153 replies to this topic

[SiriusBeef]

Karl Streiger, on 27 March 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

With less computers available it seems that 1980s BattleTech was more a simulation on the board. Works great when a single player controlls a single mech - and a game master made the callculating - works best witjh the duell rules.
Considering you use larger formations for example company vs company .- without gamemaster - you get really fast a terrible headache - believe me i get always a head ache when playing battletech
I never get all the ideas behind the DarkAge debakle, but some mechanism didn't look bad at all - for example the unit activation.

The whole idea of a "Dark Age" was just kind of stupid. You're right though, the "clicky" mechanic is pretty fun, easy to learn and relatively quick to play. I found the entire ruleset pretty fun and plable especially as a first exposure to TTG. Much like "Wings of War" it's a game that can be learned in a few minutes and takes less than an hour to play. The problem was kids want Timbys not Forestry mechs. Blind Boosters was another huge mistake. Who wants to spend 15-20 bucks and not even know what you are getting? Stupid! By the end of production Wizkids had figured that out but it was too late to save the line. No one was interested. If all this MWO stuff gets hot it’s possible we may see new stuff from Wizkids.

I've still got a small collection of JF, HH and DC. Have not played in more then a year but IS the only way i can get "some" people to indulge me in BT at all.

There is at least one FLGS where most of the folks have a fair number of CBT models and know the rules so if I’m dying to play CBT it's not that hard to find a game. Eventually my core group of basement gamers will get around to some CBT again but only 2 out of the 5 of us were ever really die hard mech heads. Most were all GW gamers before anything else. What that means is tons of work for me ensuring balance won’t be horrible and that the missions are good enough to keep everyone’s attention for a 10-12 session campaign.

[Berith Apollyon]

Well, the heroclix line still using the blind booster, and they keep selling them.

[God of War]

Leitwolf, on 26 March 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

And this is how the official presentation in Germany looks like:



Do you realy say, this is a fantastic look and interesting or amazing game?????
We have done promotion for BT over years, without support, but IT WAS FRUSTRATING!!!! Becouse everybody say, the game takes TOOO LONG!!!! I think, we need support from the developers!! SUPPORT WITH BETTER RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry but promotion at Essen or Stuttgart or Nürnberg game fair looks always like this AT EVERY Games booth! Even at GEN-CON, Indianapolis it´s all the same. What do you what? Loud music, large Video walls and fair-chicks in skimpy outfits? Come on...

And I personaly dont want a shorter, quicker BT! Those who whats a quick, fast game shall move on and play Infinity or Confrontation or AT-43 or Dust: Tactics or Heavy Gear or *** they want. But leave BT as it is. Catalyst hat allready fu....ed up the story line, for good´s sake, leave the rules in peace!

[Petroff Northrup]

I think it needs a serious overhaul, unless you are playing like basic tech using weight as a balance then usually problems are easy to see. BV is comically unbalanced, conventional ACs are useless since light ACs do the same job but batter pretty much for a slight range loss, LBX and ultra are also significantly better than normal ACs but light ACs also have access to all the extra ammo types. Pulse lasers are undeniably overpowered to the point that boating them is borderline cheating to many and missiles have really been turned into support weapons for energy weapons. There are many problems that cropped up as soon as the more advanced tech did in TT, now I am not one of those "3025 or nothing" type people, I love everything up to and including the Jihad, especially those shiny new weapons, but it would be nice if they were all balanced better in TT.

[Pht]

Jake Valeck, on 24 March 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

anything past 3057 or so is just fail. bring back the good'ol days of 3025 and you have a TT game worth playing. just my 2 c-bills

Have you bought any of the historicals source books? I think you might get a kick out of them. *stares at his copies of bush wars and war of 3039.*

Leitwolf, on 26 March 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

And this is how the official presentation in Germany looks like: Do you realy say, this is a fantastic look and interesting or amazing game?????

So, because the game isn't visual-centric, doesn't move at ludicrous speed, and doesn't show it's real beauty to anyone who doesn't enjoy mentally manipulating systems ... it's crap?

Are movies that aren't action flicks and that don't use special effects that overwhelm any other developments bad, too?


Do anything but make me think! I might die if you make me play a game that gives mental satisfaction instead of sensory satisfaction!


Force everything into the sensory mold! To heck with everyone else!

[Jagermeister2]

God of War, on 28 March 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

What do you what? Loud music, large Video walls and fair-chicks in skimpy outfits? Come on...

Visually interesting tables is what I want, but hey, to each his own... And hey (don't let my wife hear this) - what's wrong with fair-chicks in skimpy outfits?

God of War, on 28 March 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Those who want a quick, fast game shall move on and play Infinity or Confrontation or AT-43 or Dust: Tactics or Heavy Gear or *** they want.

And they did... Now what do you make of that? Surely it's not because those games are... well, faster?

Pht, on 28 March 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

So, because the game isn't visual-centric, doesn't move at ludicrous speed, and doesn't show it's real beauty to anyone who doesn't enjoy mentally manipulating systems ... it's crap?

No, but it's still a slow, dated holdover from the 80s.... that could be improved if the small remaining player base were not so stubbornly determined to keep it just as it always was... And a game just might be (and sell) better if it showed some real beauty looking at the games table, not after days of playing. IF you like it that way, then that's fine with me. I just think many NEW players might be attracted to Battletech by a faster, visually attractive game. I've given up on the "old guard" of BT players, but the background and game basics are still great.

Edited by Jägermeister, 30 March 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[Leitwolf]

**** I wish I speak better english!

Quote

Sorry but promotion at Essen or Stuttgart or Nürnberg game fair looks always like this AT EVERY Games booth! Even at GEN-CON, Indianapolis it´s all the same. What do you what? Loud music, large Video walls and fair-chicks in skimpy outfits? Come on...

Uh... What I want? Let me think!

Miniatures with all parts in the starter-boxes?
Detailed plastic or resin minis in this box, like them from fantasy flight?
A sophisticated marketing?
Fast and easy to learn rules, which needs my sense of tactic?
Good designed maps, for everyone, how couldn´t build tables.
And a reboot for the whole storyline after 3025.

And on the fair: Good looking game tables like this from the Hamburg Tactica in battletechstyle:




Pictures of the Dystopian Wars -gametable at the Hamburg Tactica Fair.

And yes, I love the good old battletech-times to. But all they are gone. And the TT has not progressed.
And the people who show it at the fair play´s with unpainted plastic minis an 20 years old maps... COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PS:

Quote

Sorry but promotion at Essen or Stuttgart or Nürnberg game fair looks always like this AT EVERY Games booth!

Realy? I have seen nice Tables in Essen... with PAINTED miniatures too...

Edited by Leitwolf, 30 March 2012 - 10:05 AM.

[Leitwolf]

@God of war: Wir können das auch gern mal bei nem Bier oder bei nem BT-Spiel im Fantasystronghold in Ludwigsburg ausdiskutieren. Dann erklär ich Dir meinen Standpunkt, ohne das ich mich aufreg...

Edited by Leitwolf, 30 March 2012 - 10:03 AM.

[Hao Yu]

Gods yes. At the very least, the weapons and gear need re-balancing. Especially autocannons.

[Curon Hifor]

1. Weaponry will need to be rebalanced with each other.
2. Techmanuals need to have ALL information on ALL the gear and tech and weapons available in the game, and not have 'refer to base rulebook'. Irritating to no end...
3. 'Mech construction rules might need a slight revamp.
4. Map system needs a revamp. Information such as terrain levels, wood levels, etc still need to be present, but the maps themselves need to be more visually stimulating. Like if you took high-resolution google maps and put a hex grid over them.
5. More support for plastic miniatures (or perhaps Resin miniatures). Possibly pre-painted as well with various camoflage patterns and faction insignias. For those of us that paint on a regular basis, Iron Wind Metals is still around.
6. Technical Readouts NEED to have MechSheets as well in the same document/product.
7. Need a separate product or document that includes ALL reference tables, modifiers, etc. Far better to tote around a 25-page document that has all the tables needed rather than flip through the core rulebook.
8. New story injection. Either change the story from 3025/3050 forward, or get OUT of the Jihad and start doing more progressive story telling.
9. Start doing global campaigns again. Get the whole community playing and competing against each other.

Just my suggestions.

[Azantia]

Terick, on 20 March 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

No. All ACs fire single rounds. Yes some of the novel writers wrote that they fire a burst and the artist for one of the TROs did make it look that way. But all AC/s fire single shells or double tap if Ultra ACs or using the rapid fire optional rule.

For a good reference look at the description of the Enforcer in TRO 3025. It specifically mentions that the ammo bay for the enforcer is a magazine style with ten rounds load that can be easily loaded form the rear by a forklift. Made that way to allow for quick changes so the mech cna get back to the fight.

This has also been confirmed on the official website as being ACs shoot one shell with the exception of cluster round for LBs and then Ultra and rapid fire shooting two shells.

You sir, are very very wrong

from Sarna :

Description

An Autocannon is a type of rapid-firing, auto-loading direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) or kinetic rounds at targets in bursts. It is, basically, a giant "machine gun" that fires predominantly cased explosive shells though models firing saboted high velocity kinetic energy penetrators or caseless ordnance do exist. Among the earliest tank/BattleMech scale weaponry produced, autocannons produce far less heat than energy weapons, but are considerably bulkier and are dependent upon limited stores of ammunition.
Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage vs armor.^[1] The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors. Autocannon are grouped into the following loose damage classes:

• Autocannon/2
  
• Autocannon/5
  
• Autocannon/10
  
• Autocannon/20

Beyond the "standard" models, variants include the shotgun-like LBX, quick-firing Ultra and the gatling-type Rotary. Light-weight variants and capital ship scale models also exist. The experimental Hypervelocity Autocannon has also entered limited production.^[2][3]

[edit] Caliber

Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannon in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each "round" or burst of fire. Probable exceptions are the 185 mm ChemJet Gun Autocannon/20 mounted on the Demolisher combat vehicle and Monitor Surface vessel or the 203 mm Ultra Autocannon/20 on the Cauldron Born A BattleMech.

thought so.

[Leitwolf]

Curon Hifor, on 30 March 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

1. Weaponry will need to be rebalanced with each other.
2. Techmanuals need to have ALL information on ALL the gear and tech and weapons available in the game, and not have 'refer to base rulebook'. Irritating to no end...
3. 'Mech construction rules might need a slight revamp.
4. Map system needs a revamp. Information such as terrain levels, wood levels, etc still need to be present, but the maps themselves need to be more visually stimulating. Like if you took high-resolution google maps and put a hex grid over them.
5. More support for plastic miniatures (or perhaps Resin miniatures). Possibly pre-painted as well with various camoflage patterns and faction insignias. For those of us that paint on a regular basis, Iron Wind Metals is still around.
6. Technical Readouts NEED to have MechSheets as well in the same document/product.
7. Need a separate product or document that includes ALL reference tables, modifiers, etc. Far better to tote around a 25-page document that has all the tables needed rather than flip through the core rulebook.
8. New story injection. Either change the story from 3025/3050 forward, or get OUT of the Jihad and start doing more progressive story telling.
9. Start doing global campaigns again. Get the whole community playing and competing against each other.

Just my suggestions.

THANKS!!!

[God of War]

Leitwolf, on 30 March 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

@God of war: Wir können das auch gern mal bei nem Bier oder bei nem BT-Spiel im Fantasystronghold in Ludwigsburg ausdiskutieren. Dann erklär ich Dir meinen Standpunkt, ohne das ich mich aufreg...

Klar lässt sich machen. Kannst auch im Fantasy Strongpoint in Böblingen vorbeischauen, ich ruf die andren Jungs aus der gegend an,
wir hocken uns mit 10 Mann an die Platte und schubsen Zinnpüpchen.
Ich kann auch verstehen was du meinst ABER...(erzähl ich dir andermal ^^)

[God of War]

Curon Hifor, on 30 March 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

1. Weaponry will need to be rebalanced with each other.
-why???

2. Techmanuals need to have ALL information on ALL the gear and tech and weapons available in the game, and not have 'refer to base rulebook'. Irritating to no end...
-again why? Most other TT do the same?

3. 'Mech construction rules might need a slight revamp.
- and again why? Some better arguments needed

4. Map system needs a revamp. Information such as terrain levels, wood levels, etc still need to be present, but the maps themselves need to be more visually stimulating. Like if you took high-resolution google maps and put a hex grid over them.
- Creat you own Maps if you want better graphics.

5. More support for plastic miniatures (or perhaps Resin miniatures). Possibly pre-painted as well with various camoflage patterns and faction insignias. For those of us that paint on a regular basis, Iron Wind Metals is still around.
-

6. Technical Readouts NEED to have MechSheets as well in the same document/product.
- A little late after all sheets have been droppen in the "Unabriged RS-books" for free

8. New story injection. Either change the story from 3025/3050 forward, or get OUT of the Jihad and start doing more progressive story telling.
- Ahhhh you have wittnesed that ther is something called Dark Age Story Arc???

9. Start doing global campaigns again. Get the whole community playing and competing against each other.
-Ohhh pls. The Mechforce is trying to do that stuff for about 20 years and failed. Organized play will never work in a community which
is used to organize itself.

[Rambo Calrissian]

We play it as RPG. Everybody has his one character and Mech + sometimes the Mech of an NPC. All enemy Mechs are driven by our GameMaster.
For that kind of gameplay, the rules are pretty good I'd say. Deep enough to do lots of cool stuff, but easy enough to not take years for every combat round.

But I can see how a big battle, where everybody has like 20 Mechs, can get annoying.

[ice trey]

They tried giving Battletech a "make-over" once.
They called it "Mechwarrior Dark Age (clix)"

It was moderately popular for a short period of time, and then it died.
Why? There are a lot of reasons, but I partly think it's because it catered to those with shorter attention spans. They jumped ship as soon as something newer and cooler came around.

Clickytech damned near killed Battletech by replacing all the Battletech materials off of LGS shelves, chewing up the lions' share of the art budget for 3DCG advertisements, and because people seemed to think that battletech "Died" when FASA went belly-up almost a decade ago.

But Battletech soldiered on thanks to it's loyal fan base and robust system.

It doesn't need a dramatic make-over. Any major makeover would require the rewriting of thousands of different battlemech variants, Vehicles, Battle armor, infantry, helicopters and aerospace fighters, dropships, jumpships, even civilian vehicles.

Battletech is unlikely to be as popular as it once was; tabletop gaming isn't as popular as it once was in general... but considering the competition, it's doing rather well for itself - especially under the CGL banner. The only ones who'll tell you different are those hold-outs for the succession wars, but now that CGL is veering away from the Jihad/Dark Age period and taking a look back at the Star League, they have nothing to complain about.

Edited by ice trey, 30 March 2012 - 11:15 AM.

[Pht]

Jägermeister, on 30 March 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

Visually interesting tables is what I want, but hey, to each his own...

... there's nothing stopping you from building your own 3d hex tables and terrain. If the tables the guys around you are bulding are boring, blame them, not the game.

Quote

No, but it's still a slow, dated holdover from the 80s....

Slow does not mean bad. Slow does not mean bad.

It means you should be THINKING between turns, and if you find your tactics not filling up your turn time, start thinking bigger.

I swear, this is just like when I used to play starcraft and total annihilation with my friends, set to normal speed... they all complained and didn't know what to do in a *strategy game* that ran slow enough to do anything other than micromanage and watch stuff blow up continuously.

From the 80's ... mere age does not make something bad. If it did ... all previous posts behind this one are wrong, because they're older than this one (as I post it).

Quote

...that could be improved if the small remaining player base were not so stubbornly determined to keep it just as it always was...

Because, how odd, ... we like it. How completely odd.

Quote

IF you like it that way, then that's fine with me.

And yet you're still advocating to rip it from its roots. There's a contradiction between what you're saying and what you want for the game.

As you obviously hate the game, why are you still playing it, much less trying to ruin it for the people that do like it?

Curon Hifor, on 30 March 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

1. Weaponry will need to be rebalanced with each other.
2. Techmanuals need to have ALL information on ALL the gear and tech and weapons available in the game, and not have 'refer to base rulebook'. Irritating to no end...
3. 'Mech construction rules might need a slight revamp.
4. Map system needs a revamp. Information such as terrain levels, wood levels, etc still need to be present, but the maps themselves need to be more visually stimulating. Like if you took high-resolution google maps and put a hex grid over them.
5. More support for plastic miniatures (or perhaps Resin miniatures). Possibly pre-painted as well with various camoflage patterns and faction insignias. For those of us that paint on a regular basis, Iron Wind Metals is still around.
6. Technical Readouts NEED to have MechSheets as well in the same document/product.
7. Need a separate product or document that includes ALL reference tables, modifiers, etc. Far better to tote around a 25-page document that has all the tables needed rather than flip through the core rulebook.
8. New story injection. Either change the story from 3025/3050 forward, or get OUT of the Jihad and start doing more progressive story telling.
9. Start doing global campaigns again. Get the whole community playing and competing against each other.

Just my suggestions.

1 - why?

2 - they have a hard enough time getting stuff published as it is.

3- what?

4 - you can already make and print your own and build your own 3d hex terrain and buy said hex terrain. they've got enough on their hands just handling what they have going right now. It would be nice, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

5- I don't mind the small size minis, but yes, the quality of them stinks, regardless of how much prettification is done to them.

6- why?

7 - I thnk they have made/ are making a game-master's screen.

8 - NO.

9 - yeah, no kidding.

Edited by Pht, 30 March 2012 - 05:39 PM.

[Sychodemus]

Curon Hifor, on 30 March 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

1. Weaponry will need to be rebalanced with each other.
2. Techmanuals need to have ALL information on ALL the gear and tech and weapons available in the game, and not have 'refer to base rulebook'. Irritating to no end...
3. 'Mech construction rules might need a slight revamp.
4. Map system needs a revamp. Information such as terrain levels, wood levels, etc still need to be present, but the maps themselves need to be more visually stimulating. Like if you took high-resolution google maps and put a hex grid over them.
5. More support for plastic miniatures (or perhaps Resin miniatures). Possibly pre-painted as well with various camoflage patterns and faction insignias. For those of us that paint on a regular basis, Iron Wind Metals is still around.
6. Technical Readouts NEED to have MechSheets as well in the same document/product.
7. Need a separate product or document that includes ALL reference tables, modifiers, etc. Far better to tote around a 25-page document that has all the tables needed rather than flip through the core rulebook.
8. New story injection. Either change the story from 3025/3050 forward, or get OUT of the Jihad and start doing more progressive story telling.
9. Start doing global campaigns again. Get the whole community playing and competing against each other.

Just my suggestions.

1) Only if you believe that weaponry should be inherently balanced (which I don't.) The only game mechanic that applies is that better weapons tend to cost more and even then, that is not always the case.
2) The base rulebook has the game-mechanics for the "bare-bones" weapons. The TM/TO/Etc has more experimental and uncommon weapons as well as fluff for everything. In this case, page count and ease of basic game play trumped "ultimate."
3) A revamp of construction rules would be extremely problematic since it would in turn require redoing every existing unit and the likelihood of making all previous books/stats obsolete. A simpler method is for the developers to push harder for a computer-based (and well-supported) software option. Heavy Metal did just that until TW introduced those "new" construction rules.
4) On this, it is purely preference. I have used "realistic" maps; sometimes they look very nice. Sometimes not. The big problem is that the scale of maps cannot match miniature scales, so the more realistic they look, the more the minis will look out of place.
5) More options for minis; always a good thing provided that it does not interfere with production. Sometimes, I would prefer less detailed, smaller minis in greater numbers. But, again, preference.
6) In a perfect scenario, you could thumb through a TRO and see the variants and get a RS. However, page count and cost will probably preclude this. But, software developers can most definitely create a suite to do just this. Again, it would require stronger support from the BT PTB.
7) Look at the back of TW, TM, TO, SO... somebody, somewhere has probably already compiled them and added stuff that was overlooked.
8) Definite "No." Battletech has always plodded steadily (mostly) forward and while there have been a few retcons they have never wiped any part of the storyline. I will however support the notion of "alternate/what-if" timelines. You could include them in the existing storyline as "fictional" holo-series or as theoretical strategic exercises. (BTW, the Jihad is over.)
9) If only. It may happen one day.

[Leitwolf]

Pht, on 30 March 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

... there's nothing stopping you from building your own 3d hex tables and terrain. If the tables the guys around you are bulding are boring, blame them, not the game.

MAN!!! Jägermeister, me and our MW-Team HAVE DONE THIS MANY TIMES TO PROMOTE BATTLETECH!!!
The problem is, that the people like what we have done on the conventions, BUT they don´t want to play the game, because it´s to slow... So, we have a problem with the rules.... do you understand our point????



















DO YOU SEE THE DAMN DIFFERENCE????

This is a part of our work. So we think the presentation at the fair´s must be better...
AND the rule must have a make over... so they are interesting for newcomers!

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE MEAN??

Sorry, but it drives me crazy! The last harcorefans of Battletech don´t see, that the look and the rules don´t bring in new player. And the background deserves more fans. And we love the old times and the first novels. We see, what other firms do. And CGL or Ulisses think, they can do the same crap like before. THIS DOES NOT WORK TO RECRUIT NEW PLAYER! Not when games with good quality in artwork and miniatures are the competitors.

Edited by Leitwolf, 31 March 2012 - 04:10 AM.

[Leitwolf]

God of War, on 30 March 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

Klar lässt sich machen. Kannst auch im Fantasy Strongpoint in Böblingen vorbeischauen, ich ruf die andren Jungs aus der gegend an,
wir hocken uns mit 10 Mann an die Platte und schubsen Zinnpüpchen.
Ich kann auch verstehen was du meinst ABER...(erzähl ich dir andermal ^^)

Ich als ExHannoveraner weiß zwar nicht, wo Böblingen liegt, aber das hört sich gut an. Vielleicht krieg ich unseren Sigmaringer Pio auch noch mit. Lass uns das mal im Auge behalten. Hab nur kein BT-Zeug hier unten... bis auf den Dunkelfalken, aber der ist zu groß
Aber eher nach Ostern irgendwann.....

TROTZDEM REG ICH MICH HIER AUF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!