standing alone or worth a slot in a lance, but in a BV matched game they might be ok. ATB has slot limits though.

I'm aware of the special, manually rolled rules for bonuses from having an infantry in your TO&E, but I am more wondering how to use these low value units in general games. I can't even bring them in as reinforcements, unless I put them in my TO&E and give them "fight" or "scout" orders.

I don't want to add too much micromanagement / manual rolling or house rules and I don't want to "cheat"; would it be easier for me to just sell everything that can't justify a slot in a 4 unit lance, and just focus on mechs and powerful AFVs in 3-4 unit lances?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 28 June 2018, 03:40:58
So far so good with the Against the Bot campaign, but I have a few questions:

- For Cadre Duty, I get three allied mechs under my control. I've seen some people claim that you should reduce the size of your own lance to three mechs while on this mission, so you don't exceed the 6 unit cap. 

Is that correct?

Yep. So you could bring only a max of three Units in the Lance for yourself.
But basically: your campaign = your rules
I personally do just add one 'Mech to my Lance on cadre duties, hire the personal, add it to my TOE and treat those MechWarriors and their 'Mechs as part of my unit. So they gain some experience and develope. You need to get attached to those guys, don't you? I delete the 'mechs and MechWarriors when the contract is over.

Quote
- I am accumulating a lot of bonus civilian units, like small APCs and flatbeds, etc. as well as a lot of cheap foot infantry from the personnel market. All these units seem weak and have very low BV values. In a tabletop game they'd be good support units.

Is there any effective way to use them within the standard ATB rules? They don't seem capable of standing alone or worth a slot in a lance, but in a BV matched game they might be ok. ATB has slot limits though.

I'm aware of the special, manually rolled rules for bonuses from having an infantry in your TO&E, but I am more wondering how to use these low value units in general games. I can't even bring them in as reinforcements, unless I put them in my TO&E and give them "fight" or "scout" orders.

I don't want to add too much micromanagement / manual rolling or house rules and I don't want to "cheat"; would it be easier for me to just sell everything that can't justify a slot in a 4 unit lance, and just focus on mechs and powerful AFVs in 3-4 unit lances?

If you have the AtB rules box checked in your MHQ campaign options one infantry platoon counts as much as a 'Mech regarding lance size limits and for your Commander's command rating when it comes to retirement/defection at the end of a contract. The AtB rules have a line that you can put your infantry on defend orders and can use them in any battle where your lance is deployed as defender, so these obviously wouldn't count against your lance size limit (and lance weight as well). To avoid much micromanagement, create a force in your TOE, add your infantry to it and when you have a defender battle just deploy them. You still have to manage their deployment in the MM lobby as they are treated as reinforcements and will enter the game very late otherwise.
I also highly recommend using a mechanized infantry unit as medevac so you can potentially rescue a killed MechWarrior.

As I stated above, your campaign=your rules. It isn't really cheating if you want to throw in some infantry to spice up your MegaMek battles. It adds to the flavour and diversity and you can really come up with some nice scenarios where you have the infantry deployed in the center map and the 'Mechs come in as a rescue, guns blazing and stuff. Besides - we all love those little buggers and there is nothing more glorious in BT as conventional infantry flatening a big stompy robot - oh yeah! ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: vagabond820 on 01 July 2018, 12:38:28
My searches have been unproductive, so its time to ask:  how much of the rules document has been automated by Ralgith and the MekHQ team?

How much of what remains requires physical intervention?

Secondary, has anyone considered making a PDF rulebook for AtB?  Something that isn't just a look at the Mechanics of the rules but also the why and how?  Cause the spreadsheet reads more like a tech document than how to play.  Especially when it comes to understanding which rules have been automated or not.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 01 July 2018, 22:13:35
The main meat of it - contract and scenario generation has been implemented in MekHQ. Also, the retirement/defection system.

The house and pirate rules are not implemented, and neither are the various support rules, such as infantry or determining if a lance can reinforce.

The next revision of AtB guts the scenario generation system pretty thoroughly - I've got some prototype rules posted for feedback here (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=61882.0), and other folks have been working on a revision of the rest of the rules.

As for writing fluff, well, the preferred approach appears to be to let the player define their own fluff, as it's difficult to procedurally generate good fluff (as shown in the recent HBS:BattleTech, e.g. Restoration lending tanks to the Directorate, and the tanks are actually assault mechs).
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 02 July 2018, 03:05:53
As for writing fluff, well, the preferred approach appears to be to let the player define their own fluff, as it's difficult to procedurally generate good fluff (as shown in the recent HBS:BattleTech, e.g. Restoration lending tanks to the Directorate, and the tanks are actually assault mechs).

That's just poor coding, the game could check for the unit type via a tag or unit type check. It simply doesn't, another step is to simply remove the mention to the exact type of unit.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: vagabond820 on 02 July 2018, 15:01:00
The main meat of it - contract and scenario generation has been implemented in MekHQ. Also, the retirement/defection system.

The house and pirate rules are not implemented, and neither are the various support rules, such as infantry or determining if a lance can reinforce.

The next revision of AtB guts the scenario generation system pretty thoroughly - I've got some prototype rules posted for feedback here (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=61882.0), and other folks have been working on a revision of the rest of the rules.

As for writing fluff, well, the preferred approach appears to be to let the player define their own fluff, as it's difficult to procedurally generate good fluff (as shown in the recent HBS:BattleTech, e.g. Restoration lending tanks to the Directorate, and the tanks are actually assault mechs).

THANK YOU.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 02 July 2018, 20:19:47
Dunno if this would be AtB or MekHQ, but would it be possible to track mobility kills on the opfor for XP purposes?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 03 July 2018, 04:57:39
Dunno if this would be AtB or MekHQ, but would it be possible to track mobility kills on the opfor for XP purposes?

I guess it's difficult as damage usually come from different sources before a 'Mech becomes immobile.
If the enemy ejects you get to assign the the kill manually in the post battle procedure.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 03 July 2018, 10:14:58
That's what I have been doing, but when there are a dozen mobility kills it get hard to remember who disabled what without writing it down.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 03 July 2018, 12:45:31
If I get a kill like that I usually write it down. Otherwise I'd forget who killed what as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 04 July 2018, 07:09:32
I have an open excel sheet on my second monitor to write stuff like that down.
Yep, it's a bit of paperwork. I usually have to look back in the round reports to find out who did the most damage, decapacitated the legs of a 'Mech when the 'MechWarrior ejects. Really cumbersome if that MechWarrior has taken a nap (i.e. Koed) for several rounds.
For picking up enemy MechWarriors and manually assign kills I just need to copy & paste in MechHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Lazar Ghofiri on 05 July 2018, 18:56:02
Thanks for the help earlier.

What do you do guys do with the primitive mechs that keep getting awarded from civilian rescue missions?

It seems like it's better to have a smaller, high quality unit, and that it's quite expensive to refit them. Also it seems that the game won't let you customize them that much, I can't install normal armor for example.

Should they just be sold off?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: JagdFlanker on 05 July 2018, 19:51:13
Thanks for the help earlier.

What do you do guys do with the primitive mechs that keep getting awarded from civilian rescue missions?

It seems like it's better to have a smaller, high quality unit, and that it's quite expensive to refit them. Also it seems that the game won't let you customize them that much, I can't install normal armor for example.

Should they just be sold off?

you can definitely sell them for the cash, but i'v been doing full refits on them and upgrading them to the latest tech no problem so interesting you'v been having issues with that

i use them as backups for my main lance just in case i lose a mech and have to wait to salvage or buy a suitable replacement
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Lazar Ghofiri on 05 July 2018, 19:58:31
you can definitely sell them for the cash, but i'v been doing full refits on them and upgrading them to the latest tech no problem so interesting you'v been having issues with that

I can refit them with an existing refit package, if one exists. Shadowhawk SHD-1r has no refit package in 3049. This refit package usually seems to turn them non-primitive.

But if I try to customize them in the Meklab built into MekHQ, customization is very limited, I can't turn them non-primitive, the base type is greyed out, and primitive mechs can't be refitted with normal armor
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 06 July 2018, 02:49:47
I never bothered much with primitives.
If you have some spare maintainance time on an elite mechtech, it might be worth it to keep this things for a few maintainance cycles in your hangar to bump the quality up, then mothball it and wait for a good roll on the mercenary market.
If you are not deployed in contract, have an elite mechtech and A rating you get any 'Mech to F quality in three or four maintainance cycles.
For refitting you could do it in the mechlab maybe and generate a new template. Even if it works, it will take a long time, require factory and so I doubt it's worth the money compared to just increasing the value and sell it on the market with a bonus. Unless you want to keep it for story reasons ;)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 06 July 2018, 04:34:42
Is the market for selling implemented now?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 06 July 2018, 08:00:29
Not to my knowledge. Still got to do this manually which is a bit tedious if you want to sell lot off stuff.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BubbleLord on 07 July 2018, 16:28:10
So I'm aware that the Noble and Pirate playstyle rules aren't officially supported or anything within MekHQ, but has anyone been able to "ad-hoc" run one through it? I've played AtB for a long while now, but figured I'd make this account the other day specifically to ask; I'm hoping to spruce up my MekHQ experience up a bit from the more monotonous Merc group I've had running (they're just now entering the Fourth Succession War, nearly 4 years in-game down the road). Initially I had been tempted to try a Noble run (even made the art for the TO&E forces T_T) but realized there had been some issues since I couldn't get it to handle mission rolls and general generation purposes I've come to rely on MekHQ's AtB ruleset to do.

If not, then I guess it's back to the mercenary life and to hope that we could see proper implementation in the future. Hope to be more active here, too; maybe throw out an AAB or Campaign log for a new one in the future. Seems like there's a lot less of that type of thing hovering around these days.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Battleclad on 08 July 2018, 05:27:16
You can kind of use the rules as is, just pick a theme. For example for a Davion noble house you'd only use Davion contracts to determine where the deploy to (and use GM generate if you don't roll any viable ones), payments and etc would remain the same. Just no retirement roles.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 09 July 2018, 07:27:51
I would still roll for retirement as even house unit soldiers can become unfit for service by aging, but not for defection.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BubbleLord on 09 July 2018, 12:08:14
Mind you I wasn't talking about a House UNIT, but rather a noble serving one of the houses :P

But I do suppose that lines up a bit with what I was considering. The generation of battles, to me, is the part that makes it sore. But that does confirm that some of my ideas might work (use a generated contract, but maybe edit it as needed) to better get everything working within MekHQ. The less paperwork the better these days @_@ probably one of the reasons I'm pretty content running my mercenaries on AtB.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Strategiusz on 26 August 2018, 15:34:18
From the .xls file, Battle sheet: "Reinforcements do not count for victory/defeat conditions."

Does it mean killing enemy reinforcements doesn't count?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 26 August 2018, 15:37:11
THat is correct.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 08 August 2019, 04:16:33
Just a heads up. There is a new version (v3) of the CampaignAnon's ATB guide.
(This has rekindled my interested in MekHQ/AtB)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/awpk2byt5pugd8w/Against_the_Bot_Starter_Guide_v3.pdf/file
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 10 August 2019, 10:29:44
AtB question.

When I get a notification "Bonus 4 parts"

Do I need to GM add those parts? Is it ANY parts?
Or are they randomly added by MekHQ?


EDIT: ok, if someone reads this and has the same question, if you go to purchase parts screen, you can use the bonus to purchase them. (there is an option similar to "GM add")
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dgorsman on 10 August 2019, 11:45:27
I've seen that for the bonus parts.  What about the bonus hires - how are those handled?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 10 August 2019, 12:20:37
good question.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 10 August 2019, 15:52:01
As for the parts:
Depending on your unit rating and contract you might sometimes not be able to aquire some much needed replacements. This is when the target number is "impossible". With bonus parts you can just buy them without doing a roll.
For Bonus hires:
You only get on rolly each week on the personal marked. When in contract, you can't even choose what you are looking for like you could when being not under contract with a paid recruitment roll. This enables you to aquire what you need instantly, be it a MechWarrior, Tech, whatever. You still have to determine his/her experience level modified by your HR Administrators rating. I think MHQ does this automatically - just go to the markedtplace -> hire.
At least that is how I understand it :)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 11 August 2019, 08:56:40
I think even when I am in a contract, I can do a 'hire mechwarrior' regardless.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dgorsman on 11 August 2019, 15:35:02
When purchasing parts, thes a button for bonus parts if available.  With hiring, I've never seen anything that could be considered as such.  Is it just implemented behind the scenes, or...?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 11 August 2019, 15:55:30
Normally, in AtB, you're only supposed to use the personnel market to hire personnel. When you get a "free recruit", you can use the standard hire menu. There's no mechanism currently to enforce that, it's left up to the player.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BikeRacks on 11 August 2019, 16:18:23
Normally, in AtB, you're only supposed to use the personnel market to hire personnel. When you get a "free recruit", you can use the standard hire menu. There's no mechanism currently to enforce that, it's left up to the player.
I apologize if this has already been asked before (couldn't find anything searching around). Since the personnel market in the atb rules only creates roughly 1 recruit per week. I'm assuming its not meant to be used to create your starting force, but expected to be the only method for hiring after initial force creation?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 11 August 2019, 17:10:18
oh yes, starting force is free (12 mechwarriors and their units). Just use 'Hire mechwarrior' 12 times (GM add). Same for their units. And the non-coms
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 12 August 2019, 08:12:10
As NickAragua said, when you follow the AtB rules you should use the "Hire" tab only at certain circumtances (Force generation, bonus hires, etc.).
You can get more offers and chosse the category of available personal by doing a "Paid recruitment roll" for 100.000 credits each week. What quality your headhunters find and how many depends on the admin skill of your HR Admin.
Sneaky hint for fresh starters: Hire an HR Admin in your starting roster for free first, then make your rolls for the rest of your personal. Providing you do not get a veteran or better MechTech in the starting roster, use paid recruitment rolls to get one asap. Helps much to prevent your 'Mechs arriving at the first contact location with a force in tatters.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 12 August 2019, 08:56:54
Even though I posted a couple of times this month, let me do a personal summary.

I started playing AtB 2-3 years ago, and it was a wonderful experience. Then HBS got released and short of drifted away. But now, because of the kickstarter, I returned to MekHQ and it's wonderful learning AtB all over again. No really, I love setting up the initial campaigns! But there are some lingering thoughts I need to write down.

1. This thread seems to have died down. I guess it's a combination of HBS BattleTech and the fact that most talking is being done in the slack channel? It's a petty, because slack is limited as far as 'backlog' reading is concerned, unless you are a paying customer of slack

2. I have been thinking about the shares system (which I love) and the death of a mechwarrior. Would it make sense if instead of 'deducting' his share, a relative that inherited the mech could join the Unit (and random roll him, 1d6, rolling 1=no mech driving heirs)? Would this mess the economy of side of AtB?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 12 August 2019, 10:01:58
Quote
2. I have been thinking about the shares system (which I love) and the death of a mechwarrior. Would it make sense if instead of 'deducting' his share, a relative that inherited the mech could join the Unit (and random roll him, 1d6, rolling 1=no mech driving heirs)? Would this mess the economy of side of AtB?

I think it's an excellent idea to give your campaign a kind of narrative. As your are virtually GMing your own campaign you can do as you you want, I guess.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 13 August 2019, 05:35:52
actually I just reread rules 2.31 and there is indeed a rule on how to handle death of a shareholder, so I'll just use the 'official' rule instead.

But, I got another question. I've been reading CampaignAnon's guide and he recommends giving the 'sargeant' rank to support personnel, even Astechs. How does this affects the campaign mechanicaly? I mean does it affect some part of the AtB campaign?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 13 August 2019, 10:17:20
The only thing it affects that I can think of is that they get paid more.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 13 August 2019, 16:43:18
Thanks NickAragua, I will NEVER give them ranks then!

Another question, I am a little confused about the training lance. I understand that green mechwarrior get 1 exp per week if their are in a Training Lance, but then in the 'campaign' sheet it says:

Code: [Select]
Experience Advancement
Both your mechwarriors and vehicle crews receive experience in battle or (for very green pilots) by training. This experience
is tracked using Experience Points (XPs) and you they gain then according to the following table:
+ 1 xp every month if rolling 10+ in a 2d6.
+ 1 xp for every battle fought, regardless of the battle result.
+ 1 xp for every unit destroyed by the mw/crew
[b]+ 1 xp each turn for each Green mw/crew in a training lance.
[/b]+ 1 xp for every 25 sucessfull task performed (Techs/Doctors)

What does it mean by "turn"? Is it a 'turn' of training, as in one week?
Or is it talking about the scenario when a training units gets attacked? Is it an actual combat turn?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 13 August 2019, 17:13:27
You used to have to do all the bookkeeping yourself, and I guess a turn was a week. That is why so many other things are generated on a weekly base as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 14 August 2019, 11:16:50
Ok, if it means that weakly bonus, then I don't have to do anything by hand. It's automated (I just noticed)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: MoleMan on 16 August 2019, 02:16:00
Ooh, I never noticed the one xp per battle bit, that's handy, I don't think that is automated either but it's something I thought about doing myself anyway
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 16 August 2019, 06:39:56
So, I'm running a vee-heavy force for the first time, and I'm trying to figure out how it works. I've got 3 Manticores and 1 Rhino in each lance.

So, I know that the piloting and gunnery skills are averaged out, but it doesn't seem consistent which way it rounds, like in my Rhino there are 6 total crew, and sometimes with 3 Vets and 3 Elites, it counts as Elite for gunnery, and other times it counts as Veteran.

And how do special abilities work? It seems that having 3 people in a 6 person crew that all have the same ability means it shows up in Megamek scenarios, but again, only some of the time. Does it only work for one ability?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Sir Chaos on 16 August 2019, 09:09:25
So, I'm running a vee-heavy force for the first time, and I'm trying to figure out how it works. I've got 3 Manticores and 1 Rhino in each lance.

So, I know that the piloting and gunnery skills are averaged out, but it doesn't seem consistent which way it rounds, like in my Rhino there are 6 total crew, and sometimes with 3 Vets and 3 Elites, it counts as Elite for gunnery, and other times it counts as Veteran.

And how do special abilities work? It seems that having 3 people in a 6 person crew that all have the same ability means it shows up in Megamek scenarios, but again, only some of the time. Does it only work for one ability?

The crew´s Piloting score is that of the driver. The Gunnery score should be the average of the gunners´ scores.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 16 August 2019, 09:22:03
Oh, so maybe the gunnery of the pilot doesn't factor in? That might make sense. Still trying to figure out how SPAs work, tho. Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 16 August 2019, 10:11:19
I think I've puzzled it out! In order for it to look at two SPAs from a single member of a given vehicle's crew, that person has to have a rank higher than Private.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Sir Chaos on 16 August 2019, 10:34:51
I think I've puzzled it out! In order for it to look at two SPAs from a single member of a given vehicle's crew, that person has to have a rank higher than Private.

I think it´s only the highest-ranked crew member that needs the SPAs. Not sure what happens if two member tie for highest rank.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: magnusmd on 16 August 2019, 11:54:39
It used to be the unit's commander who had to have all of the SPAs

In the current development version (0.45.4), at least half of the crew (rounded up) must have an SPA for it to count.  Crew-served units that use this rule include large spacecraft, vehicles, infantry, battle armor and tripod mechs.

Eventually SPAs will be further modified to work according to IO rules
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 16 August 2019, 12:03:29
Ah, it's starting to come together now. So, you need half the crew rounded up, but in the case of an even split (3 with and 3 without, for example), it seems the highest ranked one serves as a weighted tiebreaker.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 18 August 2019, 15:29:18
About XP in training lances: MHQ handles it automatically, but only if your are deployed in a contract.
About SPAs in multi personal vehicles:
It's complicated :D
I have an LRM Carrier with a crew of four. If I give two gunners the same skill (Cluster Hitter for example) it will not count. If one of the gunners is the vehicle commander (the guy which picture is shown in the TOE) the skill will count. If the driver is the commander of the vehicle and doesn't have the skill, all three gunners must have the skill to make it work in MM.
So you really have to plan ahead who you will make the commander and which skill you give to each crewmember.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: BairdEC on 21 January 2020, 23:21:20
I'm considering working on the civilian RATs since they need some year-specific entries (https://github.com/MegaMek/mekhq/issues/1416).  It looks like the individual RATs are organized by folder for year>faction> type> class> rat_file.txt.  I'm a little fuzzy on how MHQ knows where to look for a specific file since the file path doesn't always match up to the name listed in the .xml files in .\data\universe\ratdata\.  I.e., .\data\rat\rat_default.zip\(3005 - 3039) - Historical - Brush Wars\Ronin Wars\House Kurita\Mech\Medium vs. <rat source='Historical-Brush Wars-Ronin War'>.  I see that the <rat name='3034 Free Rasalhague Republic Mech - Assault  A'>  will match up to a specific file name.

I noticed the RATs will generally have a limited list of units.  I'm thinking that means I would need to create individual files for each era/ starting year.  Would the later files need to include the units from the earlier files, or does MHQ have the ability to parse multiple files when generating forces?  I also noticed that the <chassis> tags have a :YEAR flag.  Would that would allow just creating a .xml file that references the current CivilianUnits.txt file?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 22 January 2020, 11:40:16
I'm a little fuzzy........
The RATs get loaded into memory and the name is always the first line of the RAT file.
(http://i.imgur.com/5bLPrxUl.png) (https://imgur.com/5bLPrxU)
So in this case
Arcadian Cuirassiers Heavy Mechs

I noticed the RATs will generally have a limited list of units.  I'm thinking that means I would need to create individual files for each era/ starting year.  Would the later files need to include the units from the earlier files, or does MHQ have the ability to parse multiple files when generating forces?  I also noticed that the <chassis> tags have a :YEAR flag.  Would that would allow just creating a .xml file that references the current CivilianUnits.txt file?
You can link RATs back to each other give the Example RAT file in the docs folder a look for how to do this.  If you're working on RAT generator files best to also reference the docs folder.

The challenge with making custom RATs is getting the frequency right and getting the list of units.  I would start with the MUL online and build a list of civilian unit that should be on the RATs.  Then I'd group them into era's and then link the RATs back.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 27 January 2020, 12:53:37
Apologies if this has been covered somewhere, but how exactly does picking the skill level for AtB in Campaign options work? I know you get less enemies on average when you pick a lower skill level, but what's the ratio?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 06 February 2020, 03:55:40
So I tried out AtB and went on my first mission, which was a Chase mission. I hit start, it opened up MegaMek, I started the scenario..and immediately won because I assume my opponent didn't actually have anything.

So what'd I do wrong?

Not that I mind the free cash...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dgorsman on 06 February 2020, 04:38:13
Assuming you're the chase-ee, you get a couple of turns lead time to make for the far edge before the chase-ers deploy.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 06 February 2020, 08:31:08
Apologies if this has been covered somewhere, but how exactly does picking the skill level for AtB in Campaign options work? I know you get less enemies on average when you pick a lower skill level, but what's the ratio?

Number of enemies is determined by two factors in AtB to my understanding:
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 06 February 2020, 11:59:25
Assuming you're the chase-ee, you get a couple of turns lead time to make for the far edge before the chase-ers deploy.

Sure, but that didn't happen. I rolled for initiative, and never even deployed before winning.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Shin Ji on 06 February 2020, 12:27:55
Maybe the weather killed your opponents? an F5 Tornado kills everything but Mechs, I think.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 06 February 2020, 12:30:10
Sometimes I have seen MekHQ hiccup and not load one of the unit lists when it boots up MegaMek. Were both your and the Bot-controlled units present in the lobby before you launched the battle?

If so, then perhaps there's an issue with your victory condition settings where one of them would have been fulfilled from the very start. I've never seen the game not take into consideration as-yet-undeployed units when checking for victory, but there's a first time for everything.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 06 February 2020, 22:48:21
I'll have to make sure the victory conditions are right, and it loads everything right next time. Thanks!
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 07 February 2020, 00:58:05
So I loaded my save, hit advance a few more times, got another 2 scenarios on the contract, but both of their BVs was listed as 0 in the preview (hadn't started or anything). Is that normal?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Schugger on 07 February 2020, 07:53:04
Where any AI units shown in the MM lobby?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 07 February 2020, 11:31:38
Hadn't even gotten that far, it was just the briefing screen. Or do we not get told the BV until the drop?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: yukamichi on 07 February 2020, 14:05:34
If MekHQ isn't even generating units as part of mission generation then it could be an issue with the RATs (Random Assignment Tables).

Did you change any of the RAT settings in the Campaign Options (they're at the top right of the Against the Bot tab)? Are there units listed in the Unit Market? If you open the GM Tools Dialog (under Manage Campaign) and use the RAT roller, does it give you a proper result?

Regardless, this is all just me guessing, since I've never encountered this problem before. Reinstalling MekHQ might just magically fix it with no one being the wiser, though if it's a legit bug it would be neat to pinpoint the source.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Windchild on 07 February 2020, 16:03:45
Hey Maelwys,

First, what version of MekHQ are you playing?

Second, what do you see on the Briefing Room tab, below the Start Game/Join Game/Load Saved Game buttons? After status, you should see any of your forces (which won't list BV), then any enemy forces (which will be in format Name alignment Start: direction BV: Battle Value.

If that says 0, please got to your logs file, and if you wouldn't mind let me know if there is an error or exception there (this will require you to generate some new scenarios in MekHQ first provided you've reloaded MekHQ, as the log clears on reload)
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 08 February 2020, 01:38:26
Its 46.1.

I see the mission name "Chase (Attacker), the Status is Pending, my command lance is listed, the the REgular Fiefs unit (allied start S, BV 988)

then "Oriente Protectorate Enemy Start S BV: 0" then the scenario data, like weather etc.

Assuming your mean "Mekhqlog" then there's alot of loading from files (though it seems to be loading from the cache only I guess), there some invalid quirk mentions for the Shen Long, more reading unit files, quirk failures for the Umbra, Corax C, Sytha XR and Starfire. Then some issues with units not being able to be found in various RATs, then

"Security framework of Xstream not initialized, XS stream is probably vulnerable" then some loading atlas, then

Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.NullPointerException
   at mekhq.campaign.mission.atb.scenario.ChaseBuiltInScenario.setExtraMissionForces(ChaseBuiltInScenario.java:112)

then more loading atlas.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 08 February 2020, 12:28:42
Its 46.1.
Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.NullPointerException
   at mekhq.campaign.mission.atb.scenario.ChaseBuiltInScenario.setExtraMissionForces(ChaseBuiltInScenario.java:112)

then more loading atlas.

That would be a bug. We would need to get a bug report (logs etc).  Links in my sig.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 08 February 2020, 20:07:51
Updated to 47.3, problem persisted and posted to the tracker.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 15 February 2020, 12:02:35
Well, we are required to manually set the scenario for the missions, right? Or is the scenarios are automatically set depend on the mission?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Windchild on 15 February 2020, 17:13:58
For AtB? If you are in a contract, and have forces deployed, then scenarios will be generated automatically.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 15 February 2020, 23:49:11
Is that so? When I get the contract, the mission is generated but there is no scenario. Without a scenario I cannot deploy anything either.

[GM] Generate Scenarios won't work either. Is there anything I have missed?

Well, if I make a new scenario manually and deploy the forces, MekHQ puts the random enemy for the scenario, though.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 16 February 2020, 00:30:42
Ah, it seems that I was missed something. It seems that the scenario does not generates as soon as I am reach to the planet, and it generates randomly after I am reach to the planet. :( Is it correct?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Bludlust on 16 February 2020, 01:03:56
Yes sir, you are correct. Combat scenarios are generated only after you have landed on the planet and started your contract. Then they will be generated randomly on a daily basis, sometimes no scenario, and I have had it go as high as 3 in one day. you have to advance the day to get the scenarios generated.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 16 February 2020, 02:56:38
Ah, it seems that I was missed something. It seems that the scenario does not generates as soon as I am reach to the planet, and it generates randomly after I am reach to the planet. :( Is it correct?

You may have missed that after you assign units to lances in the TO&E tab, you need to go to the Briefing Room tab, and assign roles to each lance, e.g. Scout/Defend/Fight/Training. Bottom middle of the Briefing Room tab. Some contracts may not generate scenarios every week, especially garrison contracts.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Rince Wind on 16 February 2020, 09:44:53
They also don't generate on random days but on mondays. You will get zero or more missions for the next week, with a maximum of one per deployed lance.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 17 February 2020, 11:41:58
Thanks. I can understand how it's going.

An another question: what's the Contract Score? Is it same as Reputation Factor in Campaign Operations?

And I can get various scenarios even if I get the pinpoint attack mission such as Extraction Raid and all scenarios counts? Isn't the type of mission determines which scenarios I will get?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 17 February 2020, 11:45:51
Thanks. I can understand how it's going.

An another question: what's the Contract Score? Is it same as Reputation Factor in Campaign Operations?

And I can get various scenarios even if I get the pinpoint attack mission such as Extraction Raid and all scenarios counts? Isn't the type of mission determines which scenarios I will get?
Have you reviewed the AtB documents in the Docs folder?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 17 February 2020, 13:31:28
I wasn't. I was tried OP's link before but it was broken, so I wonder where is the rules, though. Thanks for point out this. I should check it again before ask something.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 17 February 2020, 19:02:11
I wasn't. I was tried OP's link before but it was broken, so I wonder where is the rules, though. Thanks for point out this. I should check it again before ask something.
No problem, AtB is complex and while implemented it's not 100% following the docs. But they are a good start for things.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 18 February 2020, 07:06:19
Well, it is very hard to implement RPG-like methods to the program. I wonder that how you did it.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 27 February 2020, 11:00:36
An another question... How to makes bots think faster on the move phase? Even if I only have around 10 to 15 units on my force, bots are tend to think too much before made an actual move, especially for its last unit. Perhaps it stays longer for the units with fast movement?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 27 February 2020, 11:14:41
An another question... How to makes bots think faster on the move phase? Even if I only have around 10 to 15 units on my force, bots are tend to think too much before made an actual move, especially for its last unit. Perhaps it stays longer for the units with fast movement?
Princess takes longer to calculate all the options the faster the units are.  So things that might improve Bot performance. Increase memory allocated to Megamek. Use more bots so each one is controlling less units.  Remove super fast units like VTOLs and Speedy hovers.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Kovax on 27 February 2020, 13:15:25
You could also use individual initiative.  That means, instead of the bot checking every unit's potential moves, then deciding on the best, it will only do it for one unit.  Of course, that means you won't be able to choose to move your own unit A instead of B when B's turn comes up, etc.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dgorsman on 27 February 2020, 13:21:58
Avoid very flat, open maps.  Those give a lot more potential places to move to and paths to get there.

But most of all, just be patient (think chess, not craps).  Princess, on average, takes less time to move than most humans.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 27 February 2020, 13:41:04
Avoid very flat, open maps.  Those give a lot more potential places to move to and paths to get there.

But most of all, just be patient (think chess, not craps).  Princess, on average, takes less time to move than most humans.

Another point in favor of avoiding flat open maps is that the RNG loves giving the bot swarms of obnoxious hovercraft that swarm your mechs and pelt them with SRMs until they blow up.

Also yes, think back to the last time you played tabletop. Even 30-60 seconds for a unit is nothing compared to that guy sitting there at the table, muttering to himself for five minutes.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 27 February 2020, 14:04:18
For me, I have seen the bot thinking about its next move for more than ten minutes. I have seen it often, actually, although it does not do so all the times. I was allowed 4096m memory after it was too slow but wasn't it enough?

The problem is AtB automatically gives the roaster for me... Although I can fix it on MegaMek before the actual combat begins.

I suspect high MP would be an another problem, I think. My first mission was on the low-gravity world where you can move more but you may damaged if you move that much.

Thanks for the help. I will do what you guys suggested.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 27 February 2020, 14:09:10
10 minutes for a single move is a pretty significant amount of time. It'd be pretty helpful if you could provide a save of where that occurs (the autosave at the start of the turn is fine, just make sure to specify the exact moves you made on your turns.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Stormforge on 27 February 2020, 14:40:13
From what I have experienced individual initiative has the biggest impact on speeding up the bot, followed by multiple bots with each bot having 4 unit lances. Also look to what other programs you are running in the background. I have noticed that watching videos or even listening to music while the bot is moving can have a severe impact on its speed to move units. Also map size will slow bot down a bit, and not with just wide open maps. Noticed this when I started adding 40 hexes per map side in Megamek after it loaded from MekHQ.

In the end though upgrading to a faster PC had the biggest impact. I had to use the above with my old laptop to make Megamek playable before I built my first and current PC a couple years ago. This was also before some of the improvements that have been made to princess's speed. Sadly this can be expensive, and is not available to everyone. The rig I am currently playing on, the bot, with unit speeds 8/12+, tends to move in less than 30 seconds. I do get some slow down on maps 100x100 hexes with up to a reinforced company per bot, but it is still usually less than a minute. If curious I am running a i7 4790K CPU and 16gb RAM with 4096m allocated to MM and 2048m to MekHQ.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 27 February 2020, 15:10:02
10 minutes for a single move is a pretty significant amount of time. It'd be pretty helpful if you could provide a save of where that occurs (the autosave at the start of the turn is fine, just make sure to specify the exact moves you made on your turns.
I think I can give you some. Well, if I have any custom units must I provide all of them as well?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Windchild on 27 February 2020, 19:29:23
Yes, customs will be needed too.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 27 February 2020, 20:40:51
Got it. Then I must prodive the customs as well.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 08 March 2020, 23:47:01
Well, I found that a part of the reason. When I changed the bots to testbot, it gets far better, usually ends the movement of a unit within 1~2min. and even on the very complicated situation(full of inferno fire areas nearby) some of them are needs more to run(more than 5min for limited situation, perhaps it was a bit complicated to resolve). Also it says it calculcates for how many units right now(it was reduced from 4, 3, 2, and 1 before finalize the movement) so it was more easier to check. It seems that making many bots and distribute the units to them was finally have some meaning, for it does not making much difference on princess.

In contrast, Princess(which is the default bot on AtB) usually takes five minutes or more only for one unit's movement. Although I have spammed inferno Arrow IV many times, I have seen more than 20 or 30mins to make the movement of only one unit even on the first turn of the battle(that doesn't have much dangerous area) recently. Even if my force only have around 12 units on the field and either forces are far from the range. Well, the map was 40x40 so it may a reason, though. I was really consider running them manually but at that time I was found that testbot is far faster.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: NickAragua on 09 March 2020, 00:17:34
Just be aware that the testbot will be glacially slow for anything more than 3-4 units, and can pretty much only handle mechs.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: PuppyLikesLaserPointers on 09 March 2020, 00:55:37
Thanks. Then I still need princess for tanks and aeros.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Maelwys on 31 March 2020, 16:56:19
Are there any writeups for the unofficial pilot abilities out there somewhere?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 31 March 2020, 17:27:22
Are there any writeups for the unofficial pilot abilities out there somewhere?

You should be hover over them to get a description.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 09 April 2020, 04:46:18
AtB initial Starting Capital. Where is this mentioned in the 2.31 rules? Or do we use a rule CO?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 09 April 2020, 10:34:35
AtB initial Starting Capital. Where is this mentioned in the 2.31 rules? Or do we use a rule CO?

You can use either, but AtB is what the system is based on using.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 09 April 2020, 11:59:25
I can't find the reference on the excel document. I am talking about the 'starting funds'. I found references in post of 5-20% of your units cbill cost, but I suppose this is not covered in the excel?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Hammer on 09 April 2020, 12:16:53
I can't find the reference on the excel document. I am talking about the 'starting funds'. I found references in post of 5-20% of your units cbill cost, but I suppose this is not covered in the excel?

Check the MekHQ\docs\AtB Stuff for the starter guide it's a bug help.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 20 April 2020, 07:36:52
Couple of questions regarding mekhq/atb

1. How to I randomly roll for a civilian mechs in MekHQ (i got the bonus roll award from a support operation)
2. How do I salvage stuff from a mechs that has no damage and as a result does not appear in repair bay?
3. What kind of techs do i need in order to reload infantry with ac20? I got a techmech and a mechanic but it seems they are not the ones needed.
Thanks
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Windchild on 20 April 2020, 09:51:37
1) Should have been automatically done?
2) You need to go to the hangar, then swap the repair/salvage flag to salvage
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 20 April 2020, 14:45:05
1. I am not talking about the weekly (or is monthly) bonus rolls. I am talking about the (same) bonus roll that triggers when you perfom a troop operation (which is not coded in MekHQ yet)
2. Ok, this worked. I would swear it's what I did before though...
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Windchild on 20 April 2020, 15:10:06
Then the list in the the AtB rules document
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 22 April 2020, 13:34:00
I am doing retirement rolls by year, not by contract. I am also using the shares option.
My question is how does raising % of shares when getting a contract affect the yearly roll?
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: Gallienus on 25 April 2020, 01:07:47
The link to the 2.31 rules download seems to be busted due to some formatting weirdness. See this support thread for details: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=68812.0 (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=68812.0).

In case anyone else comes into this thread with the same issue I had.
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: plutonick on 25 April 2020, 07:45:02
the rules are also included in the doc directory of the mekhq download anyway
Title: Re: Campaign Rules: Against the Bot Thread #4
Post by: dragonkid11 on 07 May 2020, 09:37:36
I can't tell if I'm being stupid or not, but I currently cannot start any mission.

I got a contract, wait until there's a mission, put in my lance, but the start the game button is just plain greyed out so I cannot press it no matter what.

i haven't been playing the game for a long while but I'm pretty sure this isn't how it supposes to work?

EDIT:
Wait nevermind the date isn't correct yet.