|
Holybat posted:The grog thing reminded me of how I got into the game. I'm a weird case of having some familiarity with Battletech as a franchise, first through MechWarrior 2 on PC but never playing the OG boardgame at all. I picked up a copy of TRO 3055 from a Media Play on a sale and got into the fiction. That same Media Play was where I bought my first BT novel, Wolves On The Border and from there I got hooked into the fluff but there weren't any BT mini players around for me at the time. This is very similar to me. I got a three pack of the two Crescent Hawk games plus MechWarrior 1 for Christmas in the mid-90s and spent hours pouring over the manual. I adored the setting, but only had those games and the manual. Then years later I worked in a FLGS and Dark Age came out, which we stocked because we were in a mall and stocked HeroClix. So I got really into that for a few years before going off to university and forgetting all about miniatures for a few years. Now I have a pretty decent collection of metal and plastic mechs for CBT and play it on occasion. My son just turned 6, so 3025 should be accessible to him conceptually.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
In Shrapnel magazine news, looks like they're starting to review submissions a lot quicker. Went from Queue position 53 to 35 in a week. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2022 14:54
|
|
|
I can't remember if there's some rule or gimmick I've long forgotten, or if it's just another case of a bad decision that will never go away- but why do LRM 5s and 15s weigh 2 and 7 tons, and 10/20s weight 5/10 tons?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 21:32
|
|
|
No one from those days is involved in BT any longer, but the answer is almost certainly "bad decision".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:I can't remember if there's some rule or gimmick I've long forgotten, or if it's just another case of a bad decision that will never go away- but why do LRM 5s and 15s weigh 2 and 7 tons, and 10/20s weight 5/10 tons? LRM 5s generate two heat, LRM 10s generate 3 heat. If they were going up in increments of the same heat they would be 4. The "extra" tonnage is a single heat sink (that the mech using it cannot benefit from when not firing the LRM 10 and is wholly obsoleted by DHS). So there's an identifiable reason for it but it's still a Bad Decision. LRM 5, 2 tons, 2 heat LRM 10, 5 tons, 3 heat (+1 ton -1 heat) LRM 15, 7 tons, 5 heat LRM 20, 10 tons, 6 heat (+1 ton -1 heat)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
Gotta keep that Dragon heat neutral somehow.  I always thought the LRMs were designed before they had any half-tonnage weapons (back when the Autocannon/5 was just the "Autocannon") so they rounded the 5 and the 15 down from 2.5/7.5 to 2 and 7 respectively, then introduced half-ton weapons like the Small Laser and forgot to round them back. Edit: Just for fun: LRM 5 * 12 launchers = (36 avg / 60 max dmg), 24 tons, 12 crits, 24 heat LRM 10 * 6 launchers = (36 avg / 60 max dmg), 30 tons, 12 crits, 24 heat LRM 15 * 4 launchers = (36 avg / 60 max dmg), 28 tons, 12 crits, 20 heat LRM 20 * 3 launchers = (36 avg / 60 max dmg), 30 tons, 15 crits, 18 heat The bigger launchers are more heat efficient per ton. LRM-10s are just awful. Anything with an LRM-10 could replace it with 2 LRM-5s and perform marginally better. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Apr 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 19:48
|
|
|
Suboptimal damage/ton and damage/heat aside, 10s and 20s do enough damage to get that extra cluster of hits on an average roll vs. their 5/15 counterparts. 5+1 and 5+5+2 respectively
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
They didn't want the Clan LRMs to be strange since they were half tonnage (Probably not because that would require foresight). For extra 'fun' look at the MRMs
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:Suboptimal damage/ton and damage/heat aside, 10s and 20s do enough damage to get that extra cluster of hits on an average roll vs. their 5/15 counterparts. 5+1 and 5+5+2 respectively But two LRM-5s have a higher chance of doing something with a guaranteed 'extra cluster' (two to-hit rolls averaging 2 3 damage clusters) and still weigh less than a single LRM-10. So if you're just looking for long-range critseeking paired LRM-5s are still superior. The LRM-10 is a pretty strong contender for worst introductory weapon in the game, the only reason it's not is because the AC/2 makes everything look better. Taerkar posted:For extra 'fun' look at the MRMs Sure, I'll bite! Extra Fun: MRM-10 * 12 launchers (72 average / 120 max) damage = 36 tons, 24 crits, 48 heat MRM-20 * 6 launchers (72 average / 120 max) damage = 42 tons, 18 crits, 36 heat MRM-30 * 4 launchers (72 average / 120 max) damage = 40 tons, 20 crits, 40 heat MRM-40 * 3 launchers (72 average / 120 max) damage = 36 tons, 21 crits, 36 heat Weird. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Apr 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
LRM 10s are awful, but I'd generally take 5+1 over 3+3 against most targets. If you're playing with any kind of points value balancing system then the tonnage of the weapon is genuinely, truly irrelevant as long as it manges to have a non-negligible impact in its own right, and the LRM 10 actually does that where every kind of AC doesn't. If you're playing tonnage balanced games the LRM 10 is much worse but nothing holds a candle to the pile of wasted time and effort that is the AC/2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:But two LRM-5s have a higher chance of doing something with a guaranteed 'extra cluster' (two to-hit rolls averaging 2 3 damage clusters) and still weigh less than a single LRM-10. So if you're just looking for long-range critseeking paired LRM-5s are still superior. Would you go with twin 5s even if the to-hit number to even strike with a 5 would be worse than the chance to roll lower on the Cluster Hits Table on the 10? I know this is just moving the goalposts to an even smaller niche, but you didn't put down specific probabilities on "higher chance of doing something"
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 01:37
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:Would you go with twin 5s even if the to-hit number to even strike with a 5 would be worse than the chance to roll lower on the Cluster Hits Table on the 10? I know this is just moving the goalposts to an even smaller niche, but you didn't put down specific probabilities on "higher chance of doing something" I view two rolls ToHit as generally stronger than one until you start talking, say... gunnery 2 or better. It's one of the reasons medium laser boats are strong regardless of the era. An average pilot with two pairs of dice to roll is generally more likely to do something, even if that something is "not much." They're less likely to hit with everything, but I don't feel that's as big a deal when you're talking about low-damage attrition weapons. Hitting the target at all is the end goal since it gives weak weapons more chances to fish for boxcars and snake eyes. You're still overall better off with a good weapon system and a skilled pilot; but if you've got a trash pilot then giving them more dice to roll will make the trash pilot more consistent. I'd rather have a Valkyrie with two LRM-5s and an extra medium laser than a Valkyrie with an LRM-10 and a single medium laser. It's a Valkyrie, it's going to explode the moment something glances its direction, but it has a few more chances to get lucky first.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 04:25
|
|
|
Taught my kid to play Battletech today. I did a simple Shadow Hawk vs Rifleman brawl and went through all the important rules. I didn't want to water it down to the point of the free introductory rules, but I didn't always make him worry about things like Heat or Minimum Range. I wanted him to be aware, but not for it to get in the way of enjoying it. All in all, it went rather well. He got to feel like a champ because he kicked the Shadow Hawk's leg off, but he also learned that it is really dumb to just turn the other direction for no reason and leave your back exposed. A great learning experience overall!  
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 06:29
|
|
|
I got in a game last night at 6k BV2. Was a blast but the Devastator is pretty horrific. So goons here play any scenarios etc? Or just straight up slug match.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
I’m running an alpha strike campaign for some buddies where they start as mercs and eventually get in with Wolfs Dragoons. Then the clan invasion happens and they’ll have to decide which way to lean: defend the IS they’ve been fighting against, or their true patrons that have been pulling the strings from the beginning: Clan Ghost Bear. So far they’ve only established control of a planet, but they’ve already salvaged a nice stable of mechs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 00:16
|
|
|
How do I get better at Battletech? Just throw myself at Princess in MegaMek over and over? I'm really bad at it. I've gotten rolled in like every game I've ever played.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 13:54
|
|
|
Atlas Hugged posted:He got to feel like a champ because he kicked the Shadow Hawk's leg off, but he also learned that it is really dumb to just turn the other direction for no reason and leave your back exposed. You carefully stood and shot him in the back as he walked off?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 14:10
|
|
|
Marx Headroom posted:How do I get better at Battletech? Just throw myself at Princess in MegaMek over and over? I'm really bad at it. I've gotten rolled in like every game I've ever played. Playing against bots will teach you to fight that particular bot but it won't necessarily teach you good playing habits or ways you can improve your play. Ideally you'd want to play against someone (or several someones) who are experienced and willing to share their thoughts on how they'd move or attack in a certain situation. Where do you feel you're struggling? Base mechanics? Movement? Target selection? Or do you feel like you have those down and are looking for situational advice to help you tweak your play?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:You carefully stood and shot him in the back as he walked off? It was less dramatic than that. In the first turn we both ran for the center of the board, and then in turn two he decided to turn and walk away. He learned that lesson very quickly and didn't make the mistake again. In any case, that was the only time I really "punished" him. I basically let him win because he's 6.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Where do you feel you're struggling? Base mechanics? Movement? Target selection? Or do you feel like you have those down and are looking for situational advice to help you tweak your play? I may not be qualified to judge, but I think it's a combination of a) positioning b) unfamiliarity with units c) target priority Regarding a), I have a tough time figuring out the best way to approach. I understand maximizing cover (partial, woods, etc) and LoS and I can find decent angles, but I'm often surprised by enemy maneuvers, and at the start of the game I have no idea where to deploy. Regarding b) and c) I tend to squander my own units and make poor trades. I'm often taken aback when an enemy hits me as I've underestimated their range. I'm also stymied by team compositions. For example, I spent a recent game hammering away at a Warhawk at range and it took my Summoner and Hellbringer* like 4 turns of focus fire to start going internal while getting raked by Warhawk LPL hits. It occurred to me afterwards that a 3/5 Warhawk at range appeared to be a much better BV investment than a pair of 2/3 and 2/4 heavies, but this kind of thing only ever occurs to me after the fact. * I have been told that the Hellbringer is really difficult to use well, if at all, but I like to field my favorite robit when I have an excuse :|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 16:25
|
|
|
I've been typing this for an hour thanks to call volume at work, so someone may beat me to this, but: Maneuvering is one of those things you have to take map-to-map, but a general rule of thumb is, the heavier the cover the more it favors a close-range engagement while a board that's more open is going to favor longer-ranged attackers. Unit familiarity is tricky, because BattleTech is so varied. In your example, the Summoner and Hellbringer are sort of opposites on a spectrum: the Summoner has traded firepower for armor and the Hellbringer has traded armor for firepower. That means that your opponent can focus down your Hellbringer and generally ignore the rather more anemic Summoner that "should" be screening for it. A pair of Hellbringers or a pair of Summoners probably would've served you better, because the Hellbringers are un-ignorable damage threats while the Summoners are fairly tanky and if you position well you can force the enemy to spend a lot of time and effort trying to kill them. Marx Headroom posted:3/5 Warhawk C This is your opponent being a dick (and I don't even mean that in a bad way, honestly, more an "Oh, BattleTech"  sort of way). The Warhawk C (2 PPCs, 2 Large Pulse Lasers) is a well-known powerhouse unit. A 3/5 firing Large Pulse Lasers is effectively a 1/5 and the only real counter to that is positioning: the Large Pulse Laser has a short range of 6, which means if you can get to range 7 and stay there (by winning initiative) you can hit the Warhawk with the Hellbringer and Summoner's ER PPCs at (Gunnery + 0 + movement + target movement (probably 0) + woods / other cover modifiers) while the Warhawk is firing back at (Gunnery + 2 + movement (probably 0) + target movement + woods / other cover modifiers - 2 pulse lasers - 1 targeting computer).In other words, you have a one hex buffer where your 2 gunnery pilots are Your opponent was also min-maxing their BV (a 3/5 pilot has a 1.2 multiplier, compared to the 1.61 multiplier for your 2/4 and the 1.82 multiplier for your 2/3). That means you're paying significantly more to be a worse shot than his Warhawk. Good pilots are tempting, but if you'd run 4/5s you could've probably brought an extra Summoner or Hellbringer and I find it's nearly always better to outnumber the enemy than outgun them. I'm not sure what you had doing what, but let's assume best-case scenario for you: Summoner Prime (2/3) (2,298 * 1.82 = 4182 bv) + Hellbringer Prime (2/4) (2,654 * 1.61 = 4273 bv) = 8455 bv. You can run 3 Hellbringer Primes (4/5) for 7,962 bv (or 1 3/4 and 2 4/5s for slightly more) and make up the skill difference with volume of firepower; but this isn't a 'you' problem. This was an opponent going out of their way to exploit a new player's temptation to upgrade to better pilots. My personal suggestion would be: play your next few games with 3/4 and 4/5 pilots. Field a few more 'Mechs and get a feel for what they can do. You can absolutely punish that Warhawk C if you outnumber it heavily enough. Punish their poor piloting by making them take more piloting skill checks from taking 20+ damage in a single turn. I would also check with your opponent and see if they'd be willing to run with a "newbie friendly" pilot rule and see if they'd be willing to limit their pilots to no more than 1 point of difference between gunnery and piloting. That way you could both field 3/4s or 4/5s but neither of you could run a 3/5. Edit: I personally find BattleTech's 'sweet spot' is 3 gunnery, you get the best performance for your BV there and there isn't much a Gunnery 2 pilot can hit reliably that a Gunnery 3 pilot can't also hit reliably. Double Edit: I also know it hurts as an inexperienced commander to lose when you're fielding the (skill-wise) best Mechwarriors on the table. But a rookie commander should have rookies under their command, being able to say "we lost but my this pilot and this pilot did pretty ok despite being worse than their opponent" makes it a lot easier to see what 'Mechs work well for you and what 'Mechs don't. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
I really appreciate the detailed and illuminating response! I'll definitely try retooling my pilots (it's a campaign and I have a static force but it'll probably be fine). I think I pumped gunnery because I started out playing with big guns (UAC20, Gauss, etc) and missing with those really sucked. Also most of my force are long range, but I'm starting to think I need at least one screening unit. I'll keep in mind outnumbering generally over outgunning, map cover, and knocking over fat guys next time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
If your opponent has an exploitable weakness (like poor piloting) try to take advantage of it. Kicks always force a piloting roll, as does shoving them over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
Something I feel like doesn't come up nearly enough in conversation about BattleTech, and specifically 'Mech on 'Mech fights, is that bringing units to counter your opponent's likely picks is a big deal. Some units are harder to counter than others, and the Warhawk C is one of those, but generally speaking something like a Warhawk C is built very specifically for the equally-specific job of loving up any single 'Mech target that is in front of it. It is extremely accurate, its hits are all large, it has enough armor that it doesn't really need to move much which helps it double up on the accuracy, and it is heat efficient enough that you can pick the ideal guns for the specific target you're looking at and not overheat badly enough that you compromise one or both of your other characteristics. This, to be completely up front, is a 'Mech that cannot be countered by Hellbringers. Hellbringers are generally very good at picking smaller 'Mechs and absolutely eviscerating it, then doing that two or three more times to make its points back up. It can also occasionally trade-up into something huge by headcapping it but the odds of a headcap are not high and it's hard to trade-up because Hellbringers are expensive already. Trading up into something big is a low probability medium reward way to use a Hellbringer, but very frequently it's the only way to use one on a given table so that's what it gets the reputation for doing. The counter for big turrety Assault 'Mechs with big and accurate guns (the playstyle you might hear referred to as "TurretTech") are three distinct concepts: 1) Artillery. Most people don't use this because the rules for it are a chore and it's "Advanced" so it's not really considered a default option, but it's the most reliable way to make a big Assault 'Mech abandon whatever cover it might be sitting in, at no risk to the unit firing the artillery. This forces it to move, which worsens its accuracy, and you can also force it to accept worse terrain. This is also very much a "Clans don't do this" kind of thing so it may not be available for multiple reasons. 2) Standoff range. This is basically bringing the longest range guns you cna bring and then putting yourself outside of the maximum range of their guns while still shooting back. The number of things that do this reliably to ER PPCs and Large Pulse Lasers is not large, and includes such standout and efficient weapons as: Ultra AC/2s, LB-2X ACs, ER ATMs (which you might not even have available yet), and ER Large Lasers. ER Large Lasers are by far the best of those weapons and it's not close. This counter is also badly hindered by the fact that most maps are too small for this to be useful, because the opponent can just walk forward for two turns and then there's nowhere on the board that's actually out of range of their guns. 3) Fast striker units. This one feels a bit paradoxical, since the Warhawk C has multiple Large Pulse Lasers and those are good against small fast things, but this is balanced out by a couple different factors. One is cost, a Warhawk C is a shitload of BV especially when pumped up like that, and you can afford two or sometimes even three fast striker units for that same cost. This means that even if you do lose one on the close, or you get a bad initiative turn and one gets mauled, you still have units left to effectively engage with. My personal favorite fast strikers for taking down things like Warhawk Cs are fast Mediums, which carry enough armor to shrug off one or two (or six) pulse laser hits, and have a weapon loadout painful enough to make them impossible to ignore. This both flushes the target out of their terrain, and also gets into the juicy rear armor for quicker kills. Number three is especially spicy against a Warhawk C, because it has exactly one crippling flaw:  This is a representation of the Warhawk C's full range of fire for its Large Pulse Lasers. Outlined in red is the hexes where they cannot target you under any circumstances (but the ER PPCs still can, mind). The orange line is where the rear arc ends, so there are a couple of hexes where you can viciously punish a Warhawk with a fast striker for not moving. My personal favorite fast striker that fits the bill and are likely to be available to you is the Ice Ferret, and in particular the D config. With a 4/5 pilot it is less than half the cost of a Warhawk C (1643 versus 3598), much faster, can shrug off enough pulse laser hits on the way in that it won't be a smoking wreck even if you only brought one, and if you manage to get within ~eight hexes (the sweet spot is 8, to put the ER PPC and LPL both into medium range, but 7 is also good because both sets of pulse lasers will be in medium range and you out-damage them; if you can spot the opportunity to get into that blind spot you want to be at 2-4 hexes where your guns are also in short range) will absolutely carve the rear end off of it. Strobe fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
Pairing an Ice Ferret D with a Viper A is a solid "safecracker" duo for the same reasons. The Viper's a little pricier at 1989 BV but it can make itself a really hard unit to ignore. Ice Ferrets and Vipers tend to have a poor reputation since they're not great at engaging the typical Clan cavalry heavies but if there's something chunky and slow and vulnerable to being shot in the back the Viper A is great at getting in and kicking the beehive. Direct-firing a Naga's standard (non-seeking) Arrow IVs at the hex directly behind the Warhawk is a fun time too. With 4/5 pilots you could run a Summoner Prime + Hellbringer Prime + Ice Ferret D + Viper A for roughly 100 bv more than you're currently using to run a Summoner Prime and Hellbringer Prime with their current pilots. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 21:55
|
|
|
What are mechs that play similarly to the Warhawk C that was manufactured later (and up to the ilKhan era)? I do not necessarily want it to be upgrades, just similar in playstyle (basically, what if Ranna Kerensky survives the Jihad and/or is alive in 3153). Also, which Black Lanner configuration best fits Clan Wolf(in exile)'s doctrine? I understand it is more or less a Jade Falcon mech, but I really like its new sculpt (as compared to the old TRO).
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2022 06:45
|
|
|
The Hellstar is probably the most obvious example, sharing the same tonnage, speed, and general profile of "four big fuckoff energy guns". The Rifleman IIC (Standard) is still in production that late, and is four Large Pulse Lasers on an even slower slightly smaller 'Mech. The Mastodon A comes reasonably close with three Large Pulse Lasers, a Gauss Rifle, and some LRMs, but is slower and durable enough it makes the Warhawk look like it's made of kindling and toothpicks so it's closer conceptually to a Dire Wolf equivalent. There's not really a particular Black Lanner config that does or doesn't fit WiE doctrinally. That's the whole point of an Omnimech, you can do with it what you need to at any given time. Of particular note for the purposes of loving with big slow turret monsters, I'd say the F is probably the best one equipped for the job with five Medium Pulse Lasers. I'm personally partial to the D for being cheap as gently caress and a total buzzsaw up close. The Black Lanner is unusual among Clan Omnis in that there really aren't any configs that suck. I'm not particularly fond of the G, and the X is probably the weakest overall. Basically everything else I can see using.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2022 07:02
|
|
|
Noted, though seems like only the Rifleman IIC can be easily ran with the kickstarter mechs. I will play around with the various configs and see which one pairs best with a Timberwolf (being having games with friends where I try to run a full star of mechs with a Timberwolf being a must-take).
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2022 08:21
|
|
|
So I've thrown myself at Princess a few more times using the map and units from my last match, trying to figure out how I could've won. This map:  And this force from the west: Hellbringer 3/4 Summoner 3/4 Fire Falcon C 4/5 Nova S 3/4 (I'm working with a static mech force with variable pilot skills and a reserve list, my other mech in reserve is a Kit Fox A, max 10k BV) Against this force from the east: Warhawk C 3/5 Stormcrow T 3/5 Nova S 3/5 Elementals (Laser) 3/5 Elementals (Laser) 3/5 Invariably, the Warhawk deploys on top of the mountains and does its turret thing. This was extremely difficult to counter because the top of the map was basically no man's land, and approaching from any other angle was suicide. After many attempts, I found the best way to increase my odds was to add in the Kit Fox, bump up all the pilot skills (most 4/5, with 3/5 for the Hellbringer and Kit Fox), and send the strikers towards the Warhawk while the PPC units stayed just out of LPL long range. Threatening the Warhawk drew the Stormcrow into the open and my snipers were able to even the odds. At that point it was just a matter of finding an arm crit against the Warhawk (which I did), and the rest fell into place. So it seems like a combination of a) more units, worse pilots to effect volume of fire b) fast strikers and c) using PPCs to apply pressure out of LPL range Thanks again for the advice, I know Princess is an AI but I felt like if I couldn't beat up the computer I'd stand little chance against humans. I have the reserve lists of some other players in the campaign so I'll try against those on a few more maps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2022 14:49
|
|
|
That might be the best published map that a Warhawk could ever deploy on and it mitigates every weakness you could use against it with that list. I recommend playing a differently map or a different enemy. You're basically doing the metaphorical equivalent of slamming your face repeatedly into the Tree Sentinel in Elden Ring over and over against at the start of the game when the answer is 'don't do that'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
Who chose the map? If it was you, it's best to remember that the Tukayyid maps are horribly imbalanced in the defender's favor and are intended for specific scenarios. If it was your opponent, my opinion changes from "your opponent is a dick" to "your opponent exploited your inexperience to pick a map they couldn't possibly lose on" which is exactly the sort of behavior I despise in long-time BattleTech grogs since it discourages new players from coming back for more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2022 18:59
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Who chose the map? It was me, we were doing a capture scenario with the objective in the middle. I figured the roads and wide open middle would be more exciting than wading through woods or rolling hills. They actually deployed their Warhawk in the bottom corner, which in hindsight doesn't really make sense to me considering the mountain but eh. I don't think it would've mattered either way, it took me a half dozen replays to get even a shaky handle on things. Also this player was the event organizer and they're pretty much the opposite of grog: super friendly, inclusive, house rules has "friendly, casual games" in the mission statement, so no worries there. I don't mind getting knocked around a few times if it's a learning experience I'll keep that in mind regarding maps though! It's tough bc we've preferred 32x17 since a lot of the recent CGL map packs are that size and mostly play in person, but I'm mostly megamek so if anyone has suggestions for balanced maps I'll take em
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
32x17 is fine, but let me be the first to mention that wading through woods and rolling hills is significantly more fun than trading shots over an open field for 90% of BattleTech games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2022 20:42
|
|
|
Lore Gurus, I've fallen into a pit of finally getting into the tabletop side of Battletech after finding out some coworkers always wanted to try it as well, so I've gone and picked up a bunch of catalyst inner sphere packs with the plan to paint up some fluffy lances for quick, small scale, Alpha Strike play over our lunches. Am I missing any iconic faction pairings (while trying to keep things kind of balanced)? I keep waffling back and forth over swapping the Atlas and Banshee, but one guy isn't a fan of seeing the stereotypical Steiner Atlas  and of course I'm trying to resist the urge to buy a dozen more mechs to fill things out until I can paint everything. Time frame is trying to be vaguely 3025-3049 (no clans yet)Lyran Commonwealth Banshee (14), Hunchback (11), Hatchetman (9), Wolfhound (9) FedSun Victor (14), Crusader (13), Enforcer (10), Blackjack (9) Dracs Orion (14), Grasshopper (14), Jenner (10), Panther (8) Fancy Mercs Marauder II (21), Atlas (19), Centurion (9), Raven (9)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Avynte posted:Am I missing any iconic faction pairings (while trying to keep things kind of balanced)? I keep waffling back and forth over swapping the Atlas and Banshee, but one guy isn't a fan of seeing the stereotypical Steiner Atlas Atlas is also stereotypical Draconis Combine, while only House Steiner fields the Banshee with any regularity. Victor, Grasshopper, Centurion, and Raven work for Capellan Confederation if you'd like to trade the Marauder II for the Victor. That'd give every lance one assault 'Mech to play with. Lyran Commonwealth Banshee (38), Hunchback (28), Hatchetman (20), Wolfhound (24) (110 pv) FedSun Marauder II (47), Crusader (32), Enforcer (25), Blackjack (26) (130 pv) Dracs Atlas (52), Orion (39), Jenner (26), Panther (19) (136 pv) Capellan Confederation Victor (40), Grasshopper (37), Centurion (28), Raven (the 3L is the standard Raven, not the 1X  ) (26) (131 pv)The Lyrans wind up a little weaker due to their lack of a heavy 'Mech, but if you give them a Goblin (SRM) tank it brings them in line, PV-wise. Alternatively, if you swap the Orion for the Hunchback you also stay fluffy while having the DC/Lyrans in rough parity and only about 5 points behind the Federated Suns and Cappies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2022 01:41
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:[snip] Thanks! That was exactly what I was looking for. I hadn't even considered putting the Atlas over with DC, and was quite stumped on what to do with the Marauder II. I might end up going with the Orion <-> Hunchback swap as well since a Dragon is on my shortlist of next purchases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2022 01:47
|
|
|
alright, i've slacked a lot and i'm only about 60% done my hex terrain, but we're playing a small test game on saturday of CBT. partially to renew interest among other potential players in our friend group, partially to keep me motivated to keep on my terrain work. i have enough to make a ~3 ft x 2.5 ft game board. we're planning on playing hexless with DFA's mods (just the ones for playing hexless) and QRS. i'm going to be using a tablet to keep the rules pdf on hand, but also use flech's sheets. for our first game, i'm thinking a simple 2v2 and mark up the flech's sheets manually. if we get to playing a second game, i'd like to try using the full suite of flech's automation. any tips/pitfalls to watch out for? i'll be taking some pics and posting of course. my buddy has like 2+ companies of mechs painted already that i've printed for him, so we'll see what we can get on display in the scenery. hot cocoa on the couch fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Apr 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2022 14:17
|
|
|
There are a bajlllion rules in Battletech and without loads of experience, you will not get every detail right. Don't beat yourself up over it. It is, ultimately, just a game. Whenever you aren't sure about something, either go with what makes the most logical sense to the group at the moment or flip a coin. On odd occasion we've simply made the roll without knowing precisely what the target number was and we've looked at the result to judge whether or not digging deeper was worth it: a low roll lets you move on without spending any more time on it, a very high roll means you'll probably succeed even if there's an additional modifier. These are all things I would do in basically any wargame though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
Huge info dump New Kickstarter coming this fall:  Core product restock: https://bg.battletech.com/news/restocks-of-core-products-major-update-of-coming-releases/ New force packs:      (The Atlas in the Northwind box is a mistake)
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
Well I guess I know what I'm setting aside some of my tax return for now  Glad they're coming out with more of the lance boxes and putting them in stores.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2022 21:47
|
|
