From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: BTECH - Rules flexibility???
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 21:11:33 GMT
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User

In article <5100@daily-planet.concordia.ca> kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
>	Ok, I'll bite ... :-)   Did you ever play Mekton ?

    |\|o, actually, I never have played Mekton.  I have played an RPG
 style anime mecha combat game designed by a friend of mine, called
 KT I think.  It was very faithful to the anime style of mecha combat.
 

>	No ?... Yes ? ... it doesn't matter, because the new Technical 
>	rules are coming, with some of the best stuff I've seen.

    |\|ew tech rules for what?  BattleTech or Mekton?
 

>	Now, what I can't understand is why Mekton can pull off the 
>	"Swashbuckler" Mecha style (dodge-parry-kick-shoot), while
>	BTech forces us to "Sand Blast" ?
>
    |\|ature of the game, along with mistakes made in the original
 design.  (i.e. fixed tonnages in increments of 5 tons for mechs, all
 construction values based on weapon weight instead of actual cost,
 and inflexible pilot skills with set standard initial values.)

 
>	Yes, BIG weapons are a pain. Yes, extra rules are a pain for 
>	record keeping. Yes, the game is Truly unrealistic...
>
>	But, how about making it go a little faster, while at the same
>	time, making "character" fatalities less prelevent ...
     _
    (_)ne idea I had recently was to try plyaing the game with only
 one change: no movement point costs for facing changes or terrain.
 In this way, if you have a mech that can move 6/9, it can then move
 to ANY hex within 6 hexes of itself for a +1 firing modifier, or any
 hex within 9 hexes for a +2 modifier.  You can't really call it
 walking and running anymore, since you'd expect them to be using some
 kind of hover or anti-gravity type of movement (like the mecha in so
 many anime shows).  I haven't yet had the chance to playtest this idea.

 
 
>	(I can dream can't I ? :-)
>
    \/\/e all can.  (:
 
 
> > With these two conditions, you see that each mech has to be able
> > to both mount either a large number of weapons or a few very large
> > weapons, as well as be able to either survive several hits by
> > similar weapons, or avoid getting hit at all.  This, of course, is
> > the basis behind the concepts of designing mechs with as much armour
> > as possible, and making them as fast as possible.  That's simply the
> > way the game is designed, and how the weapons, armour, and movement
> > values are balanced.
>
>	Sorry, I have been seing Light 'Mechs fall heavilly on their
>	collective faces since the NeoTech has arrived. I don't think
>	that speed compensates enough anymore.
>
    ___
     |rue.  Star Leauge technology and the Clans have unbalanced the
 game more towards heavy hulking walking arsenal type tactics, and
 even farther away from the anime mecha style of fighting that inspired
 it.  I don't doubt that this was intentional.  Sam Lewis himself has
 said that they don't want BattleTech to be an anime style game.
    ___
     |he way I see it, they could have developed BattleTech along two
 lines:
 
    1) More towards anime style mecha combat.
 
    2) More towards "realistic" unit combat.
 
 Unfortunately, they chose the later.  The main problem with #2 is that
 BattleTech is inherently UNrealistic, so that instead of BT being
 either strong on realism or strong on anime style (unrealistic but a
 heck of a lot of fun) combat, it's right in the middle.  It started
 out weighted towards anime mecha combat, so I think that's the
 direction they should have tried to develop the game in.  Of course,
 it's still weighted down by the mistakes made in the original design
 that I noted above, so it never would have gotten very far towards the
 anime style of combat, either.
 

>	Let me say this.... I'm working on a set of rules to "improove"
>	the game, without changing the design system, adding many more
>	rolls or such. When I have finished (it's now in playtesting)
>	I'll probably post it. 
>
    ]['ve worked on three different major variations to BattleTech in
 the past seven years or so.  The first one didn't add much, and was
 ungainly.  (It added rules that made additional rolls necessary,
 dragging the game out unnecessarily.)  The second one had much of the
 same equipment and was even more ungainly.  I started work on the
 third one about two years ago but never finished it.  It was much more
 abmitious (completely revamped construction and movement rules -- the
 weapons, maps and counters were about the only things that stayed the
 same) and much more promising.  The main thrust of my third variation
 was to make the game simpler and make the game play faster and more
 like anime style mecha combat.
 
    ]-[ere's a sample from the construction rules:  First, choose a
 chassis (internal structure) from .5 tons to 10 tons.  Next, multiply
 the chassis weight by the initial desired MPs, and then multiply that
 by 5 to get your engine rating.  (In comparison, this gives mechs that
 are initially twice as fast as the same IS/Engine in BattleTech.)
 Next, load up your mech with equipment.  There is no maximum weight
 limit.  When you're done, divide the engine rating by the final mech
 tonnage and multiply by two.  That's your final MP allowance.
 
 For examples, say you choose a 5 ton chassis, with an initial MP of
 10, giving you a 250 engine.  If you load that chassis up to 50 tons,
 you'll get a final MP of 10.  If you load it up to 100 tons, you'll
 get a final MP of 5.
    ___
     |he practical limitations of designing mechs in this system is
 that instead of internal structure locations, the mechs have hardpoints.
 The larger the chassis, the greater number of hardpoints (and of course,
 the larger the engine required).  Hands are not integral to a chassis,
 and take up both weight and one hardpoint each.
    ___
     |he movement points allowed in this system are so great because
 any remaining movement points left over during combat can be used to
 make dodges.  (:
     _
    (_)ne final sample I'll mention is that mechs can add external
 armor, a la the armored Valkyries in Macross.  Once the armor is
 added, the mech's MPs must be recalculated.  The external armor
 has hardpoints itself, and can mount additional weapons (which are
 lost when the armor is destroyed or jettisoned).  External armor
 takes up hardpoints where it is mounted, and weapons already in
 those locations cannot be used until the external armor is destroyed
 or jettisoned (the armor is covering them).  Certain locations, such
 as weapons held in hands, mounted in the hardpoints in place of the
 hands, in the head, etc. are exempted.


>	Of course, to play BattleTech, you should stick to 3025 for the
>	most "ballanced" enjoyment.
>
    ][ like playing with Star League equipment and rules, myself.  I
 think there's still enough balance in the game, and lots of nifty
 equipment.  (For example, a regular old Medium Laser is still very
 useful even with the existence of Pulse Medium Lasers.)
 
 
>Roll!       ___      +---------------------------------------------------+
>Over!   __ ( . )      From        : Stephane I. Matis
>      _/__\(___)      Internet    : kgnome@cs.concordia.ca
>    / /\\[==]//\ \    Working for : Monenco Systems Group 
>   /_/  |THOR|  \_\   Working  at : Newfoundland Offshore Contractors 
>  [00] _//==\\_ [00]  Writing for : Mecha*Press and FASA's BattleTech
>      / _/--\_ \      		    Dream Pod 9
>     |__|    |__|     "It Just Works... " - Steve Paul Jobs, CEO NeXT
>     (__]    [__)     "Clam Warships are landing on Toycod !" - Anonymous
>    [_=_]    [_=_]   +---------------------------------------------------+

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/