D8 Battletech

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)
Retry
05/19/15 11:15 PM
76.7.238.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
If I recall, tracked unit move the same amount of speed as the same weight mech with the same sized engine. Yes, you need a transmission for it, but mechs tend to be about the same speed as the tracked units. Wheeled is actually easier to go faster. That first statement seems wrong., retry. Maybe it is just how I read it.



They can move at the same speed as the same weight mech with the same size engine, but if the engine is fusion then the vehicle will have a 50% higher engine weight. The vehicle will have to sacrifice in armor or weaponry whereas the Mech probably won't, unless it's something silly like a Charger.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/19/15 11:23 PM
172.56.32.31

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
To tell the truth there is to much ammo per ton, ammo should weigh a great deal more than it does. But to keep the game playable it needs to be left alone.

I also think engines should be left alone.

What needs tweaking is weapons systems.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
05/20/15 02:25 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Never heard of the earthsiege/starsiege game so if that does sound like their territory, then thanks for telling me. Don't want any issues.

As was suggested in another thread, making ammo like fuel for ICEs. Allow enough to last the battle, but I can see issues with that.
I would like to know the reasoning behind the ammo should weigh more then it does. A gauss slug should weigh more then an ac 10 shell by a bit, yet they have 8 shots verses 10. Not saying it is wrong or bad, but curious.

And I do agree with the ammo explosions. A ton of mg ammo does 2 points per round? 200 points? That does sound like more then a bit much. It should blow out the armor as well as some of the force and maybe even some of the round before they cook off. I can see an auto fall for the mech, but to destroy a mech, yet an arm breach under water or in space doesn't shut the unit down? Sounds like each area has some physical separation in them. I found ammo on a light mech was stupid in the extreme, because of the instant death.

And we seem to agree that the weapons need tweaking.

On a side note, are you going to deal with comms and sensors? possible jammers interfering with orders?
I know that is extremely difficult without a game master running it to enforce anything like that. To a lesser extent, the sensors.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/20/15 06:58 PM
208.54.38.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
100 rounds of .50 cal of ball ammo weighs 16kgs. If a machine gun fires 600 rounds a minuet that is 100 rounds a turn. 200 turns of ammo should weigh 3.2 tons and not 1 ton.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
05/20/15 11:54 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That I didn't know.
The thing is, when firing, does the shot do a burst fire, or continuous fire the entire round? It may be it only shoots 150 to 200 bullets in a round.
Then again, you have to remember that a single round for battletech is 10 second. So 100 bullets should be max in a round. I believe aerotech is 1 minute turns. Which means some games using strafing runs would probably be wrong in timing.
If you consider the 10 seconds firing, the number of shots may not even equal a ton.
Hope that doesn't sound like I am picking apart your idea as much as it seems.

Also, is that firing caseless shots or with the shell casings? I don't remember if battletech uses the shell casings or not.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/23/15 08:19 AM
172.56.30.82

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Your trying to get small bullets to punch through heavy armor plating. I would say firing the entire round. I was assuming it was firing 100 bullets a round.

Yes 100 bullets in a round would be correct "IF" the machine gun "ONLY" fires at 600 rounds a minuet. If you have a mini gun that fires 4,500 rounds a minuet you would use 750 bullets a round. My first example was a heavy round that fired at a slow rate of fire and not a light round firing at a very high rate of fire.

Well since all of the BT art work that I have ever seen shows casings falling from ballistic weapons being fired I would say that they do use casing ammunition.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
05/23/15 01:05 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
50 caliber is not really that small of a bullet. A 22 is.
Now from what I have seen, normally larger shots fire slower then smaller ones. Yes, there are exceptions.

Now the art work and the economics of the innersphere would mean they waste alot of materials on shell casings. I would figure people could make a fortune selling the metal back to the government, as you really never hear much about clean up crews looking for that type of salvage. And the one issue I have with the artists. They tend to draw those same casings falling from a gauss rifle. That is a single solid chunk, without a casing. But it still looks cool.

Now I know a 30 mm will tear up tanks. Not sure the fire rate of the a10s gun. Anyone know the comparisons to a 50 cal vrs the 30mm for that stats? I think someone posted it once before, but not sure. Might be a good idea to put it in another thread.
CrayModerator
05/23/15 05:18 PM
97.101.96.171

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey writes:

Yes 100 bullets in a round would be correct "IF" the machine gun "ONLY" fires at 600 rounds a minuet. If you have a mini gun that fires 4,500 rounds a minuet you would use 750 bullets a round. My first example was a heavy round that fired at a slow rate of fire and not a light round firing at a very high rate of fire.



A BT weapon doesn't necessarily spend a full 10-second turn firing. It might just be a half-second tap on the trigger when you have a lock. Tactical Operations and MaxTech address longer bursts with MGs and ACs.

Quote:
Well since all of the BT art work that I have ever seen shows casings falling from ballistic weapons being fired I would say that they do use casing ammunition.



Caseless autocannons are addressed in Tactical Operations. They're definitely not standard.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
ghostrider
05/25/15 04:02 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
a thought had occurred to me about the length of time the mg's fired.
There is noting in the rules to explain how long they fire in a round, but yet there is a spider variant that has mgs on it. They can jump 240 meters to a target and fire the mgs at it. Even a locust or spider running 360 meters can do the same. That would mean there is a limited time they fire, otherwise you should never do any damage in that round, since you are out of the 90 meters range while approaching it.. Yet, you can be point blank when you use them.


Edited by ghostrider (05/25/15 04:03 AM)
KamikazeJohnson
05/25/15 11:32 AM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

a thought had occurred to me about the length of time the mg's fired.
There is noting in the rules to explain how long they fire in a round, but yet there is a spider variant that has mgs on it. They can jump 240 meters to a target and fire the mgs at it. Even a locust or spider running 360 meters can do the same. That would mean there is a limited time they fire, otherwise you should never do any damage in that round, since you are out of the 90 meters range while approaching it.. Yet, you can be point blank when you use them.



MGs (and, depending on how you envision them, Autocannons) are the biggest inconsistency with the move/fire phase system. You can assume Burst Fire, but there's no logical reason why they can't fire continuously for periods of 10 seconds or longer (the present-day equivalents can handle sustained fire without overheating), in which case, why limit their damage potential? Or we can assume the weapon fired the whole time, but then we have issues where a Locust "strafing" a target somehow does the same damage with the same hit percentage with it MGs as a Thunderbolt using its plodding movement to maintain optimal range for the entire 10 sec. I personally chalk it up as an abstraction for the sake of fitting in with the game system, and take the damage rating as a kind of "average" damage from the weapon.

Note as well that a rapid-fire weapon should logically have a "spray" effect, where you would expect a 10-second burs to perhaps hit the arm, travel across the torso, maybe all the way across to the other arm, but that type of damage path isn't easily represented in BT without adding several paragraph of Special Rules for rapid-fire weapons.

There's a point where I give up trying to justify things logically, and just accept it.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/01/15 04:59 PM
172.56.42.25

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
KamikazeJohnson writes:

There's a point where I give up trying to justify things logically, and just accept it.



Welcome to the logical thinking gamers. =P
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
06/01/15 11:38 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Actually, the walking line of shots across the torso in the novels is a very good example of the damage inconsistencies of the autocannons. I would think the damage they do should be considered average for that size weapon. I would think an ac 5 would do 5 points on the normal hit, but maybe it should do a point to a/some locations next to it's damage area on a good hit roll. Maybe an extra point for ever say 3 over the roll to hit.
Maybe increasing the damage it does might be a way to balance the fact energy weapons just out perform them.
Removing the heat from them might be another thing, but this isn't something that should be considered lightly.

The length of time would have to be burst otherwise the ultra would not be working.

Some of it just needs tweaking. I could understand the 'lost tech' crap for a while, but really. They have not figured out how to fix this crap yet? The heavy laser doing twice the damage for the same range but double the heat of a normal laser, yet they can't improve the normal ones?
I don't have the re-engineered information but it sounds like it has issues as well. Honestly, I would think the er and pulse variants were re-engineered.
KamikazeJohnson
06/09/15 02:35 AM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Did a test run of some of my new rules, and for the most part things worked well. My changes to the Cluster Hit system turned LRMs into Monster Weapons of Death. Well, maybe not that extreme, but an LRM 15 worked out somewhat more effective than a PPC (at least in part due to crappy rolls by the Awesome), when once you factor in tonnage, ammo, and heat, a PPC and a LRM 20 should be approximately even, so apparently I need to tweak my Custer Table numbers.

D8 play is...interesting...we used base Gunnery skills of 6, and even so, the movement and terrain modifiers were noticeably less significant. Add in the fact that missiles had a chance of hitting well below the target number (or minor damage, but still something), and those speedy Light 'Mechs were in much more danger than usual. The other bi difference...was simply the difference. Any experienced BT player has a feel for how likely they are to hit at any given target number. Suddenly 9s and 10s were "average" shots, and even a 14 was worth going for in many instances. The change felt positive overall, but will definitely call for some mental adjustment when switching over from regular BT.

Planning on incorporating more SRMs into the next fight, see how they measure up to Medium Lasers.Need to complete my Hit Location Tables as well, although that and some of my weapon tweaks will make the "classic" 3025 'Mechs obsolete. Probably need to redesign them. Anyone know of a 'Mech Design program that allows customization of the base rules?

So much work to do, so little time to playtest
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
06/09/15 11:55 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Glad to hear it made the game interesting.
From what it sounds like, running up to club each other is not going to be the norm anymore. Which sounds more like the game should have been like. More fluid, less I swing, now you swing. Then repeat.

Though I can see this making the urbanmech nothing more then target practice.
Just curious, but you did a 3025 run? Or did you have more advanced weapons in it?
Drasnighta
06/09/15 12:43 PM
198.53.98.65

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:


Though I can see this making the urbanmech nothing more then target practice.




You say that like the situation has changed.
CEO Heretic BattleMechs.
KamikazeJohnson
06/09/15 11:13 PM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Drasnighta writes:

Quote:
ghostrider writes:


Though I can see this making the urbanmech nothing more then target practice.




You say that like the situation has changed.



UrbanMech = Speedbump

Actually, I'm working on Facing rules for Hit Locations, which go hand-in-hand with slightly altered Armour Limit rules. Add in my modified Weapon specs, which lightens Autocannons somewhat, and the UM-60 becomes a somewhat more durable speedbump.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
KamikazeJohnson
06/09/15 11:34 PM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

Glad to hear it made the game interesting.
From what it sounds like, running up to club each other is not going to be the norm anymore. Which sounds more like the game should have been like. More fluid, less I swing, now you swing. Then repeat.

Though I can see this making the urbanmech nothing more then target practice.
Just curious, but you did a 3025 run? Or did you have more advanced weapons in it?



Stand'n'Bash will definitely become limited to groups of like-minded Heavies and Assaults (and poor unfortunates left with no other options). I expect Piloting Skill Checks to be a more significant part of the game, making Push and Charge attacks more prominent, and putting Physical Attacks into the Movement Phase will allow "run by" punches...kind of like a "clothesline" attack.

I did 3025 for a trial run, to test the basic system. I have some plans for the advanced tech, specifically the Autocannon advances.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
06/10/15 02:16 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Moving the physical attacks to the movement phase, will definitely make piloting skill rolls that much more prominent. It will make dfa alot more dangerous.
I would suggest making it a little harder to do the clothesline if the target hasn't moved that turn. Logic being they could try and dodge the attack since they do have some movement left.
I do feel even more sorry for the unit that misses a charge. Short range back shot for failing. Ouch.

Keeping an eye on what people try to use after they make a physical will definitely be needed. I can imagine someone trying to fire arm weapons after throwing a punch.
A nasty thought about axes and such. If you can do a clothesline attack with them, would it be possible be able to hit a second target if in range?

One last thought about movement and the penalties to hit. Should that be based on how far the firing unit moves as well? Even at a walk, a spider moves further then say a running urbanmech, yet I would figure it would be harder to keep the weapon on target while moving that distance.
Maybe remove it with a piloting roll, or at least modify it by one.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/12/15 08:49 PM
208.54.38.245

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would modify the base to hit numbers to bring it to an average 2d8 roll from a 2d6 roll.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
06/13/15 01:18 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It just struck me as odd, that a unit running at 90 meters would have a harder time of hitting something then something that is walking at 240 meters in 10 seconds would.
And jumping that distance make it the same to hit?
Unless jumping is like the mech warrior vidoe games later versions were you slide along the ground vs the arching motion of the earlier ones, I would think it would be more difficult to shoot.

Now with the rest of the to hit rolls, have you considered things like extending the shots out to cover things like more then 3 wood sets?
Line of sight was interesting, since you should be able to target thru the computers radar/mad sensors, otherwise idf from a moving unit should be impossible. This is assuming that you can shoot the target, vs say a wall or building in the way. But even that, atleast lrm idf should be allowed in some situations. Maybe a unit equipped with and advanced probe might qualify.
I would think light woods should allow the shots, though heavy woods should shut it down.

And with the discussion about hitting targets, I would think keeping the base the same. With the 2d8, it makes it easier to hit something. An open field shot with something coming directly at you should not be so difficult as the current rules suggest. Example. Locust runs straight at you (+4). Without you even moving at short range that is an 8 at base 4 shot. Should it really be that hard if you aim for center mass?
KamikazeJohnson
06/16/15 01:42 AM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey writes:

I would modify the base to hit numbers to bring it to an average 2d8 roll from a 2d6 roll.



Current round of playtesting uses default Gunnery Skill of 6, rather than 4. Still seemed to result in more hits than before...except for the Awesome.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
06/16/15 02:56 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Always seems to be the one unit you want to kill everything with, misses with the big guns. The dual ac 20 and upgraded ultra 20 mech I used seemed to do that alot. It is one of the reasons I also use punches over kicks. Miss and fall.

But that is interesting that even a higher gunnery skill results in a little easier to hit. Might check the dice to make sure they aren't loaded

Did you give any thought to returning the ams back to taking out a number of missles, which might mean the entire volley is destroyed with no damage to the ams carrier? That would help balance the lrm spread hits, as well as make them a little more useful. I was going to suggest possible allowing a good roll to take out more then normal. Would really screw up those that love streaks.
KamikazeJohnson
07/17/15 07:13 PM
24.114.42.43

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So a simple Dice conversion has turned into a full-blown alternate ruleset...I've modified Movement somewhat, intruducing Inertia when stopping or moving from a standstill. Tweaked the weapon stats a bit. Added 2 additional weapons, LRM 25 and LRM 30 to go along with greatly modified LRM rules. LRMs now use a combined To-Hit/Missile Hit roll...LRMs, particularly the bigger racks...rarely miss completely now, although a shot at a high To-Number is more likely to result in only a minor amount of damage. LRMs are smaller, lighter, carry more ammo, and generate more heat, but require a "loading" round between shots, making them much more effective in pairs.

Altered the Hit Location table to make more sense...6 Location Charts reduced to 2 simple Table to account for 6 directions of incoming fire. Max Torso Armour rules will need to be modified to allow heavier Back armour, work in progress.

Still working out the details for my Engine Power requirement for Energy weapons...but essentially Energy Weapons draw from the same Power limit as Movement, meaning a Laser Boat may need to reduce speed in order to apply maximum firepower.

Many changes done, many more to come
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
07/17/15 08:00 PM
76.89.121.69

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Did you really think it was going to be simple like just adjusting numbers? I know you have been here longer then that.

Interesting that you say max rear torso armor. I believe that is dependent on how much front armor you have. 12 internal means 24 armor, so you could have 12 points on the back, as long as you only have max of 12 on the front. I do not think there is anything that says you can't put all 24 on the back except weapons fire critting as soon as it hits.

And the suggestions doesn't mean you have to deal with them. Most seem to be counter to issues people have with the game and reality. Yes, it is fantasy, and yes there is the fact you have to give some physics up to play it, but some things just sound wrong.

Now with the engine issues, can the unit carry a larger engine to counter the power requirements for it? Like using a 325 engine in a marauder instead of the 300?

I do like the idea of having a reload time for some things like missiles, but will the be dependent on the size of the rack? Like a 5 pack not having much, where a 20 pack might be a couple of rounds? And even more if you have multiple ammo types and want to use something other then the default ammo?
Firestarter
07/17/15 08:02 PM
67.251.72.165

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I must say this is impressive. I do believe you have created Battletech 2.0
Good job.
ghostrider
07/17/15 08:10 PM
76.89.121.69

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Watch the copyrights.

It does make you wonder how much you can tweak things and still be playable and fun. I don't know if he is going to let us in on the design or not. It would be a tro by itself.

And speaking of this, I have a question for the admins.
Could he put this on the board here, or would that be a violation of copyrights?
We don't want any legal issues at all.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/17/15 11:22 PM
71.170.164.190

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
As long as he does not try to sell it there should be no issue with the copyrights that are held by the owners of BT.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
KamikazeJohnson
07/17/15 11:22 PM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

Did you really think it was going to be simple like just adjusting numbers? I know you have been here longer then that.



No comment.

Quote:
Interesting that you say max rear torso armor. I believe that is dependent on how much front armor you have. 12 internal means 24 armor, so you could have 12 points on the back, as long as you only have max of 12 on the front. I do not think there is anything that says you can't put all 24 on the back except weapons fire critting as soon as it hits.



The modified Hit Location Table makes Rear hits much more common; however, simply changing the Front/Rear ratio would leave Torsos badly underarmoured in a Slugfest. I'm thinking of allowing 2 per Internal for Front Torso, and an additional 1 per Internal for the back. Balance might entail modifying the amoung of Torso Structure at each tonnage, or other armour-related changes.

Quote:
Now with the engine issues, can the unit carry a larger engine to counter the power requirements for it? Like using a 325 engine in a marauder instead of the 300?



That was kinda the idea...under standard rules, 100-ton 'Mech has 4 Engine choices...100, 200, 300, and 400. Under these rules, a 100-ton 'Mech could mount a 325 Engine, reserving 300 points for Movement, and 25 for Weapons. However, the 'Mech could also be over-armed, forcing it to reduce to 2/3 movement in order to fire up to 125 points worth of energy weapons. Could be especially useful for heavily-armed Mediums...move 8/12 to get to the action, move 5/8 while engaged, then back up to 8/12 to escape. Should affect Jump movement as well, I'd imagine.

Quote:
I do like the idea of having a reload time for some things like missiles, but will the be dependent on the size of the rack? Like a 5 pack not having much, where a 20 pack might be a couple of rounds? And even more if you have multiple ammo types and want to use something other then the default ammo?



I think the reload time would work best if it's consistent across all LRMs...works fluff-wise by assuming a larger rack has a comparatively larger ammo feed system. I'm accounting for multiple ammo types by forcing the player to choose which ammo bin is used during the Reload turn. Requires planning ahead with their ammo choices.

I now have the onerous task of playtesting for balance ahead of me. Oh, the horror of playing multiple sessions...
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
KamikazeJohnson
07/17/15 11:28 PM
207.161.146.219

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

Watch the copyrights.

It does make you wonder how much you can tweak things and still be playable and fun. I don't know if he is going to let us in on the design or not. It would be a tro by itself.

And speaking of this, I have a question for the admins.
Could he put this on the board here, or would that be a violation of copyrights?
We don't want any legal issues at all.



I'm hoping that being "just a collection of house rules" will keep me safe from copyright issues. Right now it's a labour of love for my own enjoyment...I have no intention of distributing the completed project without first working out a deal with TPTB. Would be nice to see that happen, but I'm not holding my breath lol.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
07/18/15 01:26 AM
76.89.121.69

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It might throw off the balance, but maybe having torso armor use 1/2 of the front armor on the back.
Say put 6 points on the front, and the rear gets 3 points for 'free'. This would mean you would not armor the back, but it would automatically be done from the front. That would mean the armor per ton might change or you would require less tonnage in weight. That might change the internal to allowing 3 points per spot instead of 2.. This would only be allowed for the torsos. A little much, but some thing that might be workable.

Also, I would think some one will ask sooner or later, though I suggest no. Would you allow overcharging of the energy weapons?
Potentially more damage but can explode the weapon.

When you talk to them, maybe suggest a 'home rule' guide book or something like it. That might go over a little better with them. Though I doubt it.
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)
Extra information
0 registered and 22 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 78365


Contact Admins Sarna.net