Formal List of Grievances with the BT System

Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
SSFSX17
09/06/02 06:59 PM
209.233.16.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I am concerned only with the gameplay rules of BT in this thread, for I will use the input to, uh, do something productive.

Please write out a formal list of your grievances with the BattleTech system. You can talk about pretty much any part of the system, and pretty much any derivative, like AeroTech or BattleForce.

I will list a few that you won't even need to list:
Battle Value
Imbalance of IS vs Clans
TC + MPL cheaping
Uselessness of some weapons like the AC/2.
Lousy good-for-nothing mortals. Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.
realworldviews
09/06/02 08:29 PM
24.98.65.7

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Uselessness of some weapons like the AC/2.

Pesonally I will have to disagree with you on this.
The AC/2 has it's uses, and even more so the UAC/2 and the LBX2. What else can you use that will hit someone before they can get into LRM range. Some designs have made very good use of AC/2s. At first I also wondered about the usefullness of the AC/2, but that was until I playsomeone who knows how to use them. Heck the AC/2 has a short range of 8 hexes, that's long range for MLs. A couple of my favorite designs have become the 3050 MAL-1R Mauler, and the 3055 Clan Bane (Kraken). Of course the Bane does have 10 UAC/2s so it is a little different.

I would have to agree with the TC and any pulse lasers.

I will have to get back later with my grievences about the game play. I will think of something, I just can't think of anything right now.
Colonel Brian Davis
Gamers United
"Dreams become reality, for all who start off with a dream"
BA_Evans
09/07/02 05:32 PM
65.194.182.3

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Use the Kraken in a vacuum. That is an awful lot of extra rolls to see if locations shutdown due to the vacuum. This can be devestating.

Rick Raisley
09/07/02 10:17 PM
66.157.241.114

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
1) Battle Value

Not perfect, but by far the best system used to balance BattleTech games so far.

2) Imbalance of IS vs Clans

If you use #1, they're not unbalanced. Unless you count the fact that for equal BVs, IS usually wins, in my experience.

3) TC + MPL cheaping

Not cheap if you use #1. Okay, aimed shots can be cheap. But that doesn't mean the equipment is.

4) Uselessness of some weapons like the AC/2.

Obviously you never were the target of a super-heavy tank with 25 AC/2's sitting on a hill outside of your range. ;-) Okay, those were Ultra/2's, but still...
Rick Raisley
heavymetal@bellsouth.net

HeavyMetal Pro, Vee and Lite Home Page:
www.heavymetalpro.com
Greyslayer
09/07/02 11:27 PM
63.12.141.113

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
'Not perfect, but by far the best system used to balance BattleTech games so far.'

C-bills. You want the best your pay through the nose for it. BV is actually cheaper on some of the most expensive pieces of hardware in the game. BV also increases the chance of a player using a heavy or assault since the price in BV isn't all that different from a light to assault mech (example 3025 Jenner F 792 BV vs a 3050 Charger 3K 1485 BV ... I selected not the most expensive assault mech in bv but over 21 million c-bills? sheesh expensive).

We had Combat Value working before it was removed in our groups for differing technology groups. Sure it was treated at a ratio but the games were MORE balanced than I could see under this system in which no ratio can clearly be used.

Greyslayer
Rick Raisley
09/07/02 11:37 PM
66.20.152.15

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
C-bills? - C-bills have /never/ been a decent measure of fighting ability of a unit. You take the most expensive 'Mech made, and I'll take the highest BV 'Mech made, and guess who is going to win?

Combat Value? - CV was more a measure of cost than fighting ability. In fact, most of the emprical formulas that people use to calculate CV for equipment that doesn't have it uses a CV to Cost ratio.

Oh yeah, IIRC, the highest CV 'Mech you could make had nothing but double heat sinks on it. No weapons, just heat sinks. At least the highest BV 'Mech you'll make will have weapons. And armor. Probably both of each.

Just my opinoin, of course.
Rick Raisley
heavymetal@bellsouth.net

HeavyMetal Pro, Vee and Lite Home Page:
www.heavymetalpro.com
Greyslayer
09/07/02 11:45 PM
63.12.141.113

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
'At least the highest BV 'Mech you'll make will have weapons. And armor. Probably both of each.'

Nope. It will have ECMs. I have proved that already in a design thread sometime back.

Greyslayer
Nightward
09/08/02 06:58 PM
132.234.251.211

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Weeeeell....

My biggest issue is with the range and damage of weaponry in the game. Granted, you don't want everything to be a "One Hit, One Kill" weapon...*smacks himself* wait, what am I saying? But regardless, modern weapons are a lot better than those of BT. Stinger missile launcher vs SRM Infantry model? AGM Tacit Rainbow vs any BattleTech Missile system? Modern artillery and ICBMs vs BT Artillery? I trust we all get the point. And I know that the ranges of BT weapons are purposely slanted so as to make movement have a meaningful impact on the game, but the fact that modern infantry weapons outrange many of the BT "Big Guns" still irritates me.

The second thing that annoys me is the sudden proliferation of C3 gear. I can understand the Com Guard having it, but I certainly wouldn't hand it over to the Lyrans, let alone the CC. I know that what with espionage and all, it would have to happen eventually, but still...the DCMS had it for years, and being Japanese would have had a natural affinity for electronics, but even they could not mass-produce it so well. Suddenly, it seems that every single Lance in existance has been retrofitted with C3. Bah! Of course, part of this objection is because it is eroding the power of my beloved Draconis Combine

But to address your point "Uselessness of some weapons like the A/C-2".

I must disagree with you there. The A/C-2 has a low damage profile, but *INCREDIBLE* range, especially for 3025. An expert player with a Lance of Blackjacks could make your life a living hell by staying too far away to hit, whilst plinking away with the A/Cs. Eventually, he'll get head hits of CT:2 results. Not every weapon is powerful, but every weapon is balanced. Mostly. Sometimes. Okay, rarely, but that was the point of this thread, was it not
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
MadWolf
09/09/02 02:46 AM
134.53.144.102

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The Imbalance of Clan Vs IS? right. The Tech Level is Better for the Clan's ( XL's taking only 2 eng. crits in each torso) but by far they are not all that unbalanced. If you play a campaign and you finally get to retrofit that Clan ER LLaser on yer black jack. You really don't feel Unbalanced.

LAM's are the only thing i dont like. I need not transformers in my game.
Nothing is Impossible, It is only Improbable.
Greyslayer
09/09/02 05:24 PM
216.14.192.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
'If you play a campaign and you finally get to retrofit that Clan ER LLaser on yer black jack. You really don't feel Unbalanced.'

Right to the area that I feel is unbalanced. The Mechwarrior 2 (roleplaying version) munch a mech system.. I suppose at least in MW2 you can actually spend time IN a mech , but in essence there was not much stopping players making a gauss rifle from a toaster. The IS technology had been declining for centuries, your techs don't even know what a 'double heat sink' looks like yet the second the clans turn up their techs are refitting clan equipment upon their own 'not really running gear' with little or no problems.

An example:

Max refits his Awesome AWS-8Q with 3 Clan Large Pulse. Simply put in the MW2 system he just has to remove the
-PPCs and slots in the Pulse with a couple of engineering rolls and a couple of technician rolls (in which his tech probably has edge and probably even Natural Aptitude: Technician or Engineering or a selection of techs each with the skills needed for the job).
-Max Tech at least requires the same criticals and tonnage or there would be hell to pay but this system would be easy to overcome by slotting three single heat sinks in since the Large Pulse are one ton lighter each.
-What I think would happen (and hence why I think Omnis are BS): The Old PPCs were using some pretty ordinary patched together power-couplings, you could even say the entire setup is for a different 'phase' of power output from the Pulse Laser. The Pulse probably requires a very 'clean' coupling, something that would have to be salavaged 'clean' from a clan mech, probably had different adaptions for plugging into a weapon and also onto the engine. Heat is probably dumped a little differently (PPC one big shot, Pulse multiple smaller shots hence heat should be treated differently within the mech) through the heat sinks when using the weapons. The targetting and tracking would be almost useless in this new setup. The lighter and smaller weapons would make it hard for a pilot to hit the target and the mountings for the weapon would have to be built from scratch since the IS don't have 6 ton 2 crit lasers.... plus the weapon was probably designed to be put in a pod in most scenarios anyway. I won't go on to deal with sensor differences with weapon-fire since I don't know the total effect they would have but would make a change at some noticable level.

This is probably why I preffered 3025 over any other period. You don't have these acts of blatant engineering stupidity running against the grain of the playing 'universe'.

Greyslayer
Orylan
09/11/02 11:45 AM
24.59.163.113

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
My biggest gripe is with the 'scenarios.' Never have I found a small action (less then a battalion on each side) where it was possible to have a 'running' battle in a scenario set up.

Rarely do they call for more then 2 screans. The game balances out IS and Clan weaponry by making the clanner's be close to the IS. Sure, it is possible to set the two forces up from opposite sides of the board, but once battle is engaged, it seems a pain for the clanners to disengage the IS for long. ("Star Captain, we can't move further out, around the IS forces!" "Why not?" "The FASA/WizKids black wall of nothingness is in our way." "Oh no!").

Anyone try and run the first engagement between IS and Clan forces on the Rock? 1 Battalion of IS mech's (all un-upgraded) only severely damaging 2 omni-mechs? To represent this engagement, it'd take 16-32 mapsheets (that's also alot of mechs and it'd take a week at least to resolve it). but on anything smaller then that, the IS forces would have a fighting chance.
MadWolf
09/14/02 01:33 AM
134.53.144.93

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
This is what i have to say.

I can take PC apart. and put it back togeather without understanding a dam thing that i did. Then give me a new piece of hardware and (ummm. usb card) and I can try pluging it in and doing so til it works. Like any good mechanic if you see what your working with and have a very basic understanding of what your doing you can ad anything in, Granted LLasers arn't Plug in play but once a Mechanic blew a few up he'd figure it out in a heart beat.
Nothing is Impossible, It is only Improbable.
Greyslayer
09/14/02 01:36 AM
216.14.192.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We are talking about plugging P4 components on a early P2 motherboard. You would have to have EXTENSIVE knowledge to be able to do that if in fact it would be possible.

Greyslayer
Durango
09/16/02 01:39 PM
65.212.106.131

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Greyslayer is right.

On the other hand, even in 3025 we had the "chewed gum and bailing wire" approach to re-fitting 'Mechs.

Ideally, if you want to install that Clan weaponry into your 'Mech, you'd have to give yourself some mods. For instance, if you remember in one of the first scenarios, several of the 'Mechs had problems...this one generated too much heat when using his repaired laser, or that one had a severe targeting problem when using his AC10.

The problem is that you can't do that any more, since any advantage you'd gain using that new weapon has been negated...why bother to install it?

THAT'S what munch is. Having a perfect 'Mech. What's the fun in that? Walk, shoot, walk, shoot.

Bob_Richter
09/16/02 02:34 PM
4.35.174.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Tinker roll to build a power cleaner/adapter.

Reprogram the targeting computer with the data off the omni-pod (computers roll)

A 6 ton 2 crit laser WILL fit on the mount for a larger gun, and even then, an engineering roll would suffice to design a new mount, and a technician roll with the right parts to fabricate it.

Inner Sphere technicians have been refitting 'Mechs into improbably configurations since time immemorial. It's what they're best at. As long as they understand what a new gun needs to work, they CAN refit it.

Admittedly, the trouble is figuring out what it needs, and that can be an adventure (and several very valulable components blown to helll) in an of itself.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter

Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
Chas
09/22/02 03:55 PM
66.187.3.130

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply

  1. BattleValue

    • Believe it or not, BV is about the best way available to balance forces. CV was little more than a slight reworking of the C-Bill cost system and did nothing to ensure balance in mechs. Now, for campaigns, BV becomes less important. But in matches (such as those that take place at conventions), BV allows for well balanced forces.

  2. Imbalance of IS vs Clan

    • This has been getting harped on forever. If the Clans had simply more of the same tech that the IS had, they wouldn't be a credible threat.

      IS 3025 technology encourages one style of play.

      IS3050+ technology encourages another style of play.

      Clan technology engenders a third style of play.

      And pitting the various tech bases against one another gives rise to a huge variety of different play styles.

      If you can't adapt yourself to any of these play styles, you die. Plain and simple.

  3. TC+MPL

    • Any game system, no matter how balanced, has certain combinations that are extremely deadly. This just happens to be one of them. For a while, before the BT heat cap was abolished, mechs with extremely high heat loads and massive damage potential were frequent abusers (Sure, that mech with 30 Medium Lasers overheats. But if it strikes with more than half of them, most opponents begin losing lots and LOTS of armor very rapidly. Who cares if you shut down, so long as your opponent is reduced to slag pile?)

      Note that most Pulse+TC combos are NOT official designs, and that most Pulse+TC combos that ARE, are not really Pulse+TC abusers. At most, they have a couple Pulse Weapons.

      Now if someone, in-game begins building a mech that's nothing but Pulse+TC, that's the GM's fault. Not the game system's.

      People complained the same way about head-capping when the Gauss Rifle came along.

  4. Uselessness of some weapons, like the AC/2

    • Uselessness? In L1 play, the AC2 is the longest-reaching weapon in the game. Sure, it does minimal damage. But you're able to stay outside of even MISSILE range and nickel-and-dime an opponent to death.

      It's the same principle that brought about LB-X AC's. You may not do most of your damage with the AC/2. But, by blowing holes in the armor, you make it easier for more damaging weapons to penetrate the armor and ravage internal structures.

      Also, from a construction standpoint, some of the weight/crit loadouts with these weapons are VITAL. Sure, an AC/2 is fairly low-damage, but when you're short on crit space, but still have lots of tonnage to distribute, an AC/2 still is a worthwhile consideration

---
"High necked fashions just became the IN thing here on Tharkad."

-- Morgan Kell
-- Grave Covenant
Greyslayer
09/22/02 09:26 PM
63.12.141.22

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BV ... XL Engines are the big kicker. The person who designed them in the bv system allowed a heavy rorting of the system. Mechs like the Wraith (not a real killer mech in itself) is about the same price as the 3025 Griffin. An XL engine can increase multiple aspects of the mech except BV cost? Arrow IV mechs - very cheap and given the fact that the mechs are probably deadlier on-board without TAG then they don't incur the +200 BV per launcher. Arrow IV has been banned from almost every tourney I have ever seen and that is now EVERY tourney I have seen for BV.

Now can the problems be fixed? Seriously Yes, but not in the short-term. The BV system would have to be overhauled, as it was it was not adapted from the original design submitted by a player to MFNA but accepted whole (as far as I know), it was brought in at a time of poor research and proofing (though that does seem to be a bane to battletech in general). The thing that got me though was that they threw away the CV system altogether. Then they brought in the absolutely PATHETIC maintenence system in the FM:Mercenaries as a compensator for one of the better aspects of the CV system. You can't maintain a mech from the BV system (struth most of the cheaper mechs have higher to run parts ... Such as those XL mechs with Arrow IVs and mechs like the Wraith), you could sort of run it from a price modifier (an example would be dividing the price by 50,000 to get the weekly cost to maintain the unit).

Anyway enough ranting from this duck for now,

Greyslayer
Bob_Richter
09/23/02 02:19 PM
4.35.174.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
1. That's a matter of opinion. I still find tonnage more satisfying. BV is tragically flawed to the point of near-complete uselessness.

>>>Now if someone, in-game begins building a mech that's nothing but Pulse+TC, that's the GM's fault. Not the game system's.<<<

How's that? It's certainly a possible result, in game, and definately a desirable one as well. FASA doesn't build decent weapons configurations. This doesn't excuse the imbalance of certain weapons which is, after all, more or less what BV was designed (and failed) to deal with.

>>>But you're able to stay outside of even MISSILE range and nickel-and-dime an opponent to death.<<<

Four words: In a pig's eye!

This is an almost inexecutable strategy, and even if it DID work, it wouldn't be any fun.

The AC/2 is the next best thing to useless. The AC/5 *IS* useless. You know it as well as anyone else.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter

Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
novakitty
09/23/02 09:14 PM
192.195.234.26

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
"The AC/2 is the next best thing to useless. The AC/5 *IS* useless."

The HV and rotary of the above are quite fun though.
meow
dwug
09/23/02 09:14 PM
24.50.42.189

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I have to agree with Chas on #1&3 (on stock mechs anyways). You can really cheese the BV system with high heat and lots of low damage spl's (if the GM allows it).

Given the "Dark Age" (shudder) that the Inner Sphere was in before the GDL memory core and the fact that the clans never lost their tech base and had a couple hundred years to refine it, the imbalance is justified. Why bring in the Clans in the first place? It closed a chapter in the history of BT. Everyone would still be wondering "Where are they" if they hadn't.

As to the AC/2's, you havn't seen humiliation till a 3025 Blackjack whittles you away from long range & you can hardly touch him. (I was in a Warhammer) Talk about eating humble pie.

With the exception of the BV system, the strength/weakness of any of these problems can be overcome, it just entails better use of tactics and/or GMing. If you allow opponents to build ubermechs or bring Clantech to an Innershere fight, you'd better adapt and overcome or quit whining

Now I'll climb off my soapbox.

dwug

"Good Ash, Bad Ash, you're the one with the gun."
Greyslayer
09/24/02 12:48 AM
216.14.192.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
'You can really cheese the BV system with high heat and lots of low damage spl's (if the GM allows it). '

The GM better get busy banning STOCK mechs then. The Dasher H is just such an example of many BV low units due to abuse of the system flaws.

'Why bring in the Clans in the first place? It closed a chapter in the history of BT. Everyone would still be wondering "Where are they" if they hadn't.'

Just like the Clan Wolverine 'where are they now' stuff that is kicking around. Still better off without the clans than with them in it.

'As to the AC/2's, you havn't seen humiliation till a 3025 Blackjack whittles you away from long range & you can hardly touch him.'

Then

'With the exception of the BV system, the strength/weakness of any of these problems can be overcome, it just entails better use of tactics and/or GMing.'

The BJ would be hard-pressed even if superior gunnery to either defeat or even critically damage a warhmmer unless the player rolled snake-eyes or head hits. Struth, it doesn't even have the AMMO to chew through the armour of a warhammer unless it gets lucky on location rolls and hits practically with every shot (which at long range is practically impossible). Sure I have used a veteran BJ-1 to take down a MAD-5A but again it was only through luck of a snake-eyes roll that I got it. Not through any great usage of a mech that struggles to inflict serious damage on a unit.

'If you allow opponents to build ubermechs or bring Clantech to an Innershere fight, you'd better adapt and overcome or quit whining'

If you allow someone to use custom mechs they are probably the kind of player that you will need to be comforted when a player using stock mechs rips them a new hip actuator, same goes for clan vs IS. Picking clan purely because of superior technology without any other equalising factors is an exercise in futility I can and I have defeated clan units that have outnumbered, outmassed and outgunned me. Thank goodness when those 3 reinforced clusters of clan mechs came on the table against my regular comstar division that I had about a division of artillery in support (superior STRATEGICAL manouvering), smashed 3 clusters of clan equipment certainly makes a crock of how the battle went in the book (1 cluster took out that division with minimal damage apparently .... the GM made a mistake too I was supposed to have more mechs than I did)..

Bv system - seriously flawed, unlike other systems you can't incorporate a ratio system to overcome this since its flawed towards specific equipment in specific ways (such as the heavy small Dasher is cheap but the ER Medium Dasher is wayyy tooo expensive, how can you fix a ratio on that?).

CV system - we had a system that worked using ratios. Unfortunately because we used faction listings FedCom was the more powerful since it predated the split at the time we did these competitions.

Tonnage - again easy to fix with ratios. I found the rules for Protomechs when using tonnage and unit limits though a little bit of a rort (5 protomechs count as a point so limiting a clan force to a star you can still have 25 protomechs).

C-bills - can't work. The clans have no concept of efficient battle vehicles. Everything they produce is done so at a more expensive level (pilots, equipment and logistically due to extensive usage of omnimechs). In 3025 though I would say this system is better than any of the others mentioned above.

Tourneys - Overall Tonnage will win. It does mean the battles are a little boring as the favourite mechs are selected (examples like the wraith and MadCat). BV can work at a 3025 level which I have held a tourney with. It worked very well, no other technology levels have really worked though. CV has never really failed once we had a ratio system in place.

Campaigns - Bv = NO HOPE. CV is workable but even with a ratio in place you would have to charge that at all levels (including income) to have some sort of balance. Tonnage = How? It just doesn't lend itself to the long term. C-bills can work but again more of a specialist 3025 ideal or Mercenary object.

Greyslayer .... doesn't need a soapbox on these topics.
Bob_Richter
09/24/02 02:40 AM
4.35.174.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Never found a use for the HV, and RACs are a little unreliable for my taste, but suit yourself.

Why did you change the subject, anyway?
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter

Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
Bob_Richter
09/24/02 02:51 AM
4.35.174.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>>>With the exception of the BV system, the strength/weakness of any of these problems can be overcome, it just entails better use of tactics and/or GMing.<<<

1) Better game design would have headed off the problem from the get-go.

2) Why is it you assume the person with superior equipment will always be the inferior tactician?

3) GMing has NOTHING to do with Battletech. If you look through your manuals, you will notice that the term is not ever mentioned. Not even once. Pulse Lasers, Targeting Computers, and custom Omnimech Configurations are very much a part of the Battletech Universe. It would only be a poor GM who would disallow any of the three.

4) Some of us don't WANT to fight with Pulse Lasers and Targeting Computers. Some do. Battletech should probably be re-balanced to accomodate BOTH play styles, don't you think?

>>>As to the AC/2's, you havn't seen humiliation till a 3025 Blackjack whittles you away from long range & you can hardly touch him. (I was in a Warhammer) Talk about eating humble pie.<<<

That IS humiliation, especially since YOU should never have allowed it to happen. If you lost a Warhammer to a BLACKJACK, I know right well how you'd fare against my munch-machines (see point #2 above.)

>>>You can really cheese the BV system with high heat and lots of low damage spl's (if the GM allows it). <<<

1) As I mentioned above, there is no such thing as a GM in a Battletech game. If you have one, you are playing by some off set of house rules.

2) That's precisely what's WRONG with the BV system. It's a FLAW. It needs to be CORRECTED. Got it?

>>>Why bring in the Clans in the first place? It closed a chapter in the history of BT. Everyone would still be wondering "Where are they" if they hadn't.<<<

Unlike some old-timers I could name, I don't have a problem with the IDEA of the Clans. I object only to the poor execution and development of said Clans.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter

Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
novakitty
09/24/02 11:47 AM
192.195.234.26

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Since when has anyone cared about staying on subject?
meow
dwug
09/24/02 12:46 PM
24.50.42.189

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
By "GM" I refer to the players themselves setting the terms of the engagement. The people I game with agree on the terms of the battle beforhand and then come up with their forces. We usually use stock mechs to avoid the"munch" effect, but have been known to go all out (and a good time is usually had by all). The rules do not need to be "re-balanced" to effect this, all it takes is agreement amung the players.

I do not assume the person with superior equipment will always be the inferior tactician, I am just saying that that is the best way I have found to counter it, aside from totally swamping him with numbers.

We do use a GM when playing a double-blind game or a tourney, just to act as a final arbiter of the rules. We also refer to the player who is running a campaign as the GM for lack of a better term. Sorry for any mis-communication on my part.

If used to set up forces of stock mechs to oppose each other, the BV system is great even when used IS vs Clan. I do not beleve it works very well for "home grown" mechs, there are too many ways to finagle it (ammo, flamers, spl's engine type), but I do not forsee a system that ever will. Any replacement system will have things about it that can be exploited just like this system.

dwug
"Good Ash, Bad Ash, you're the one with the gun."
ChalengerII
09/24/02 03:40 PM
62.254.0.4

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
just for laughts this post
I've always had problems with BV as it is a pain to calcuate by hand but I thought my troubles were over when I got a mech designer. Now I have hit upon two minor problems with this
1 Mech designer workes out the BV for MP5 JP4 mechs so I had to do them by hand
2 The drawing board and Mech designer can't agree on the BV of any of my mechs.
This basicly means I end up having to do them all by hand.
Challenger
Bob_Richter
09/24/02 06:36 PM
4.35.174.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
>>>We usually use stock mechs to avoid the"munch" effect<<<

And thus fail miserably, as eveyone scrambles for the munchiest stock 'Mechs and configs, yes?

>>>The rules do not need to be "re-balanced" to effect this, all it takes is agreement amung the players.<<<

The rules NEED to be re-balanced so that there's some POINT in using weapons other than PL+TC (or any of the other popular munch configs.)

>>>I do not assume the person with superior equipment will always be the inferior tactician, I am just saying that that is the best way I have found to counter it, aside from totally swamping him with numbers. <<<

The best way to win is always to be the superior tactician, but it's not a counter to superior equipment. Superior equipment makes it easier to win. Even an inferior tactician can beat a Rakshasa with a MadCat.

>>>If used to set up forces of stock mechs to oppose each other, the BV system is great even when used IS vs Clan. <<<

It works POORLY, even if it does make for some fun fights. If I try hard enough, I can find you some good example of critically unbalanced stock designs. More are just slightly off the balance point, but if you know what you're doing and have enough 'Mechs, it's not hard to BV-munch even with stock 'Mechs.

>>>Any replacement system will have things about it that can be exploited just like this system.<<<

You might start by adjusting the existing system to account for the errors we KNOW it has.

-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter

Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
Greyslayer
09/25/02 12:43 AM
216.14.192.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Were the differences large or could it be from rounding errors? Do they like HMPro show a sheet of working out its values so you can see where they have gone wrong (I had an old version of TDB and while I found easier to use than HMPro and easier to learn to use I did find that several values were wrong when it calculated the BV).

Greyslayer
Greyslayer
09/25/02 12:56 AM
216.14.192.226

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
'And thus fail miserably, as eveyone scrambles for the munchiest stock 'Mechs and configs, yes?'

When we have played Clan Grand Melees then yes everyone scrabmles for the munchiest stock designs (mind you being the last to die when I decided 'what the hell I'll try a Thor E despite my dislike of ATMs' was fun) and I have found this trait consistant with the Clans altogether. When we have played IS though it quite often ends up in the 'pile-of-death' scenario where a player gets to randomly select a mech out of a stack of papers (and my joy once of picking a RLF-3R when others were in a Dragonfire and Atlas and so on, still I had alot a fun as did all the other players). I can't see munch in that scenario nor in many others using stock designs.

Greyslayer
MacLeod
09/25/02 07:45 PM
64.160.52.184

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Bob, I think you're being overly negative. Not all 'Mech designers like using the munch-a-holic strategy of PLs and TCs. In fact, I rarely do so. I'll admit, TCs are quite common on my Shakuras Industries designs, but they very rarely have PLs, and most of the ones that do are ones that have a very big main gun that uses up lots of ammo (a few of my Victor variants come to mind). Still, I for one never go out to build a munch 'Mech unless that's my concept. I usually think of a design first, and then build it. That, or I do conversions from anime series. In fact, it's these philosophies that allowed me to create the Oni and the Lone Wolf. Both of these have major roles in my books, and since I created a BT parallel with Scott MacLeod (my character) as a major hero, I decided to convert these designs to see how they came out.

And hey, I really hate calculating BV by hand. I just wish there really was a better way of calculating a mech's worth. BV is just a bad idea, as you have said, because people CAN and DO build TC+PL munchomatics.
Drugs don't kill people, pancreatic cancer kills people.

... and whoever heard of a drug that causes pancreatic cancer?
Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
Extra information
1 registered and 69 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 enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 11620


Contact Admins Sarna.net