From: clarka@netcom.com (Andrew Clark)
Subject: Re: Btech: Favorite Mechs--BOOK MECHS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Followup-To: rec.games.board
Summary: book Mechs, well . . . 
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: world 
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:55:38 GMT


phygod72@nic.gac.edu (Phil ) writes:
>In article <Bx7JtL.1xy@news.cso.uiuc.edu>  writes:
>} phygod72@nic.gac.edu (Phil ) writes:
>} 
>} >People actually *like* book 'mechs?

I don't like the vast majority of them.  There are a few . . .
3050 Marauder, for example.  I prefer to design my own but tournaments  
require the use of stock 'Mechs.

>} >Incredible...I haven't come across a one that I like.
>} 
>} Oh, they aren't all bad. Most of them are good as places to start.
>} They do tend to be cheap in comparison to player designs. FASA's stuff
>} is supposed to be the basic models that get used. The variants most
>} people design are often frightfully expensive. I could never afford
>} to make all the modifications to my basic Warhammer in Mechwarrior
>} that I make everytime I use one in basic Btech.      

>Ahhhh...I see the problem now--people actually *keep track* of what the prices
>for various 'mechs are.  Incredible.

I agree.  Keeping track of all those C-bill prices; ugh!  Thank you, FASA
for all those equations and figures.  They're really useful in balancing
forces.   Not! 

>I don't see BattleTech as all that decent of a campaigning system, and so I  
>don't campaign.  Here's the problem:  In a campaign, you can't eliminate any of
>the weapons...AeroTech, BattleTech, and CityTech all have to be there (unless  
>you're on one planet, in which point drop AeroTech). 

Battletech doesn't have a system for comparing the values of various
non-Mech forces.  Raw tonnage doesn't balance well.  In the games I've
played using all forces, we designed a system that worked quite well for us.
In general, vehicles cost less than Mechs, and infantry were cheap.

>But here's the problem:

>I can smear any mech lance with artillery (no problem--none).

Really?  A lance moving 5/8 can outrun off-map artillery and use LOS to
evade on-map artillery; the little spotters can be blown up with armed
little hunter-killers (a 5 ton VTOL with a medium laser . . .); you may
tag a 'Mech or two using pre-plotted fire, but when I get close I'm 
going to blow you away.    

>I can take out a city with artillery. 

Yes.  If you can protect the artillery.  That is a STRONG if.  
But what happens if you need to capture something intact?  Like a
Mech factory, or a baby milk plant :)

>I can take out a lance with elementals.

Not often.  Same 5/8 lance, 40 tons each.  I'm not going to get close
enough to let you hurt me; I'm going to PPC/LRM/Gauss you from seven to
twelve hexes away.     

>I can take out anything that I want with an AeroTech fighter.

Once.  You are right that an Aerospace fighter can kill any target,
but a good air defense will ensure that it won't survive the return fire. 
Small (15-20 ton) vehicles with loads of SRM packs (or medium lasers)
can be used to surround an important target; if you strafe it or bomb it,
they will hit you with lots and lots of damage.  Boom.

>I can take out infantry with Mechs, elementals with artillery (or AeroTech).

Depends on the infantry and the environment.  In the open, sure.  In heavy
woods or a city, you might get hurt rather badly.  As for taking out
Elementals with artillery, dream on!  Three units of Elementals = 15 suits.
IF you manage to hit the correct hex, yes.  You might miss.  Remember to
allow for artillery flight time; even two turns is enough to make your
life miserable.  As for elementals vs Aerofighters, the tonnages don't
match.  An Elemental unit is five tons; an Aerofighter is say, forty.
That means I get eight times five = 40 SRM/2 packs fired at that 
Aerofighter.  Twice.   

>All I really have to do is say "I want all artillery (plus some of my handy  
>spotters: 30/45 5-ton heilos with...C3 (or TAG--take your pick), or all  
>AeroTech fighters (configured to strafe, of course)", and you can't win.  

Ok.  I'll fight you any time.  My cavalry (very fast 'Mechs and hovercraft)
will rush your artillery emplacement from three or more directions, covered
by eleven-ton VTOL spotter-killers.  My electronic warfare hovercraft
will make your C3 useless.  My own artillery will be lining up on your  
position and dropping either smoke or explosives on top of your emplacements;
and they'll be on the move before your return fire lands.  My AirCav
(21-ton attack VTOLs) will be raining AC/2 or LRM fire on you and pose
a constant nuisance (until my transport VTOLs drop off jump infantry and
you get to watch them leapfrog towards you.)  You have a major targeting
problem: a "target-rich environment," where lots of little things are
coming at you and you don't have enough firepower to take care of them all. 

Oh, yes.  All your Aerospace fighters are configured to strafe?  Can
they strafe my Aerospace fighters (configured for air superiority)?
I agree that AeroSpace fighters are unbalanced, but they can't hold
territory: only decimate it.  You can blow my city to shreds (maybe)
but you can't take it over.  For that you will need ground units: Mechs
and vehicles.  

>Period.

Nope.  The secret is combined-arms.  Use everything in the roles for
which it is useful.  Infantry can work in close conjunction with 'Mechs
to provide close fire support; vehicles can carry the infantry into 
battle, then harass the enemy from all sides.  VTOLs can be used to
outflank the enemy force and put down fire (or infantry) at his most
vulnerable points.  Mechs of different designs can work in the fast
attack, strike, defense, assault, or reconaissance roles.  Conventional
fighters can cheaply wreak havoc on enemy units without air defense, or 
carry vehicles and jump troops behind enemy lines (make the aircraft  
VSTOL-capable, then escort with Aerospace fighters.)

>So, I just play 500-1000 ton battles, pure BattleTech (well, vehicles, too--but
>no infantry/elementals/artillery/AeroTech), and enjoy the strategy of the game.


I think it's more fun to use all the available units.  There's more room
for overall strategy and unit design, as distinct from Mech design.  In
unit design, the goal is to create a mix of forces capable of a specific
mission (or missions) that meets certain requirements.

On the other hand, I can understand the "purists" who don't like the
non-Mech elements of the game.  Sometimes I just want to wade in there
and bash Mechs too.  BUT that's not the only thing you can do with Battletech.
-- 
clarka@netcom.com     Andrew Clark     My ignorance is my own fault.
"We have virtual reality today: Pete Wilson lives in it." | Bad cop! 
"Macs are to computing what television is to journalism." | No donut! 
Secondary account at aclark@UCSD.EDU -- prefer mail at netcom site.