|
I will not vote for an Inner Sphere faction, as I am not interested in playing one. However, I'd gladly throw my hat into the ring if you need an OpFor Clan commander. I was part of a Clan campaign for a couple of years, and am actually more familiar and comfortable with Clan tactics (including Zellbrigen) in the boardgame than I am with Inner Sphere tactics. My skype name is "e.corbeau", and I've played MegaMek in the past. I'm not precisely sure how you intend to run this LP in the brass tacks, but I'd love to bid against you when Clans arrive in style.
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
WarLocke posted:
Us freeborn don't always speak correctly, quiaff?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 01:39
|
|
Contractions?
|
WarLocke posted:So if you're freeborn, do they stick you with the crap mechs like Vixens or what? I play Ghost Bear, so no. Though I have no idea what the OP has done with the Ghost Bears in his timeline.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
Well, how 'bout this big fat hint: jump jets are really, really good - moreso if you're not experienced with the game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 01:55
|
|
|
If you're talking Heavy, then you only ever need one. The Timber Wolf. Clearly superior to every other Heavy Omnimech ever designed, it really points out the core flaws of having Omnimechs in the Battletech construction system.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
Pretty sure that the "rest of the regiment" thing refers to the real unit that the Death Commandos are impersonating coming in for their original intended mission (y'know, that one goons voted down?). Awkward.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Isn't mobility and forward mounted weaponry a great combination for dogfighting? Less so for Close Air Support, but as a pure interceptor... Absolutely, but Aerotech has never simulated dogfighting effectively. Very few games have managed that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2012 00:54
|
|
|
Well, it also depends radically on the environment and sensor quality. The classic example of maneuverability over heft is still the Zero, but that was atmospheric combat (clouds, altitude, and the sun all being factors) with eyeballs as the primary form of detection. Engagement ranges were often close, and most sci-fi/fantasy space combat (since Star Wars) is based on that era because of the glamour typically attached. Battletech is no exception in theme, but the games don't reflect the advantages of agility well at all with the way initiative and the turn based system works. Though it's entirely correct that mounting long range weapons on what should be a knife-fighter is pretty dumb. Corbeau fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Nov 18, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
Agility would be better represented as a bonus to initiative, more or less giving agile fighters the chance to operate the way ace pilots operate in the LP. What I'm getting at is that I don't like Aerotech or any of it's descendants, which isn't really a shocking revelation. Probably best if I stop there rather than giving in to my urge to debate the merits of the P-51. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
The problem is that when you go macro, into large army-level engagements, you lose everything that's good about the Battletech game mechanics. Finicky heat management and absurd levels of combat damage detail and individual piloting mistakes all, by necessity, get blended into the background at a larger scale. Once those things are gone, the game mostly just looks like a modern combined arms military game. By setting design, 'Mechs don't act all that different from modern armored units in the macro scale. They're debatable a bit more mobile. That's it. So why bother putting up with Battleforce when you could play something mechanically superior? Battletech, for all it's flaws, has emergent narrative going for it. Battleforce doesn't. If your big stompy robots stop acting like big stompy robots, the game loses it's luster. Corbeau fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Nov 27, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
Preechr posted:I thought that with no Candace, and with Justin on her side, Romano is much less crazy in this timeline. Is that correct? "Less crazy" is not the same as "not crazy."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2013 10:48
|
|
|
I actually kind of like the Jade Phoenix trilogy because, unlike other BT novels, they convey how incredibly unbalanced Clan warrior culture is from top to bottom. Stackpole kind of mentions it on the side. Thurston rubs your face in it. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:As time goes on he spends more and more time pointing out that its actually other Clans that are bad and Falcons are very honorable and great. See, that's the thing: he's writing it from a Jade Falcon point of view. It's not like the Falcons never do incredibly horrible and bad poo poo over the course of the books, they just don't call it incredibly horrible and bad. .. at least I wish Thurston intended it that way. I am saddened by the idea that anyone non-ironically thinks the Jade Falcons are a great and awesome people.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2013 06:13
|
|
|
Farseli posted:Did partial cover stop being a thing or am I confused about how it works. I thought it gave a +1 and negated leg hits. Pretty sure that the leg-hit-negation is a commonly used optional rule, since partial cover post-3050 is a death sentence under the normal rules.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2013 06:38
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Not to mention the Star League's colonization program was: "Find planet with abundant air/food/water/natural resources and gently caress it up so one of these things is no longer true, forcing planets in the periphery to be reliant on the Star League for survival." We tend to call it "globalization."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
SIGSEGV posted:Now I'm probably an idiot but wouldn't adding a recoil and / or imprecision that occurs during an alpha strike that would also affect the alpha strike be a better counter to this? For some reason, PGI has an ironclad insistence upon pinpoint crosshair accuracy. They've outright stated it. Even while they're trying to nerf sniper builds. It is the dumbest thing imaginable considering that basic cone of fire mechanics would solve all of these problems and be directly in line with BT to-hit mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
Living Legends: the actually good BT game. Though it does have it's own issues, the core stompy is better.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:There isn't actually any need for the players to betray each other You're talking about goons.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2013 09:37
|
|
|
As an observer, I'm loving the new deadline stance. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
Natural Selection is definitely the one to read. It's completely bizarre.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
When I played in a long-running campaign, years ago now, the GMs dialed down piloting skills to the point where 2/3 was average and 3/4 was green. It affects balance, sure (though not always in bad ways - clan pulse lasers become less ridiculously overpowered when you've got 0 gunnery and are shooting at an Assault 'mech), but it made things move much, much faster than with the book 4/5 standard.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
The logical choice is B. On the other hand, Romano. Vote F.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2013 15:17
|
|
|
Just put the clone down asap. Vote F!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
C because I want to see how on earth this trial is going to get spun when it all goes horribly awry.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
LeschNyhan posted:The biggest problem is that lying down gives up at least two movement points for the next turn. In a 4/6 'Mech, you're going to need as much movement as you can get. Even with a couple of height changes or woods to go through, you should be able to move at least 3 hexes for a +1, which is the same as going prone. If you go prone, next turn, you have to spend two points just to get up again, which requires that you run 3 straight hexes to get a +1 again, and there's a lot of woods and elevation changes. Given the Mountain Lion's short ranges and retractable blade, that looks like giving up a lot for a tiny advantage in the now. You only really need that movement if you have reason to move. If you always win initiative and know that they can't just walk up and blow you away, or waltz into a range bracket that significantly favors them over you, then taking stationary cover in heavy woods is a pretty powerful plan. Being +3 harder to hit in exchange for +0 on your own attacks (moving would be +1 to +3 on your own attacks, recall) is actually pretty boss. In a map full of rough terrain, parking in great cover is usually the best plan unless you're packing jump jets (in which case you can bounce between cover). Man, it's been a long time since I played BT but this makes me all nostalgic. A good old-fashioned trial with all of the political implications regarding how it's fought. I'm hoping that the RWR pilot goes nuts, gets god-dice, and smashes the clanners so badly that they go completely berserk and start throwing around some nukes. Corbeau fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Jan 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
The game also changes drastically depending on the tech level that you're playing. Pre-invasion IS 'Mechs are generally so slow that the game is dominated by occupying advantageous terrain features and camping them as long as possible. When you start putting XL engines onto 'Mechs then they start to get fast enough that movement modifiers are a more viable defense, so the game is more about figuring out movement paths to take advantage of cover while on the move. I genuinely believe the most fun game of Battletech is the one played between Clan heavy 'Mechs (5/8 movement and tons of guns). Terrain evaluation changes with era too. Parking in partial cover (behind a 1-level hill) can be great in low-tech games because the extra +1 to enemy attacks outweighs the risk of the punch table when damage values (and thus the chances of getting headcapped) are low. In the Clan era that completely changes: better gunnery skills, equipment gunnery modifiers (Targeting Computers and Pulse Lasers), and higher damage weapons (cERPPCs, Gauss Rifles) make partial cover a severe liability instead of a benefit. I remember people maneuvering specifically so that their opponent would be forced into partial cover, just so they could chop their head off with their incredibly munchkin quad-cERPPC + TC + 0-gunnery units.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
The Merry Marauder posted:/\ Those are the newer rules. Thank god. Partial cover was the first thing I house-ruled when I got a chance. I recall that being a pretty common house rule back in the day, but the particular group I ran with for the most part played rules as written (as long as they could break them in half). Including integrating the Mechwarrior rules for Edge. Hey, it's in a book after all!  (Actually Edge was a pretty good game mechanic.) Corbeau fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Jan 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:Everyone knows the best charging mech is the Fireball. They are cheap enough that you can field 8 of them instead of a single assault mech. Always be bowling. The best charging unit, of course, is a hovercraft. Total bullshit when min-maxed and rather nasty even when ramming with Savannah Masters. Cheap legchoppers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2014 10:37
|
|
|
berryjon posted:Man, I remember getting into the MechWarrior 3025 Beta. That was fun. It was also one of the reasons why I didn't go for MWO. That game was way better than MWO.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
This really is beginning to remind me of the Tukayyid scenarios my group ran years ago. Except that the forest isn't all on fire yet. Yes, we gamed out Holth Forest. Yes, it was awesome. Yes, it took months. Mass combat may be cumbersome as all hell in BT, but it carries a certain overwhelming majesty - almost awe.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 04:51
|
|