11 replies to this topic

[Ubertron X]

While updating MegaMek and playing a couple of games to shorten the time until the launch of MWO I noticed that the rules for partial cover must have been changed sometime ago. To be honest, I was quite surprised.

So I dug out the TT rulebooks and compared both rules. According to my math, and I regard myself to be rather good at math, partial cover in the new rules is way less effective as it has been in the old rules.

While skipping the risky punch location table you will get hit much more often with the new rules, which is a significant change in gameplay.

To be honest I am not happy with the new rule, which makes winning by superior positioning much harder. Before you could decide yourself if you would take the risk of getting your head hit more often in favour of the superior cover provided. Now you get mediocre cover only, which effectively is somewhere between the cover a light and a heavy wood provide.

As already stated above I liked to old mechanics more, also because that's how I always depicted an uphill battle since "Decision at Thunder Rift".

What do you think of the new partial cover rule and which one do you use for your TT games?

Edited by Ubertron X, 04 July 2012 - 04:01 AM.

[Arctic Fox]

Don't forget that in addition to the +1 to-hit modifier, Partial Cover under TW rules also allows you to effectively ignore anything that hits the legs. So while it's -2 to-hit compared to the older rules, you can avoid quite a few hits that do get through the actual attack roll while simultaneously not having your cockpit turn into a weapon fire magnet.

Edited by Arctic Fox, 04 July 2012 - 04:15 AM.

[Ubertron X]

No, I did not forget the 8/36 (22,22%) leg miss chance the new rules apply. However the total % of cover provided by the new rule is still much less than provided by the old rule.

By the way, when considering high to-hit numbers, your chance of getting your head it in the open can actually be higher than with the old partial cover rule. The reason for this is simple. If you can't be hit at all or if are very hard to hit due to your cover your head can't be hit at all or only very hard.

I can post percentage values to underline my statements if need be.

[Lycaonis]

The new rules are far superior in my mind, they mirror the 3D terrain miniatures rules much better.

The biggest problem with the old rules is that they didn't take into account the effect targeting computers, cluster munitions and pulse lasers would have on increasing head/pilot damage. Get caught in the short range of a Warhawk C firing it's TC+LPL combo and your PC bonus was nullified with a much higher chance of having your head vaporized.

[Karl Streiger]

Lycaonis, on 04 July 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

The biggest problem with the old rules is that they didn't take into account the effect targeting computers, cluster munitions and pulse lasers would have on increasing head/pilot damage.

Exactly. The old partial cover are fine as long as you use only intro tech.
Not to mention multiple LBX at short range...the Black Jack Omni C Config was really successful to flush out mechs standing in cover.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 04 July 2012 - 05:07 AM.

[Tokra]

With Clan Tech i even moved to a possition so my opponent was in partial cover to blow off his head. The old rule was pointless at this time. For 3025 the +3 was to much to hit really good. Standing in partial cover was a must have for most. With Clan and 3050 it became the opposite and a curse.
The new rule is way better. You can choose btw what rule you want to use. There is a setting for it.

[Ubertron X]

I always knew that the ridiculously overpowered clan stuff broke my favorite game the moment I read the 3050 TRO - and that is the exact reason why I loathe them so much - but honestly, change a sturdy and tested rule just because some people are foolish enough to keep standing still in partical cover in short range of a LB20-X AC or a couple of large pulse lasers?

If you are this close to a Massakari-C and so easy to hit that he will most probably hit you even behind cover he can anyway opt for aimed shots, so it's your OWN decision if you are going to risk a head hit to reduce the incomming damage to a minimum or if you take the full (and worst case aimed) damage.

Where is the problem? It's a game of dice, so take your chance or not.

And no, the new rule is not better because one of the main principles in successful Battletech is not to getting hit at all (or being as hard to hit as possible) by outmaneuvering your opponent by any means possible including range, speed and cover. And thats what the old rule supported perfectly.

If I jump 5 hexes into partial cover into medium range of a mech that has moved 4 hexes he needs a 13 to hit me (impossible), while I need 10 to hit him (16,67% chance), and that's the game.

The new rule however fails hard to cover this critical issue and therefore (to me) it is clearly inferior.

As our TT community does not play clan very often because nearly all of us consider clan tech to be way too cheesy and requires less skill to play the game we will most probably stick to the old rule.

[Lycaonis]

While I can certainly understand the not be hit principle behind your reasoning. I still prefer the miniatures rule set, and thus my preference for the new PC rules. Something playing MM or hex board does not really adapt well.

Being able to hide not only legs, but arms, side torsos and even heads and center torsos behind PC is a much more tactically flexible and doesn't bog the game down to a game of rolling 11-12s.

[Sychodemus]

The new (odd considering they are five years old, but compared to 25+ of BT, why not?) rules were just an outgrowth of the expanded partial cover rules from Maximum Tech (and assorted 3D miniatures rules.)

Summary of the "new" rules: +1 to-hit modifier; All locations have the same chance on 2d6 as a 'mech not using partial cover except that intervening terrain soaks the damage that would be applied to the legs (for quads, this means any leg.) The general idea is that your opponent has two chances to miss.

When TW was being written, the vast majority of playtesters and staff found that these rules better represented the desired effect. Quad 'mechs also played a major role in this decision and they benefit the most from the new rules. By extension, it was found that it offered a way to protect vulnerable (i.e. damaged) legs - especially for quads.
The head's vulnerability was also considered. It was believed that a 1/6 chance was not properly representative of the proportions of the average 'Mech's upper body (again skewed by the quads.)
Scattering shots (Missiles, Ultra ACs and LB-X) too were a factor, as the old rules made them all or nothing weapons against partial cover, whereas the new rule allowed for the terrain to absorb some of it as well as the targeted 'Mech. Again, this was considered to be more in line with the intent.
Additionally, the super-fast units that had emerged (which prompted the new expanded movement table) and things like Stealth Armor made impossible-to-hit 'Mechs a very real possibilty. With the limitations of a 2d6 vs TN mechanic and all the other aspects in mind (plus a few others relating to certain weapons and equipment), a reduction in the partial cover modifier was considered acceptable.

Many find the new rule to be both more intuitive and effective than the original method in actual practice. By and large most players have accepted it and have learned to prefer it.

Of course, you may play with the original rules if you like.



EDIT: Typos.

Edited by Sychodemus, 04 July 2012 - 06:48 AM.

[Ubertron X]

Thanks for the elaborate answer Sychodemus!

You brought up many arguments that I can easily follow if not support. However I still find it quite disturbing that the eventual and inevitable power creep (who wants to play with only 3025 tech for 25+ years) forced the game designers to temper with some of the most basic core rules.

5 years already, eh? How time passes...

[wanderer]

There's a very good reason partial cover got changed.

It made going into water almost suicidal, especially with the proliferation of things like LB-X cluster shots...because all hits were on the PUNCH table.

The number of times I can count people losing heads as a result of the old rule colliding with the more accurate and cluster weaponry post-3050? Huge. Heck, I used to LOVE people hitting cover...because most of the time, they had a KO'd pilot from multiple head hits or were decapitated by a Gauss or CERPPC hit entirely as we'd focus-fire them.

The current rules are much kinder, and made cover much, MUCH less risky- because taking cover shouldn't mean upping your odds of death, it should decrease it!

[VonFranz]

You can go hull-down in a mech still to get an extra +2 leaving you with a +3 total PC defense. This requires you to spend MP to go hull down and MP to leave hull down though. You can use that rule if you liked the +3 from partial cover.