Battletech Public Playtest Thread

[Celebrim]

So, playtest round 1 is labeled "Survival Package". Its pretty simple with just two major rule changes.

• Remove side hit location tables. Only Front and rear tables for playtest.
• Ammo explosions do a maximum of the following;
  • 20 damage with transfer to a location without CASE.
  • 10 damage without transfer to a location with CASE
  • 1 Damage and no transfer with a location with CASE II

I don't like removing the side hit locations, it makes the mech feel too much like a vehicle.

But I am very much in favor of reducing damage from an ammo explosion, as the existing rules very much favored not fielding mechs that carried ammo because an ammo critical was just too big of a risk given all the other problems involved with carrying ammo-based weapons (low damage for their weight, for example). The flat damage feels a little weird given Btech's usual granularity, but I can't think of a simple rule I like better. Damage based on payload size feels like it should be the rule with CASE, whereas a scaled down ammo explosion feels OK generally because most ammo has flat damage per ton but has edge case problems like MGs.

 

[kronovan]

..I mean, you can play modern minis wargame with Alpha Strike, but i'm after a granular detailed experience. So, if it speeds up play but keeps that detail, im all for it, if it gets removed simply because its complex, im not for that....

Alpha Strike are the rules I use for the vast majority of my SciFi minis play. The reason being, is I use Alpha Strike's ground, abstract aerospace and abstract capital ship rules for the combat enounters for my SciFi TTRPG sessiosn. I have forumlas for Savage Worlds, Cepheus Engine, Traveller and True20 that convert the pertinent PC skills to the unified Mech skill for Alpha Strike.

I've used the Total Warfare rules in the past for TTRPGs too, but often even encounters with just lance Vs lance could take the entire session to run. With Alpha Strike a combat encounter can be over in less than 2 hours, which gives me the rest of the session for the players to do other types of RP. And with most of my players having only played TTRPGs, even the simpler Alpha Strike rules are much more crunchy and complex then anything they've played.

I only started playing Total Warfare/Classic Battletech about 15 years ago, but TBH I've become a bit jaded with it. I live in a city with one of the largest CGL demo teams (also host city for Mech Con), so I've had lots of opportunity to play. Some of the players I game with have been playing for 30+ years, without many interuptions. Even though they often hand me my helmut on a platter, I'm OK occasionally going up against them with the TW rules. I don't know if I'd play more often, or enjoy play more if the rules were more streamlined. I definitely find TW crunchy, but it's sweet crunch like peanut brittle. If I want streamlined I've got AS and if I want a 4 hour session of intense play with all the bells and whistles, I've got TW.

That said, I'm well aware the TW rules have a steep learning curve and I've seem many a new player struggle with them. So, I can appreciate others wanting them streamlined. I'm just not sure I'd buy into such an edition.

 

[payn]

Alpha Strike are the rules I use for the vast majority of my SciFi minis play. The reason being, is I use Alpha Strike's ground, abstract aerospace and abstract capital ship rules for the combat enounters for my SciFi TTRPG sessiosn. I have forumlas for Savage Worlds, Cepheus Engine, Traveller and True20 that convert the pertinent PC skills to the unified Mech skill for Alpha Strike.

I've used the Total Warfare rules in the past for TTRPGs too, but often even encounters with just lance Vs lance could take the entire session to run. With Alpha Strike a combat encounter can be over in less than 2 hours, which gives me the rest of the session for the players to do other types of RP. And with most of my players having only played TTRPGs, even the simpler Alpha Strike rules are much more crunchy and complex then anything they've played.

I only started playing Total Warfare/Classic Battletech about 15 years ago, but TBH I've become a bit jaded with it. I live in a city with one of the largest CGL demo teams (also host city for Mech Con), so I've had lots of opportunity to play. Some of the players I game with have been playing for 30+ years, without many interuptions. Even though they often hand me my helmut on a platter, I'm OK occasionally going up against them with the TW rules. I don't know if I'd play more often, or enjoy play more if the rules were more streamlined. I definitely find TW crunchy, but it's sweet crunch like peanut brittle. If I want streamlined I've got AS and if I want a 4 hour session of intense play with all the bells and whistles, I've got TW.

That said, I'm well aware the TW rules have a steep learning curve and I've seem many a new player struggle with them. So, I can appreciate others wanting them streamlined. I'm just not sure I'd buy into such an edition.

That’s awesome! The reason I think they need to be very conservative with Classic Battletech is the existence of Alpha Strike. I think it’s the streamlined answer for folks who think CBT is too much.

I’m fact, there have been a few stealth attempts to make CBT elements like AS and my local play groups have wholesale rejected them.

 

[LordEntrails]

Didn't Alpha Strike simplify the rules? So is this supposed to be something in between?

 

[payn]

Didn't Alpha Strike simplify the rules? So is this supposed to be something in between?

Id say its more than a simplification. Or, you could say there is quite a bit of light between AS and CBT. What CGL is looking to do here isnt necessary simplify CBT, but more speed up play at the table by looking hard at procedures and results.

 

[kronovan]

That’s awesome! The reason I think they need to be very conservative with Classic Battletech is the existence of Alpha Strike. I think it’s the streamlined answer for folks who think CBT is too much.

I’m fact, there have been a few stealth attempts to make CBT elements like AS and my local play groups have wholesale rejected them.

I remember the attempt at simplified rules in the 25th Anniversary box set, which every player I knew despised. I thought they might be about right for my 12 year old son, who I was introducing to Battletech. He'd briefly browsed the thicker, condensed rule booklet in that set, which was a subset or the Total Warfare rules. When I handed him the simplied rules he was like; "what the heck are these?!" So yeah, even a complete n00b hated that attempt by CGL to come up with simpler rules.

Didn't Alpha Strike simplify the rules? So is this supposed to be something in between?

Yes, Alpha Strike is a much more simplified version.

Firing distances are simplified to 3 range bands of Short, Medium and Long. The complex head, torso, leg and arm armor is simplified to 2 rows of Armor and Structure. Movement is simplified into 1 uniform stat, so walking vs running isn't a thing and if your jump jet equipped Mech can run 12, it can jump 12 too. Critical damage is simplified to 4 rows of 1-4 bubbles, that track Engine, Fire Control, Movement and Weapon crits. Heat's a thing and there's a heat scale, but it only has 4 increments of 1,2,3 and Shutdown! In the default rules a Mech can only fire once per turn, but the Commander (2nd) Ed. of the rules introduced options for multi attacks, which everyone I know now uses. Best of all...all of the stats fit onto a 3"x2" laminated card that you can doodle on with a dry-erase marker to your heart's content.

There's a fairly wide gulf between the complexity of Classic Battletech and Alpha Strike. I mention those details, so you can get an idea of where a simpler, streamlined CBT might fit in.

The biggest difference between the 2 is at first the least apparent - that AS is more targeted towards playing on larger areas (4'x6' table is recommended) with 3D terrain and a higher number of Mechs. You can play As on the smaller CBT maps, but you need to chop movement values in half. To really experience AS in all its glory, you really need to play Battalion Vs Battalion with some cool, 3D tactical terrain. With experienced players, you can fight battles with 50 Mechs a side in a single afternoon. I remember spending almost an entire weekend at a local gaming con doing that with the the CBT rules - ouch!

 

[payn]

I remember the attempt at simplified rules in the 25th Anniversary box set, which every player I knew despised. I thought they might be about right for my 12 year old son, who I was introducing to Battletech. He'd briefly browsed the thicker, condensed rule booklet in that set, which was a subset or the Total Warfare rules. When I handed him the simplied rules he was like; "what the heck are these?!" So yeah, even a complete n00b hated that attempt by CGL to come up with simpler rules.

Yes, Alpha Strike is a much more simplified version.

Firing distances are simplified to 3 range bands of Short, Medium and Long. The complex head, torso, leg and arm armor is simplified to 2 rows of Armor and Structure. Movement is simplified into 1 uniform stat, so walking vs running isn't a thing and if your jump jet equipped Mech can run 12, it can jump 12 too. Critical damage is simplified to 4 rows of 1-4 bubbles, that track Engine, Fire Control, Movement and Weapon crits. Heat's a thing and there's a heat scale, but it only has 4 increments of 1,2,3 and Shutdown! In the default rules a Mech can only fire once per turn, but the Commander (2nd) Ed. of the rules introduced options for multi attacks, which everyone I know now uses. Best of all...all of the stats fit onto a 3"x2" laminated card that you can doodle on with a dry-erase marker to your heart's content.

There's a fairly wide gulf between the complexity of Classic Battletech and Alpha Strike. I mention those details, so you can get an idea of where a simpler, streamlined CBT might fit in.

The biggest difference between the 2 is at first the least apparent - that AS is more targeted towards playing on larger areas (4'x6' table is recommended) with 3D terrain and a higher number of Mechs. You can play As on the smaller CBT maps, but you need to chop movement values in half. To really experience AS in all its glory, you really need to play Battalion Vs Battalion with some cool, 3D tactical terrain. With experienced players, you can fight battles with 50 Mechs a side in a single afternoon. I remember spending almost an entire weekend at a local gaming con doing that with the the CBT rules - ouch!

On top of what @kronovan says here, there is a homebrew version that gets some play at cons. Its called Battletech Override. It starts with AS as its base, but adds back in some CBT elements. Its kinda sorta half way between them. If folks find AS too simple, but want CBT still dialed back.

DFA Wargaming

Death From Above Wargaming

dfawargaming.com

While I got DFA stuff up, I really enjoy their mission packets which provide info for running them as AS or CBT.

https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/dfa-wargaming.appspot.com/o/public_files%2FDFA%20Missions%20v6.0.pdf?alt=media&token=305edd1a-9858-425f-a97e-13fdd9be94b1

 

[Kannik]

Something to note. Unlike the video games, mechs dont carry ammo in the limbs until after the clan invasion era.

I had to check, but there are at least a few 3025-era 'mechs that carry ammo in their arms: the Stalker, Zeus, and Thunderbolt all do, for example.

So, unless you only play later era games, you are looking at torso pinball explosions. Completely agree with you about the ammo explosion being like every round was fired at the target in the resultant explosion. Machine guns are an oddity. Battletech is a mech plus more game. Machine guns are intended for the "more" part. However, its pretty rare for folks to run infanry.

And even if you do run into infantry, a quarter ton of MG ammo is likely to do you, let alone a full ton and the smallest you can stock is a half ton.

The weapon size and add a few damage in explosion is an interesting idea. I think it might be easier tho just to pick a number and as you noted 20 is probably too high (I told CGL the same).

-nods- There's a kinda cool thing under these new rules where CASE ends up becoming more worthwhile as it drastically reduces the number of damage taken rather than only preventing transfer. So that aspect of auto-venting is interesting, especially as it may save XL engines (and thus make the weight of IS CASE equipment more worth it).

I wonder if a straight up static number (to the venting cap) would be a bridge too far for many players, who might want to still account for either that edge case of "there's only one or two rounds left in the bin" kind of thing. Even though, as noted above, nearly all weapons would hit the cap with even one or two rounds left in the bin.

We have been using 1/10 ammo explosion damage for a few years now. Still requires some calculation but its entirely survivable compared to the standard rules.

Anything that reduces the nuclear nature of all BT ammo during explosions is a worthy mod.

 

[Kannik]

When it comes to the side tables, at first blush I'm less keen on the revision. A lot of what I would consider firing to the side of the mech is in the front firing arc right now. To make a side firing arc, where you can't hit the opposite side/structure, feel 'right' to me would need the arc to be the 60 degree arc between the middle of the front side and rear side hex faces

/ ~ \ < - midpoint of this face
\ _ / < - to midpoint of this face

But that would make the rear arc much bigger and thus mean more shots could hit your rear torso armour. Maybe that's a reasonable trade-off.

Beyond that though, both with what's currently considered the side firing arcs and even if the arcs were switched to the above, I would be hesitant to have a table where you can't hit opposite sides as with the mech's moving all about both in and around the hex ((fictionally, not necessarily mechanically), and also your relevant positions throughout the turn (you may have started outside of that arc, and fire is happening throughout), so I like that there is some chance to hit opposite side things. Especially arms and legs, which are swinging/moving about.

On the plus side, the new method would make positioning more powerful -- if you are a maneuverable mech and can stay on the same side then you can more reliably hammer on the same locations over and over again. So that helps light mechs a bit, perhaps, especially against heavier units.

And as for the idea this may help speed up the game, with the idea that there's one less table to memorize or consult, well, maybe. But if the table is on your record sheet, I don't think an additional table adds that much overhead.

(Mostly because overall I find the biggest impediment to speedy BT battles is less due to the multiple tables, locations, components, different weapon ranges, etc, but much more about the low to-hit chances (it's not uncommon to need 9+ or 10+ to hit, thus giving a 70%+ miss chance). It's why I'm not super excited to play Alpha Strike, for while it's got its own schtick as a way to speed up BT I think it misses the boat a bit. I've been testing some alt rules that use either 2d8 (sacrilege to introduce another die type, I know, but the numbers work out great) or 3d6 for the to-hit roll, increasing the overall die result range meaning each step is smaller meaning the chance to hit goes up (but also not by so much that modifiers become meaningless). This avoids those rounds of nothing but whiffs which is what has the game take a long time to complete.)

 

[payn]

And as for the idea this may help speed up the game, with the idea that there's one less table to memorize or consult, well, maybe. But if the table is on your record sheet, I don't think an additional table adds that much overhead.

My thoughts too. Its not so much the side charts when applying weapon damage that slows things down, its typically when a mech is falling. The shear number of things you have to work through for completing a fall is pretty onerous for newer players. Again, I think that granularity is what sets CBT apart, but I know this slows the game down. Getting ahead of the playtest a little, if the side charts are gone, they got a plan for that. You roll 1D6 like before, but only a roll of 1 do you use the rear table instead of front for damage. It is...simpler, but I still wonder about facing when it comes to firing from prone?