battletech ad?

Pages: 1
05/06/19 12:15 AM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There is a series of techtalk, or tex talk dealing with battletech on line.
The give a shout out to Sarna here.
Be warned that if you view this, they do curse in it, but so far I have seen the Catapult review, and found it funny. Crude at times, but funny.

Does this have anyone from Sarna as part of the team doing this?
The title of the person doing it is BlackPantsLegion.
05/06/19 07:33 PM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Was watching the video post while the person is play HBS Battletech game, and he suggests he played alot of table top games.

He seems to know quite a bit about Btech, butt for some of his playstyle, made me wonder.
He takes a Shadow Hawk, and has the ac 5 with the rest lrms. Yet he will not stay out of ML's short range and fires them. As the game does allow IDF and such, I don't know if he realizes that unit doesn't even have to see the mech, just be spotted by another in the unit.
Instead of working with the mech the way he built it, he complains he can't fix it with srms.

Now I can understand some people having forget a few things if they haven't played it in years, but seeing him use a spider as a stand and fight unit also made me laugh.

But he is at least explaining a few things of the game. And is doing a little advertising for Sarna here.
05/06/19 08:20 PM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Do keep in mind that many folks play the game but can't seem to realize that what works in the different computer games doesn't translate over to the board/table top game at all. And given that NONE of the computer games follow the rules of Battletech worth a damn, well that also tells you something.

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
05/07/19 03:42 PM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Had to stop watching him play HBS game.
He is what seems to be a typical tabletop player. Complaining about the time it takes to repair his units, as in table top, they have so many extra, instant units that can be changed for each combat situation.

As for following the rules, it is pretty close from what I have seen so far. Granted the damage is quite different, but it seems to follow the game. Armor seems to be adjusted for it. Heat is the same, yet the scale is different as well.

Last video I seen the guy playing, he constantly has his lrm unit leading from the front, and his short range units hiding in the back. So where some people do not know the video games tend to run a bit different from the board game, some things are still basic. Lrms have a minimum in 3025 era. Targeting something that just kicked you with them is completely stupid, as the unit should not have gotten that close.
Medium lasers don't have the long range as the guy seems to think. Plus hiding the laser carrier behind rocks, instead of the Lrms, just makes me feel like they are showing the worse of the game. Now that units are at the weight of his, and skills are better then recruit, it is painful to watch.

As for the game itself, it does seem to be a solid game. AI is smart enough to use tactics, like jumping on top of hills in the treeline for cover, and firing from there. Flanking maneuvers are constant. A few oddities, but I want to put it down as the game trying to give the player some sort of break.
05/07/19 10:28 PM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Here is the thing, the game as we know is NOT that hard to convert to a computer game, the fact that they won't is in my opinion LAZY, either it follows the rules of movement, damage, construction and the rest or it's NOT a Battletech game beyond using the name and the images, kind of like The Last Jedi was for Star Wars.

And most table top players can do well once they learn the computer game system, yet it doesn't hold true for those coming over from the computer game to the table top game. One of the best and funniest games I got to play in was at UCon in Ann Arbor one year, we had some guys sign up who ONLY knew about Battletech via the Mechwarrior 2 computer games. And they were all talk, about how good they were, how they could win the upcoming fight on the table, etc...and of course they had to play the Clan side. 6 turns later they were not talking much anymore beyond crying about how unfair the board game was and when it was over one turn 8 they were looking at the amazing mechs left as a mess on the battlefield. They fought like they did in the computer game, weapons all firing, not worrying about heat or ammo and found out fast and quick that those things are NOT treated the same nor was damage.

And as I have found out in computer games, the game is not a tactical game, it's just that a game, shoot first and run, that is the main play point.

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
05/08/19 12:58 AM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
From what I seen in the videos, the game does have tactics in it. The AI sends the short ranged units in to spot the players mechs, and uses the LRM's to bombard the player from afar. They will move to stay in range of the lrms, without advancing on the player, unless the AI is running the recruit experienced units.
It does jump the AI's mechs into strategic positions as well as the strike and retreat to cool down. Hunchback 4p. Came out far enough to target one mech, fired, then next round headed back into cover.
Cover, as well as woods does affect your targeting numbers, and the AI uses it to decent effect in the beginning, with more effect as the AI's experience ranks increase.

Granted, it goes off track with the board rules with missiles. The percentage to hit is per missile, not the pack.

I have seen more things come up on youtube dealing battle tech, but haven't gotten into watching them yet.
The main reason why I brought up this one is the shout outs to sarna. Which the person does in almost every video.
05/08/19 12:54 PM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
How does sending out light mech to spot make it a defined stand that the AI uses tactical thinking? Lights are there to find the enemy yes, but not there just to spot. Again the damn computer game thinking that all you need to is rain missiles down on the enemy doesn't work in the table top game and if you are saying that this is the best example yeah I will take a hard pass on this.

Glad the Youtubber is giving Sarna a shout out.

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
05/29/19 01:30 AM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The producers of the officially licensed computer games are out to make sales, not to replicate the tabletop game to perfection. That said, I think HBS did a fine job - I'm not so happy about the construction rules (especially extra slots in the CT and legs), the fact every location effectively has built-in CASE, inability to use weapons and physical attacks in same turn, and the units available in game are a poor match to canon in that part of space, but for mech-on-mech (or -vehicle) gameplay its a solid approximation. I seem to recall MechWarrior 2 almost perfectly nailing omnimech construction rules though and its a shame other games have regressed since then.

The AI in HBS BattleTech is a mix of good and bad. Its good at strategy, focusing on one of your mechs at a time, and trying to rain down LRMs from afar, but you can upset it by marching directly toward the enemies and moving your most damaged unit to the rear (or blocking it from direct attacks by moving a unit to stand directly in front of it.) In close quarters its a little more foolish. Sometimes it just stands there and fires at you without moving for better cover. It also manages heat poorly - wasting an alpha strike on low percentage shots when the next turn would presumably offer better chances. Hot units like the Catapult K2, and Black Knight can be abused through this mechanic.

If you want the table top experience on computer, MegaMek is by far the best bet, though the default AI is terrible (the "Princess" AI is tolerable though.) Its an entirely unofficial product though.
05/30/19 01:44 AM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I do need to add a point about physical attacks. You can fire weapons when you do, but it is only the small stuff. Flamers, MGs, and small lasers. Things that just aren't worth much in the range department.

I will agree the critical spots on the mechs skewers the Battletech examples. But they so does the 'advanced' tech you can find. Even the damage/armor isn't close to the same.
The skill upgrades are a harsh, until you get to a certain point. Tactics needs to be learned in order to split fire. Really don't like that, as most would split their fire when face with multiple units, like the SRM carrier coming up being the mech that is biting your ankles. LRM and PPCs on the carrier while the short range stuff for the close unit.

But I agree. The game seems to be good, though I need to play it to say how good. I guess I should watch someone that knows how to use weapons to their full advantage, instead of the assault physical attack person Tex. Lrms should never be fired when you are in physical contact with an enemy mech. The issues is each missile rolls to see if they make the to hit number. Too many were at that range. But then, not sure how the to hit numbers were for his main character.
09/20/19 02:59 AM

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Will try to look for it in YouTube.
Pages: 1
Extra information
0 registered and 9 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: 782

Contact Admins