62 replies to this topic

[MustrumRidcully]

So, as a neat hobby in between, I am experimenting with how to adapt Battletech so that it comes with player-selected hit locations by default, instead of determining hit locations randomy.

What would you do about the mech designs and armour values to accomondate for htis and not just have everything be a race to kill the center torso or the head.

A more depth look at what I am doing so far:

Spoiler

Basically, you choose (even without any special gear) for each attack you make where you want to hit. If you roll well enough, you hit, and also hit the location you want.

For the specific implementation I am working on, I actually created a two-stage system, in which you can hit the mech, but may not hit where you wanted to hit, or hit the exact location. If it's only a hit, not a location hit, the defender gets too choose the location (within limitations. By default, only "adjacent" locations are allowed. So if the attacker aimed for the CT, you can choose to get a leg, side torso or head hit instead. I also allow to spread the damage across two locations. For the head specifically I also decided to define a "miss" region, so shooting at the head is particularly risky.)

Missiles will stil still work in a form of clusters - the total missiles are grouped into 4 clusters, and the attacker and defenders basically take turns in assigning hit locations for each cluster.

Still, even if we ignore these specifics, there is one thing I am looking at - how do you distribute the armour in a system where hit locations are player-controlled?

My take so far is to change the ratios between, arms, side torsos, center torso and leg significantly. Arms basically have a lot less armour than the center torso - that is to encourage people to go for literally disarming mechs, instead of outright coring them.

Do you think that is an approach that can work? What armour ratios would yo use? How much would you adopt total armour points to deal with the increased precision and still have mech combat move as fast or slow as seems enjoyable?

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 20 March 2013 - 03:20 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Why not just a single armor location - for front, side and rear.
You hit, you deal damage...armor is reduced...a hit into any region will have impact to another.

To hit front may effect left or right side.
To hit left side may effect front or rear.

Its sound interesting to let the defending player to choose the hit location. But instead of every shooting it just would become necessary when there was a critical hit.

So the defending player can chosse the region were the critical hit has to be rolled.... CT...as you said means "head, legs or side torso"
Side means leg, arm or side.

The single armor value have to be calculated by: chance to hit that region and armor in that region. For example with a chance of 2.78% to hit the head of a Mech, the heads armor should be part the frontal armor... but modified to consider the chance.

What could be a addition is to include the cockpit location of a Mech...the Thunderbolt or the Summoner have there cockpit at the right side...so the armor value for the head should be part of the right side....head shots will be achieved when hitting the right side.

.....
another approach:
you know the rules were you can aim for the legs or the right side....so that you can choose the fiting To-Hit-Location Table.
Attacking player just said what of the four tables he is shooting at - again i would take all armor factors together - so that shooting at the upper table will not result with chance of 1:6 in a head shot.

[MustrumRidcully]

I am not sure I want to go there, but it is an interesting idea to simplify hit locations even further, and only go into more depth on critical hits. This could also simplify gameplay (having to choose a specific hit location every shot might slow things down. No more than rolling the hit location probably, but still something that makes BT combat slow.) I may have to experiment with such an approach...

[Karl Streiger]

Found an old topic in the BG.BattleTech Forums:

http://bg.battletech...ic,17446.0.html

There i have also posted a example:

The Commando as you know can take only in one hitzone the damage of a large laser... so chances are hight that the first hit of a large laser will cause internal damage.

On the other hand it can take several hits of medium laser. Without much internal damage...although the chances to get critical increases with every step.

In this example the raw mathematics of this ... are pressed into figures. I have tested some rounds last year... but i believe at this time i wanted to much...because i even did some changes for the weapons: For example a SRM 6 is able to fire 6 missiles...thats it no reload nothing else...so i pressed the probabillity of the average to hit ratio of a ton of SRM ammo and pressed it into a single missile.
A salvo of 6 SRM wiped out an Awesome...simple because all shots hit home.

[Skylarr]

Quote

Aimed Shots:
Players may make aimed shots against units that are shut down or whose warrior is unconscious, using any weapons other than missile launchers and LB-X autocannon firing cluster munitions. When fi ring on an immobile ’Mech, the attacking player can make an aimed shot by naming a target location. Against any hit location except the head, the player makes the to-hit roll using the standard –4 to-hit modifier for firing at an immobile target.


If the attack is successful, the player rolls again. On a result of 6, 7 or 8, his shot hits the designated location. For any other result, the player rolls normally on the ’Mech Hit Location Table. (This roll may still result in the attack striking the desired location.) If the attacker is taking an aimed shot at the target ’Mech’s head, modify the to-hit number by +3 rather than the normal –4. If the shot hits, the player rolls 2D6. On a result of 6, 7 or 8, the shot hits the head. For any other result, roll normally on the ’Mech Hit Location Table.

Players cannot use the Aimed Shots rule to make physical attacks.


Targeting Computer:
A warrior can use a targeting computer to make an aimed shot against an active target (see Targeting Computer, p. 143). If using a targeting computer to make an aimed shot against an immobile target, the player adds a –1 modifier (representing the targeting computer) to the –4 immobile target modifier. (All other rules remain the same.)

Excerpt taken from Total Warfare page 110

Quote

CALLED SHOTS
A called shot is similar to an aimed shot, though less narrowly targeted. An aimed shot is an attack against a specific hit location and can only be made against an immobile target. An attack “aimed” more generally, representing the pilot’s skill at directing his attack against a desired general area, is a called shot. Called shots can be made against active, mobile targets.

Any attack can be a called shot. The player must announce the type of called shot—high, low, right or left—when the attack is declared. All called shots must be made with an additional +3 to-hit modifier. If the attack hits, the hit may be resolved on a different table than the one that would normally be used. For a successful called shot aimed high, consult the Shot from above section of the Special Hit Location Table (see p. 175, TW). For one aimed low, consult the Shot from Below section. Units cannot aim low against a target in partial cover, or against a vehicle; vehicles are also not subject to “aim high” attacks.

For called shots aimed right and left, a successful attack strikes the target as though the attack had come from one hexside to the right or left of the hexside through which the attack would normally come, based on the line of sight. Aiming left hits the next hexside clockwise, while aiming right hits the next hexside counterclockwise. For example, if an attack would normally come in from the right side, aiming right would hit the front (one additional hexside to the right), while aiming left would hit the back (one additional hexside to the left). This means aiming left or right makes no difference if the attack is coming in straight at the front side of a ’Mech, because all three front hexsides are considered “front.”

Unlike an aimed shot (see p. 110, TW), there are no restrictions on weapons (or targeting computers) making a called shot; the more generalized nature of “calling an area” as opposed to trying to hit a specific location means that even “scatter-style” weapons can be used in a called shot.

Advanced ’Mech Hit Location Table: Players may wish to disallow the use of the Advanced ’Mech Hit Location Table with “called right” or “called left” shots, as this can significantly increase the likelihood of rear torso hits.

Except taken from Tactical Warfare pages 78 & 79

Careful Aim
Instead of firing its weapons, a unit can spend the Weapon Attack Phase of a turn taking careful aim on a single target within its line of sight. While taking careful aim, the unit may make neither weapon nor physical attacks, nor may it expend MP. For every consecutive Weapon Attack Phase the unit spends taking careful aim, apply a –1 to-hit modifier to any weapon attacks against the chosen target (to a maximum of –3). Once the unit attacks, it uses up this bonus. If the aiming unit moves, switches targets or fails a Piloting Skill Roll, or if the target moves out of LOS before any weapon attacks are made, careful aim is interrupted and any accumulated bonus is lost.

Pulse/Rapid-Fire/LB-X/HAG: Pulse, Rapid-Fire (when firing more than one shot), LB-X (when firing cluster rounds) and Hyper- Assault Gauss rifle weapons cannot make use of careful aim.

Targeting Computers: Targeting computers apply their standard modifier when used in conjunction with careful aim.
Excerpt from tactical Warfare page 84

BattleTech has been around since 1984. That is almost 30 years. There have been many game cons were new idea were tried. In its current state it is designed to be as fast, smooth and fair as possible. Any addition or advance rules slow the game down.

My group has been playing together since the 90s. We have tried advanced rules and even house rules, but, in the end we tand to fall back to the basic rules. I do not own the Solaris Rules and what you are suggesting may be in there.

I appluade you for new ideas. This may be a great idea for a group of experience players. I would not spring ths on a new group of players unless you really think it will peak their interest. What I am trying to say is that in 1v1 duels or Lance on Lance this may be a nice experiment, but, in large scale combat it will only slow things down.

Good Luck and let us know how it works out.

[MustrumRidcully]

Skylarr, on 20 March 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

BattleTech has been around since 1984. That is almost 30 years. There have been many game cons were new idea were tried. In its current state it is designed to be as fast, smooth and fair as possible. Any addition or advance rules slow the game down.

My group has been playing together since the 90s. We have tried advanced rules and even house rules, but, in the end we tand to fall back to the basic rules. I do not own the Solaris Rules and what you are suggesting may be in there.

I appluade you for new ideas. This may be a great idea for a group of experience players. I would not spring ths on a new group of players unless you really think it will peak their interest. What I am trying to say is that in 1v1 duels or Lance on Lance this may be a nice experiment, but, in large scale combat it will only slow things down.

Good Luck and let us know how it works out.

I always felt that all the rolling involved in Battletech is what makes things slower than it should - and by having some things being simply a player decision, it could speed things up.

But I could be wrong, because players often suffer from analysis paralysis...

One of the other reasons I want a player-chosen hit location is that I want rules that are more "videogame"-friendly. Look at MW:O - just like every other Mechwarrior title before it, you control your aim point with joystick or mouse and hit where you aim - no real randomization. But in each of these games we get problems with intense alpha strikes and mechs dying too fast because hitting the "important" spots is easy enough. And going by MW:O, the player community doesn't really want a change on aiming - so the armour system must change, so that selecting hit location becomes a non-trivial, interesting choice.

By creating a table top system build around choosing hit locations, this could be made easier. Figure out how to balance armour locations on paper first, and then the step to adapting it to a videogame should be somewhat easier.

Another "feature" I am having in my approach is that you don't need to roll to-hit for every weapon. You roll to-hit for weapon groups. What is still "under debate" for me is how these groups are assigned. On the most simplistic levels, it could really just be one roll per mech. That would speed up things really well, I think. But it might be too simple. The other is to have it group by weapon location (meaning that the drawback of putting all your "eggs" in one hit location is weighted out by the advantage of firing all weapons together -this assumes that multiple attacks carry penalties), and yet another is to give weapons a kind of "speed" category.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 20 March 2013 - 06:32 AM.

[Skylarr]

In TT you are allowed to Link weapons. All the weapons in that Link fire off the Tartget number for the weapons that has the hardest chance to hit. that is why you normally only link simular weapons.

[Skylarr]

Also, In a Video Gane you are not always firing at the same location. you try to hit the torso, but, your shot may go to the arm or leg or even to a limb on the other side of the mech.

If you want make it close to a video game then if you mis yo will need to see how far off you shot it is. Is it hitting another location or missing all together.

Quote

Linking Weapons
Before the game begins, and also during the End Phase of any turn, a player may designate certain weapons to be linked on his units (this can be any non-infantry unit). Any or all weapons on a single unit can be linked, but they must be able to fire into the same firing arcs. A unit may also have more than one linked group of weapons. For example, a ALB-3U Albatross may link the large pulse laser and two medium lasers in its right arm into “link 1”, the SRM 6, LRM 15 and ER Large Laser in the torsos into a “link 2” and finally, since only the LB 10-X AC is the only weapon mounted in the left arm, it is in its own “link 3.” Additionally, provided the rules above are adhered to, a weapon can be a part of multiple links. Linked weapons must be clearly indicated on a unit’s record sheet.

Linked weapons must always be fired at the same target, though all linked weapons in a given group need not fire every time (for example if a target is out of range of some weapons in a link, those shorter-ranged weapons need not be fired at the target, but they cannot be fired at any other target). The controlling player makes only one to-hit roll for the entire group of linked weapons. The to-hit number for the group is determined according to the worst range and other modifiers in the group. For example if a large pulse laser and a medium laser were in a link together and the target was in range of the medium laser, then the to-hit modifier would be determined based upon the medium laser (i.e. its shorter range, no pulse modifier would be applied and so on). If the roll fails, all the linked weapons miss. If it succeeds, all the linked weapons hit. Hit location is determined normally for each individual weapon in the linked group.

Excerpt taken from Tactical Warfare pages 85 & 86

[MustrumRidcully]

Skylarr, on 20 March 2013 - 06:35 AM, said:

In TT you are allowed to Link weapons. All the weapons in that Link fire off the Tartget number for the weapons that has the hardest chance to hit. that is why you normally only link simular weapons.

That reminds me of another change I am doing. To-Hit difficulty is no longer dependent on weapon range. Weapons have a normal and maximum range, they do half damage beyond their normal range.

The mech sensors/targeting system determine the range penalties (which means it is also a piece of equipment you have to equip with various weights). This is mostly to facilitate the ability to link weapon fire, but also because ultimately, again, in video-games, hitting someone at 180m with a medium laser is just as hard as doing it with a large laser. The hit probabilities of BT just don't fit there. Obviously this neccessitates rebalancing weapons figures.

[Skylarr]

Quote

Extreme Range
Ranged weapons can fire at targets beyond long range, but such shots are difficult.



Use the following rules for Extreme Range.
• Extreme Range starts 1 hex beyond long range and extends to a range equal to the weapon’s maximum medium range times 2. For example, extreme range for a medium laser extends from 10 to 12 hexes; the medium laser’s long range is 9 (9 + 1 = 10), and its maximum medium range is 6 (6 x 2 = 12). For Variable Range weapons, multiply the Long Range by 1.5 (round down). If a weapon does not have a Long Range, it cannot have an Extreme Range.

• Apply a +6 to-hit modifier to any weapon attacks against targets at extreme range.

• For any weapon that rolls on the Cluster Hits Table, apply a –2 modifier to the die roll result when rolling on the Cluster Hits Table (this is in addition to any other modifiers that may affect this die roll result). These modifiers never reduce a roll on the table below 2.

• Divide the Damage Value of any Pulse Weapon by 2, rounding down.

• Subtract 1 point of damage from any Direct-Fire Energy weapon or any weapon with the word “Gauss” in its name
(except HAGs).

• Multiply the Damage Value of any Direct-Fire Ballistic (but not Gauss) weapons by .75 (rounding down).

• For Variable Damage weapons, use the long range Damage Value when determining the Extreme Range Damage Value.

• In the case of special rules that use range as a determining factor and do not specifically mention extreme range, treat extreme-range attacks in the same way as long-range attacks; i.e. any long range modifiers are also applied to extreme range. For example, the null-signature system (see, p. 336) increases the modifier for long-range attacks by +2 to a total of +6. As such, for extreme range attacks, a +2 modifier would be added to the standard +6 extreme range modifier, for a total modifier of +8. Finally, as it is impossible to consider every case in the space available, the players’ judgment must prevail on occasion.

• Any weapon attack from a weapon at Extreme Range using a C3 System adds 1 range bracket beyond the closest
friendly unit in the C3 system. For example, if a weapon is firing at Extreme Range and the closest friendly unit is at Short Range, the firing unit would determine the final Modified To-Hit Number as though the closest friendly unit was at Medium Range.

Except taken from Tacticl Operations page 85

[MustrumRidcully]

Skylarr, on 20 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Also, In a Video Gane you are not always firing at the same location. you try to hit the torso, but, your shot may go to the arm or leg or even to a limb on the other side of the mech.

If you want make it close to a video game then if you mis yo will need to see how far off you shot it is. Is it hitting another location or missing all together.

Yes, indeed. My approach currently is this:

You roll one attack roll, but compare against two figures. The first is the basic "do you hit at all?" roll and is easier than the second roll, which is "do you hit where you intended to".
I didn't want a roll system for "how far are you off". Instead, if you fail the second difficulty, the defender chooses one "adjacent" hit location, with a few specialities:
Head is (probably) the only hit location that also gets the "no hit at all "hit location adjacent ot it. Which means by default, if you aim for the head and miss, you miss entirely.
Arms and Legs might get a "half-miss" adjacent location. That means the attack will deal only half damage, but you can't miss them completely, unlike the head.
Left Torso has Left Leg, Left Arm and Center Torso as adjacent, and of course it's symmetrically the same for the right torso.
Center Torso has head and side torsos as adjacent.
The defender can either choose to have all damage apply to the adjacent location, or to have it split between the intial and secondary. That's useful if both locations are already severely damaged and you want to avoid structural damage - and also to lower the impact of structural damage. Critical Hits will depend in some way on how much damage a location's structure takes, so halving that damage can be quite useful, even if it means that you take crits on more than one location.

I suspect I will need alternative adjacency matrixes for rear shots and side shots (and maybe also for artillery strikes from above?), but the ideas will probably be similar.

[Skylarr]

Quote

LOS Range
For those playing truly large games across dozens of maps, players can institute LOS Range. Note that for added realism, players can use the LOS Range rule in conjunction with the Visual Range Table found in the Double Blind rules (see p. 221), to provide a “hard number” of hexes that a player can visually see under a variety of Planetary Conditions: if you can see it, you can try to make an attack.



Use the following rules for LOS range.
• LOS Range starts 1 hex beyond extreme range and extends to the limits of the entire playing area, regardless of how large.

• Apply a +8 to-hit modifier for any weapon attacks against targets made at LOS range.

• Any Direct-Fire Ballistic or Missile weapon with a Long range of less than 13 hexes cannot make use of LOS range.

• Any Direct-Fire Energy or Pulse weapon with a Long range of less than 7 hexes cannot make use of LOS Range.

• For any weapon that rolls on the Cluster Hits Table, apply a –3 modifier to the die roll result when rolling on the Cluster Hits Table (this is in addition to any other modifiers that may affect this die roll result). These modifiers never reduce a roll on the table below 2.

• Divide the Damage Value of any Pulse Weapon by 3, rounding down.

• Divide the Damage Value of any Direct-Fire Ballistic (but not Gauss) weapons by 2, rounding down.

• Multiply the Damage Value of any Direct-Fire Energy weapon, or any weapon with the word “Gauss” in its name (except HAGs), by .75 (rounding down).

• For Variable Damage weapons, use the long range Damage Value when determining the LOS Range Damage Value.

• As with extreme range, treat LOS Range attacks as long range attacks for any situations where range is a determining factor; i.e. any long range modifiers are applied to LOS Range. In the null-signature system example above, an additional +2 would be added, making the LOS Range modifier +10.

• Note that any C3 System is incompatible with LOS Range. If a weapon is firing at LOS Range, it cannot make use of a C3 network.
Except taken from Tacticl Operations page 85

[Skylarr]

Is this soething that you had seen n another game and want to try i in BattleTech?

[Stygian Steel]

V.A.T.S or nothing!!

[MustrumRidcully]

Skylarr, on 20 March 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

Is this soething that you had seen n another game and want to try i in BattleTech?

You mean other than all the Mechwarrior games I played? No.

I usually play RPGs, typically systems where hit locations don't even matter. I think for RPGs this is usually okay because things get really complicated, but tactic/strategy games are different - you want some of that complexity (as long as it's not just pointless dice rolling - and while it's a lot of dice rolling in BT, I'd see blowing of arms and critting heat sinks is definitely complexity that adds to the game.) But I think BT in general is too random for my tastes, and when you adapt it to a FPS type of game, most of that doesn't translate.

So I want a system that's less randomized and more suited for video game adaptation, but has some of the cool Battletech features. I probably would never want to play a mecha game - table top or video - without some form of hit locations, for example. (Videogamewise, that killed any interest I might have had in Hawken, for example)

[Karl Streiger]

i have bougt some dozen rulesets. as you could see i'm was mostly inspired by Heavy Gear. If my girl friend wouldn't just kill me in the moment i bougt a starter box. i would start to collect them. probably even some warjacks. because there are some rules like DragonMech out there too.

If you mind i will send you some of my falculations must there some excel
As you said most problem of BT is luck.
Or call it karma when i look back at the history of Thunderbolts, Bargest, BattleMasters and Warhammer IIC or Phoenix Hawks or Stooping Hawks on the other side.

i have bougt some dozen rulesets. as you could see i'm was mostly inspired by Heavy Gear. If my girl friend wouldn't just kill me in the moment i bougt a starter box. i would start to collect them. probably even some warjacks. because there are some rules like DragonMech out there too.

If you mind i will send you some of my falculations must there some excel
As you said most problem of BT is luck.
Or call it karma when i look back at the history of Thunderbolts, Bargest, BattleMasters and Warhammer IIC or Phoenix Hawks or Stooping Hawks on the other side.

[MustrumRidcully]

Karl Streiger, on 20 March 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

i have bougt some dozen rulesets. as you could see i'm was mostly inspired by Heavy Gear. If my girl friend wouldn't just kill me in the moment i bougt a starter box. i would start to collect them. probably even some warjacks. because there are some rules like DragonMech out there too.

If you mind i will send you some of my falculations must there some excel
As you said most problem of BT is luck.
Or call it karma when i look back at the history of Thunderbolts, Bargest, BattleMasters and Warhammer IIC or Phoenix Hawks or Stooping Hawks on the other side.

i have bougt some dozen rulesets. as you could see i'm was mostly inspired by Heavy Gear. If my girl friend wouldn't just kill me in the moment i bougt a starter box. i would start to collect them. probably even some warjacks. because there are some rules like DragonMech out there too.

If you mind i will send you some of my falculations must there some excel
As you said most problem of BT is luck.
Or call it karma when i look back at the history of Thunderbolts, Bargest, BattleMasters and Warhammer IIC or Phoenix Hawks or Stooping Hawks on the other side.

Sure, but no promises when I get to look into them.

[Skylarr]

Let me know how it goes. I am interested in seeing the table you create.

[Karl Streiger]

Another mathematical question.
The Chance to hit the CT...is 16% and 2%...although I usually reroll the 2% chance.
Does that means a the effectiv armor of 50 points CT armor is 8?
Could anybody help?
Just need it for the addition...didn't find my old excel spread sheet.

The BattleForce stats is just simple a dumb addition of all armor points and i don't think that this is working. Because it is to simple linear

Edited by Karl Streiger, 21 March 2013 - 04:33 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

I think I know what yo umean and you are correct.

If your Center Torso has 8 hit points, and the mech takes an overall of 50 points of damage in a given timeframe, this would be on average enough to destroy the CT armour. or rather, 8 points of armour on the CT might be enough to negate that damage.

It would mean that the remaining 42 points of damage are distributed to other hit locations.

Of course, if, say, the damage comes in 5 packages á 10 damage, if your CT is hit at all (and there is a ~58 % chance to get hit at least once by 5 attacks), you would take internal damage on the CT as your armour is breached...

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 21 March 2013 - 04:59 AM.