153 replies to this topic

[Damocles]

Pht, after reading many of your posts in Mektek's Poli board, I am so happy that I can agree with your posts regarding the direction of MW games etc.

Cheers mate

[Leitwolf]

Yes Chris! Let us take the material and change to the catalyst and the ulisses-forum. ;-) and then we make a caveman TT, which movement-phases takes 2days :-D

Edited by Leitwolf, 06 April 2012 - 03:13 PM.

[Pht]

Leitwolf, on 05 April 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

......... I think, we need more Hasseröder, before we answer Pht ....
MAN! The point is, that we love the Battletech background story. Look at us. We are still loyal rasalhague mechpilots. But we hate, that BT dosen´t take all of it´s potential, to be a great game. THEN we will play it again... maybe... and maybe other old fans.

Hey, progress! I think we are getting closer to the felt problem.

What is it that you want from the game, i mean, besides "move faster?"

Is it that you want to play with more mechs in, say, a single night's setting?

If it is this latter sentence, what about battleforce does not fill this need?

lyonn, on 05 April 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

From a new TT players perspective here's my thoughts. My background is GW games, MW video games and Battletech books.

Turns take too long to complete with more than a few mechs using the quick start rules. This means that there's no way to have a match lasting under a 1 or 2hrs with a pleasing amount of mechs. So without a large chunk of time you can't play.

Why do you expect a game that's relatively comprehensive on details of combat to move fast?

Simply because other games do?

Quote

I'd like to see a mobile/web app that encompasses all the record sheets and maths to speed up rounds. Playing B'tech with the aid of tablet (iPad etc) which can handle all the dice rolls, ammo, heat, damage, modifiers etc was make the game far less taxing.

http://www.pryderockindustries.com/
http://www.pryderock...l_game_aids.php
http://www.solarisskunkwerks.com/
http://www.heavymetalpro.com/
http://www.pryderock...67/ORFrame.html
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.btencyclopedia.com/

Oh... and this one is to make printing your RS and such easier - it installs a virtual printer that converts anything "printed with it" to PDF.

http://www.dopdf.com/

and compiled tables:

http://bg.battletech.com/?page_id=2029

Quote

From a rules/lore side of things its a mess. They'd be wise to revise all their rules and trim the fat where needs be. They also need to start laying down more canon facts Mech heights 25year example of how they fudge such simple things.

Are you using the new core rulebooks set of total warfare, techmanual, tactical ops, strategic ops? 99% of the rules you would ever need or want are in them.

I also would like to know ... what are you referring to as "fat?"

Quote

Theirs no excuse for the poor quality miniatures they are still pushing. While GW has many flaws I was shocked how far they have come since I used to play their games. The detail of their miniatures are excellent they come with multiple variations of assembly and everything is in good quality plastic. When I bought some B'tech miniatures its mostly the same wonky odd sized stuff I was buying in the 80's. There's some hope in the new plastic loki/thor but until there's a large scale role out across the range B'tech is still behind the market.

Agreed; still, I don't want to see the minis wind up costing, say, 20$ a pop.

Damocles, on 06 April 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

Pht, after reading many of your posts in Mektek's Poli board, I am so happy that I can agree with your posts regarding the direction of MW games etc.

Cheers mate

?

Why?

Edited by Pht, 08 April 2012 - 05:40 PM.

[JackCrow]

Leitwolf,

That was some amazing looking stuff you posted a few pages back. Great work.

[lyonn]

Pht, on 08 April 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

Why do you expect a game that's relatively comprehensive on details of combat to move fast?

Simply because other games do?

------------------------------

http://www.pryderockindustries.com/
http://www.pryderock...l_game_aids.php
http://www.solarisskunkwerks.com/
http://www.heavymetalpro.com/
http://www.pryderock...67/ORFrame.html
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.btencyclopedia.com/

Oh... and this one is to make printing your RS and such easier - it installs a virtual printer that converts anything "printed with it" to PDF.
http://www.dopdf.com/

and compiled tables:
http://bg.battletech.com/?page_id=2029

I'm just some one who love the Battletech universe and wants to play lance on lance combat but finds the excessive time to finish such a match prohibitive. Therefore I don't play.

I check out all of those programs most of them are mechlabs which isn't what I was after (since I'm a noob stock mechs are used). I was looking for an interactive program that calculates and tracks to-hit, dmg, heat, tracks ammo,virtual dice rolls etc. Its not easy to convince some one to play after 10pm to have a 4hr long play session with where every fire round involves lots of addition.

I know its lazy to say I don't want to do simple addition (I'm ok with it) but it kills the enthusiasm to play of adults who don't necessarily have the same passion for B'tech universe and younger children/tired adults who find it difficult to work out there tohit's/heat.

In a dream world catalyst would put out a flash program or mobile app that lets you enter your units then offers a side rule calculator, virtual dice and record sheet entry.

I've ran out of time but something along the lines of this;

[Victor Morson]

Oh God, yes. The systems are really, really outdated by the standards of other tabletop wargames, as much as I love them. The majority of the complexity and depth I love about CBT is only really viable because I play with things like Megamek and their new campaign manager - otherwise it'd take a year to finish a single lance fight.

The real big ones have to be:

Story
BattleTech's storyline was fine, right up until post-Clan invasion. Then FASA and it's best writers fell out, and things changed from there. The Civil War kicked in, but suddenly Steiner went from being an incompetent nation of merchants to homicidal madmen; everything turned black & white and the Clans started talking about honor so much (and getting a skewed view of their original concepts) to the point I think most writers thought they were actually Klingons.

The basic concept was fine, yet, though- there were at least good battles to be fought even if the writing was down a notch. Then came Dark Ages, locking CBT towards this path to the Jihad. Jesus Christ, the Jihad. Another idea that in it's very, very basic form wasn't a bad one - with the good writers being around for the very early setup yet (Getting them manipulating the FWL and such) but theeverything about it was stupid. The Republic if the Sphere was stupid, the way Outreach went out was stupid, the way the houses react to it was stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. CBT's never recovered from this, steadily marching onward as an agreement to support a game that is defunct!

Mech Design
People love designing 'mechs. While there are advantages to the current design rules, to be sure, I think the Hardpoint system introduced in MW4 / MWO is the ticket here; I'm not saing to disallow people building their own 'mechs, but have rules for how to assign hard points in place. This would allow modified 'mechs to be tournament legal, instead of the nightmare of rules checking that basically bans modded designs entirely. In short, it needs to be given a simple "modify existing 'mech" concept, on top of building rules that in themselves, allow future modifications.

The actual wargame

Of course, these finally leads to actually playing the game. It needs a streamline. I was happy when I first heard of Dark Ages, because it sounded exactly like what CBT needed; then it got it wrong. All terribly wrong. Horribly stupid rules, no accounting for individual weapons beyond range/damage.. it's a mess.

That said, this one is trickier to outline. This would take months of skilled war game veterans to properly redesign, and I'm not even really going to make a stab at it here. The bottom line is we need the game to support more advanced options from things like TacOps, but in a package that means you can do it without taking a few hours per turn without computer assistance.

Honestly if I play Table Top again as it is, I'll bring my Netbook and mirror the game onto it. It'd still be faster than calculating it by hand.

[NoElf]

Prosperity Park, on 22 March 2012 - 09:38 PM, said:

Here's what I see as a BattleTech overhaul:

• Leave the weapons, lore, technology all the same.
  
• Make it PC/ Console based
  
• Don't kill me

I think it needs to adopt lush, rich 3D environments and Mech modeling with captivating landscapes and custom Mech painting labs, live-action animated movement sequences, random number generator-based dice rolling, and the pther adjustments needed to keep the game moving forward in an age where BattleTech players live too far apart to play frequently, and for those darn LBX cluster rounds.

Seen this? http://www.mwtactics.com/

[Karl Streiger]

I don't think that a app for calculation would help If i wan't a computer does all the math i play MegaMek...
You have to many options...for typing in all variables you need as long as you need for calculating

No Sir, we have to aggregate some variables but keep the play style the same if you use QuickCards a LBX20 becomes a less damage weapon - with less potential of taking out enemy units - only to sum a damage value doesn't help much. MW4 made a step in the right direction with increasing the damage - but it is still "linear" - SRM and LBX have a good chance of inflicting critical damage - a other rule set should keep this handling...why? Veterans playing the game for 25years don't want to learn a new game that is only called battletech - it has to keep the flavour and the tactics.

In the evening(gmt) with more Hasseroeder or other i will work on

Edited by Karl Streiger, 09 April 2012 - 11:25 PM.

[Pht]

lyonn, on 09 April 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

I'm just some one who love the Battletech universe and wants to play lance on lance combat but finds the excessive time to finish such a match prohibitive. Therefore I don't play.

Battleforce? Quickstrike? Have you tried them?

Quote

In a dream world catalyst would put out a flash program or mobile app that lets you enter your units then offers a side rule calculator, virtual dice and record sheet entry.

In a dream world we would have holographic tabletops programmed to play battletech...


I'm seriously wondering if all the people posting complaints about how slow battletech is and how it should be ... essentially lobotomized... (yes, that's the nicest way I could think of to say it) realize that the game was not designed for quick play ... and have played battleforce, a game designed for quick play with many units on both sides.

I don't get the whole "pound a square peg into a round hole" argument when there's already a round peg made just for the purpose... and of those who may have actually played battleforce, if they didn't like it ... than why not address it?

[Der Kommissar]

Quote

Dose Battletech TT need a make over?

No.

They tried that once. It was called 'Dark Age.' Which is a dead, failed product.

Edited by Der Kommissar, 10 April 2012 - 07:30 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

The question should be named in "is it possible to make a restart"... it is impossible.
It is a rule of the universe that no human beeing is able to change the battletech ruleset.
Why?
Got some influence and started some weeks ago - 2 weeks ago my private laptop with some conversion tables crashed...mainboard and harddrive....no problem had another version on my business laptop... well it crashed yesterday...hard drive...

Next try i will make with pen and paper...lets see if another accident is able to destroy this work again

[Wolfdawg]

Yes...... And No..... for ALL the previous reasons..... But In all sooth how do all of us tired old guys get new blood ???? when there are SOOOOOO many things in the way... all the worlds youth ADD and cant do simple math in their heads???? 4hrs for a lance on lance game??? man I just did a 8 on 6 battle in less than 3 hrs ..... and I was the one doing all the math in my head.... My buddy isn't dumb or slow ... just never a thing for math in his head..... Oh yeah my 4 modified recon mechs finally made it to his 6 O'clock and ended the battle in 3 turns, later or so.. Speed Tac's and Strat's.......

[Kartr]

The main thing I'd like to see updated is the vehicles.

Multiple crewers means they can do each job more efficiently than a single 'Mechwarrior of the same skill level. Tracked vehicles provide a much much smother ride making it easier to aim on the move. Vehicles with ground contact will have better recoil management than 'Mechs. Vehicles allow for greater horizontal movement of weapons than 'Mechs. Tanks have been able to push through heavy forests since WW2, in fact several decisive engagements were fought by tanks in heavy forests.

All vehicles should have the following:
-1 to gunner and driving

Vehicles with surface contact should have the following:
Greater range on all weapons with recoil

All tracked vehicles should have the following:
-0 when cruising, -1 when flanking
No restrictions on moving through forest hex's.

All hover vehicles should have the following:
-0 when cruising, -1 when flanking but only when using recoil-less weapons (Missiles, lasers and PPCs)

These changes would help make vehicles more realistic and make them more dangerous then the current system.

[Karl Streiger]

Wolfdawg, on 16 April 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

Oh yeah my 4 modified recon mechs finally made it to his 6 O'clock and ended the battle in 3 turns, later or so.. Speed Tac's and Strat's.......

So you idea for speeding up the game is using more munchkin? Ok lets redo the TC rule for Targeting Computer an run a game with 0 0 pilots and 4 large clan pulse laser linked to a targeting computer on open terrain - no problem - the one who win had used the terrain in a better way...

[Prussian Havoc]

TT BT does need a make over...

...however, I would like to see the make over come by way of a revitalized storyline as portrayed in a coordinated multi-media effort.

Bring in MWO's owner.

Bring in MWT's owner.

Bring back a big, big name author to pen another trilogy (As an original BT gamer, I always loved the flavor the books brought to the game!)

Bring back Battle Technology Magazine! ...though it should be completely online, and incorporate heavy facebook and Twitter linkages.

A coordinated cross-media BT make-over would earn the various platforms many of my hard-earned dollars!


(TT BT's specific make over can come by way of a final settlement and reintroduction of all currently #Unseen but dearly missed original TT Mechs... I still have my Archer, Marauder and Phoenix Hawk if molds need to be recast!!!!!)

[FearTheAmish]

Honestly this is going to irritate some purists but yes.

1.) It needs to be simplified (not overly but some) because currently a single turn can take almost half an hour. Reason for this is simple BT TT is basically dead. Only people i know who play it are guys my age and up and that pool is rapidly diminishing. Every time i have tried to get other people interested about half way through explaining firing phases i literally see their eyes start to glaze over.

2.) Artwork overhaul its a game from the 70's/80's and it shows... big time i think it needs to be updated like MWO were it stays true to the spirit of the mechs but comes forward with modern aesthetics and thinking.

3.) Weapons/Armor etc. Currently most of the weapons outside of the lasers are present in 21st century and ours are better. I think they need to revamp some of them to a more modern system. Also one thing that has annoyed me... Ferro-Fiberous armor... so its Fiber Iron armor?!? why not just use Ceramics honestly i think Chobain armor (what is used on an M1A1) would work better then what is currently depicted in TT/BT.

Currently there are other options out their for similar gaming experiences, and besides Lore they are all better. This hurts me to say but its true. look at any other form of gaming and they have changed with the times were as it feels like BT is the old grandfather of TT who refuses to change his ways because "it worked in my day".

[ssm]

Ok, despite this being blatant thread necromancy, this topic is actually close to my heart, so:

FearTheAmish, on 23 October 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

Honestly this is going to irritate some purists but yes.

1.) It needs to be simplified (not overly but some) because currently a single turn can take almost half an hour. Reason for this is simple BT TT is basically dead. Only people i know who play it are guys my age and up and that pool is rapidly diminishing. Every time i have tried to get other people interested about half way through explaining firing phases i literally see their eyes start to glaze over.

Disagree. BT rules are convoluted, and turn sometimes takes around holf an hour... But this game isn't for kiddies and most rules, after you play 1-2 games aren't a lot more complicated than those of modern board games (very popular Twilight Imperium takes hour to set up and twelve to play, and people still love it). You can also omit some of them (falling, critical hits, cluster weapons) to help somebody get hang of the basic movement and shooting.

Quote

2.) Artwork overhaul its a game from the 70's/80's and it shows... big time i think it needs to be updated like MWO were it stays true to the spirit of the mechs but comes forward with modern aesthetics and thinking.

Oh, and we have the culprit. Most of what we can call "core" mechs (let's say those that CGL included in Introductory Box Set) look just awful. We got to the point that cheap board games for children use better artwork for models than BT - and the only way to get decent looking Highlander, Centurion or Hunchback is either 3D printing/running garage kits on MW4/MWO models or kit-bashing existing minis.

And it's really bad for this game.

How can I explain to potential player that 90-ton badass monster like Highlander is represented in-game by something that looks like some kind of plastic toy robot based on obscure, S-F film from early 60s?

CGL & IWM are doing great job to sustain Battletech, but I'm afraid that it soon won't be enough. At the very least they should make entire new art on models included in Box Set, and dump this whole "Experimental Readout" charade and start churning out good looking minis, renaming old ones "Classic" - and thus satysfying die-hards that are dragging this game to the bottom.

Edited by ssm, 24 October 2013 - 02:45 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

they did this kick starter with the Celestial FLUMs - afaik those designs should have been made from resin, plus the next Box should have more detailed miniatures.
But in the end nothing much have changed.

Some people argue that - hand crafted miniatures are better (- but your example with the HGN works perfectly) - that is the reason i use the HGN IIC modell - looks much better.

Actually I'm really carefull when ordering a new miniature - i try to look at as many pictures i can get.
The primitive Thunderbolt looks good - other "new" minatures Mechs like XTRO Banshee didn't.

I really hope that together with the "faster" paced Alpha Strike Minature game - they will revamp most mechs.
Although there are still about 3000 Mech variants out there - would last half an eternety to make them annew.

(Would like to have a kind of Heavy Gear piece - multiple parts for each Mech - that I'm able to create any official version
for example the Thunderbolt in all its grandeur

[ssm]

As for the hand-crafted miniatures - here's Highlander II C mini converted to MW4 one, and it looks great:

http://smtkelly.devi...Mechs-294272260


Why can't we have minis looking like that?

(legal status of particular design above aside)

As for the next box set - while the miniatures will be more detailed (which is always good), they'll still be based on terribad artwork. It's like covering gunshot with a bandaid. Introductory Box Set shouldn't be adressed to nostalgic die-hards who love old, 80s designs, but to new players - and that means they should bring out their A-game. Namely - Anthony Scroggins, Alex Iglesias and other great artists they're working with, and not just to draw booklet covers.

Edited by ssm, 24 October 2013 - 03:44 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

ssm, on 24 October 2013 - 03:30 AM, said:

As for the next box set - while the miniatures will be more detailed (which is always good), they'll still be based on terribad artwork. It's like covering gunshot with a bandaid. Introductory Box Set shouldn't be adressed to nostalgic die-hards who love old, 80s designs, but to new players - and that means they should bring out their A-game. Namely - Anthony Scroggins, Alex Iglesias and other great artists they're working with, and not just to draw booklet covers.

Never thought about that. Always thought that with better design 3D printer technology minis would look better. But you are right. They won't; Not all of them.
The funny thing is that some of the old miniatures - like the AS7-D - still look really good. The 3D printed MWO Atlas looks better anyhow.