The re-designing of the unseen BattleMechs that was accomplished as part of Project Phoenix was the right option at that time. It ensured those BattleMechs were usable by the community in both Technical Readouts and miniatures form as we thoroughly explored the unfolding plot lines of the Jihad Era.
However, as FanPro—and then Catalyst—continued to exploring the full breadth of the BattleTech history in Historical, Era and Field Manual sourcebooks, it became more apparent that the solution that worked so well for post-3067 left the ’Mech berths empty for previous time periods, especially the Succession Wars. After years of weighing the pros and cons, we’ve made the decision to not just dip our toes in the pool, but to leap into the deep end: straight out of the DropShips into a hot LZ!
We’ve spent the last half-year re-imagining the unseen BattleMechs that will always be one of the hallmarks of BattleTech. Our goal during all of this remains to merge 21st Century sensibilities with the classic lines that make those ’Mechs so near and dear to all of us.
As part of this announcement you’ll see two covers that feature the results of this extensive work, as well as a render to start proof-of-concept miniatures production. In the coming weeks and months we’ll be rolling out more covers and sketches to show all the work that’s been merged into this amazing project.
wildphilldude wrote: Ah! Marauder and warhammer, the reason why I started playing battletech 25 years ago, glad you are back , wonder how they got round the copyright.
By redesigning it, so that it still looks recognisable for what it is, while being stylistically different enough to not be a direct copy.
wildphilldude wrote: Ah! Marauder and warhammer, the reason why I started playing battletech 25 years ago, glad you are back , wonder how they got round the copyright.
By redesigning it, so that it still looks recognisable for what it is, while being stylistically different enough to not be a direct copy.
Exactly. This is similar to what was done with Technical Readout: Project Phoenix, though arguably these are "closer" to the originals than Chris Lewis' designs.
wildphilldude wrote: Ah! Marauder and warhammer, the reason why I started playing battletech 25 years ago, glad you are back , wonder how they got round the copyright.
By redesigning it, so that it still looks recognisable for what it is, while being stylistically different enough to not be a direct copy.
Yeah. If HG comes after them, then they can say that they're not using the prohibited designs.
HG can still threaten legal action and even take them to court, of course. And you can never be entirely certain how a court case will turn out. But releasing designs that have obvious and notable differences from the originals increases the chance that the current owners of Battletech will prevail if it goes to court.
Is this going to be a product available for purchase? It seems more like a fan project from the post as there is no mention of a company name, a release date, a price point, a distributor, etc.. I'm excited about this but even knowing what scale it is would be awesome. Sorry if I missed any of that info but I didn't see it when I looked.
MLaw wrote: Is this going to be a product available for purchase? It seems more like a fan project from the post as there is no mention of a company name, a release date, a price point, a distributor, etc.. I'm excited about this but even knowing what scale it is would be awesome. Sorry if I missed any of that info but I didn't see it when I looked.
Look at the link in my original post. It's from the official BattleTech website
This shows the re-imagined Battlemaster on the cover of their newest Battletech core rule book, Interstellar Operations
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eumerin wrote: HG can still threaten legal action and even take them to court, of course. And you can never be entirely certain how a court case will turn out. But releasing designs that have obvious and notable differences from the originals increases the chance that the current owners of Battletech will prevail if it goes to court.
That seems extremely unlikely. As stated above these designs got a face lift over a decade ago in TRO: Project Phoenix and no legal shenanigans ensued. The problem with HG/Playmates and FASA were a result of the exact same designs being licensed by different companies. These new `Mech designs look nothing like the Robotech and Dougram designs from the 70's and 80's, so HG shouldn't have a legal leg to stand on.
I honestly thought that was just formatting the title for emphasis. It did not look like a URL. You might want to preface it some text like "source:" or something.. Still doesn't answer too many questions but it is interesting nonetheless..
wildphilldude wrote: Ah! Marauder and warhammer, the reason why I started playing battletech 25 years ago, glad you are back , wonder how they got round the copyright.
Just have to make the new artwork look different enough from the Macross stuff so that a court won't rule against you.
Still doesn't answer too many questions but it is interesting nonetheless..
Its a "heads up" announcement about things in the pipeline. Catalyst Game Labs usually doesn't give exact release dates because they have been burned by those in past.
MLaw wrote: Is this going to be a product available for purchase?
Yes. Presumably from the render shown the re-designed `Mechs will receive miniatures, and from the Interstellar Operations cover it looks like the designs are already incorporated into the artwork.
MLaw wrote: It seems more like a fan project from the post as there is no mention of a company name, a release date, a price point, a distributor, etc..
It is not a fan project and has the full backing of Catalyst Game Labs (current license holders of Battletech) and Topps (current license owners of Battletech).
MLaw wrote: I'm excited about this but even knowing what scale it is would be awesome.
The scale isn't listed because Battletech's scale has remained consistent* for the full span of the game. The scale is 1:285, or as Breotan posted a few responses up, about 2 1/2" to 3" high.
*Not counting scale creep from 30 years of sculptors adding to the range or the completely separate HO scaled Clix game.
If they can sort out the scale issues, even better; the Project Phoenix ones were stupidly huge.
BattleTech is actually a board game and can be played without the minis. While having the mechs in scale with each other would be nice, its not really necessary and I'm not sure how feasible it would be with the mechs ranging anywhere from 20 to 100 tons.
The 20-tonners tend to be shorter (around 7-8m) and proportionately leaner. The 95-100 tonners are taller (up to 18m for the Banshee and Grand Titan) and proportionately bulkier.
Basically the difference between a 300-lb linebacker and a 50-lb kid who runs a lot.
I'll grant you the scale often gets distorted; the lights are usually sculpted way too large relative to the assaults... or vice versa.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: That seems extremely unlikely. As stated above these designs got a face lift over a decade ago in TRO: Project Phoenix and no legal shenanigans ensued. The problem with HG/Playmates and FASA were a result of the exact same designs being licensed by different companies. These new `Mech designs look nothing like the Robotech and Dougram designs from the 70's and 80's, so HG shouldn't have a legal leg to stand on.
Yes, it's unlikely. But redrawing the Macross Tomahawk with the missile pack rotated 90 degrees probably wouldn't be enough to keep you out of legal hot water if you tried to claim it as your own. There's a somewhat murky grey line between "slightly modified copy" and "original artwork inspired by". And if HG is feeling cranky for some reason when these things are officially unveiled, it could end up in court regardless.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: That seems extremely unlikely. As stated above these designs got a face lift over a decade ago in TRO: Project Phoenix and no legal shenanigans ensued. The problem with HG/Playmates and FASA were a result of the exact same designs being licensed by different companies. These new `Mech designs look nothing like the Robotech and Dougram designs from the 70's and 80's, so HG shouldn't have a legal leg to stand on.
Yes, it's unlikely. But redrawing the Macross Tomahawk with the missile pack rotated 90 degrees probably wouldn't be enough to keep you out of legal hot water if you tried to claim it as your own. There's a somewhat murky grey line between "slightly modified copy" and "original artwork inspired by". And if HG is feeling cranky for some reason when these things are officially unveiled, it could end up in court regardless.
Are you suggesting that Catalyst's redesign only included rotating the missile launcher of the Tomahawk/Warhammer by 90 degrees? Because the Warhammer above looks to me like it has been bulked out, it has a different armor configuration with panels and other details that are vastly different than the Tomahawk's external appearance. The cockpit layout is different, the torso weapons are different, the arm cannon housings are different, the shoulders are different, as is the search light. The two designs bear a resemblance, sure, but I don't think a reasonable person would see this:
And think it is exactly the same as this:
Besides, Wizkids, FanPro, and Catalyst Game Labs have done this exact same thing with the Project Phoenix designs with no legal problems. It is a non-issue.
If they can sort out the scale issues, even better; the Project Phoenix ones were stupidly huge.
BattleTech is actually a board game and can be played without the minis. While having the mechs in scale with each other would be nice, its not really necessary and I'm not sure how feasible it would be with the mechs ranging anywhere from 20 to 100 tons.
I know that for BT use the miniatures are just glorified counters, but I'm a wargamer at heart. Alpha Strike would be nicer with things being a bit closer - the Reseen Warhammer IIC was massive!
For an example of my slightly obsessive mindset, I'm the guy that refused to buy Star Wars Armada because the Corvette was too big...
I honestly think the primary reason for Battletech limping along for the past decade has been its refusal to update the miniatures. Someone will of course chime in saying how much they still love BT and still play it, but that's a tiny drop in a dwindling wargaming scene.
Instead of making use of all the brilliant new mechanical artists and new ways of crafting miniatures, they wallowed in a pit of nostalgia for which there were already plenty of old mech models to fill.
These updates are a very good idea. I know many people who love battletech but won't touch it because the older designs, while nostalgic, are crap. I'm just sorry that they wasted so much money making plastic molds for that starter. I would advise caution that because the lines and panels are even cleaner with digital sculpts, remember to add extra finer details to establish scale, 3D printers today can handle the detail and it'll be important in the long run.
I also notice that you seem to be using the same or similarly trained artist for the new mech designs, good job. Even the new atlas shares the squatter head design.
Now, I wonder if it's a good time to also reboot the fiction.
Wonder if we'll get LAMs for the Wasp, Stinger and Phoenix Hawk?
This looks much better and more in line with the original models than the Project Phoenix designs from a decade ago and I am always eager to pick up a model of a Warhammer (and Battlemaster & Locust).
Don't get too excited; if all of the redesigns run this close to the originals then they'll never see the light of day. Harmony Gold watches BattleTech like a hawk, and with a RoboTech movie in production at Sony right now, they're vigorously defending their IPs.
Vertrucio wrote: I honestly think the primary reason for Battletech limping along for the past decade has been its refusal to update the miniatures.
Until recently, BattleTech did not make their own miniatures (with the exception of the plastic starter set). They were always licensed, first to Ral Partha and currently to Iron Wind Metals.
SkaerKrow wrote: Don't get too excited; if all of the redesigns run this close to the originals then they'll never see the light of day. Harmony Gold watches BattleTech like a hawk, and with a RoboTech movie in production at Sony right now, they're vigorously defending their IPs.
With all the time they've spent NOT defending their IP against other designs over the years that are just as similar, I think that they'd lose pretty handily.
SkaerKrow wrote: Don't get too excited; if all of the redesigns run this close to the originals then they'll never see the light of day. Harmony Gold watches BattleTech like a hawk, and with a RoboTech movie in production at Sony right now, they're vigorously defending their IPs.
Only if HG like to fight an up hill battle, TOPPs isn't some small company that they push around. If you notice IP bullies like easy targets.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't get it. They already did redesign them for Project Phoenix? Why does this exist?
Project Phoenix introduced new designs into the setting, but left the depiction of the originals unchanged. This seems to be a retcon of the original designs; that cover art mockup in post 7 is now what they're saying Marauders, Warhammers and so on have always looked like, from 3025 (or earlier) onwards.
As for scale, I don't ever remember seeing heights of the 'Mechs given in any of the Technical Readout books, ever. Without that, it's a bit hard to claim miniatures are in scale. Some of the old "Unseen" models had odd features due to the anime designs they used being for something a different size to what it was portrayed in Battletech. This redesign should eliminate those oddities as a side effect (like the Scorpion having two cockpits).
Although I recently bought the Robo tech game just to get these Mechs - excited tos ee new Warhammer models and great to see the Black Widow's version depicted
AndrewGPaul wrote: Project Phoenix introduced new designs into the setting, but left the depiction of the originals unchanged. This seems to be a retcon of the original designs; that cover art mockup in post 7 is now what they're saying Marauders, Warhammers and so on have always looked like, from 3025 (or earlier) onwards.
Right, sorry, I get it now. Project Phoenix was a reinvention of classic designs for a modern era that became part of the story, where as this new thing is an actual fluff retcon. Gotcha.
Now, I wonder if it's a good time to also reboot the fiction.
Do you mean re-write everything from the ground up or re-release novels? If the later then you might be happy to know the novels are coming back and they even have Michael Stackpole involved writing new Battletech novels.
This is pasted from the announcement in the OP.
THE RETURN OF BATTLETECH NOVELS
It’s been a long, long haul to get here: fusion drives off-line; blown helium seals; mis-jumps … you name it, we’ve slogged through it.
However, over the last year we’ve successfully published six Shadowrun novels, with more on the way. We’re now applying that success to novel-length BattleTech fiction, with the launch novel, Embers of War by Jason Schmetzer, at the printer right now!
For Ezra Payne and the Stealthy Tiger mercenaries, professionalism is everything. Hired to assist in the bitter, bloody fighting on the planet Hall, they quickly earn a decisive victory for their employer. They settle afterward in for a needed period of rebuilding, and a few months’ peace before moving on to the next contract.
But their respite does not last. More mercenaries, hired by the Allied Mercenary Command itself, land on Hall. They believe the Tigers’ employer to be league with the Word of Blake, a shadowy interstellar organization that worships technology, and which has been building its own empire among the worlds around Terra.
The Tigers want nothing of this battle, but war rages across the Inner Sphere. The hard-fought cease-fire cannot last, even on Hall, and when every faction is embittered and fueled by fervor, peace has no chance at all.
As a new conflict erupts, will the Stealthy Tigers’ BattleMechs be enough to save them? Or will the looming threat of renewed war engulf them in its fiery embrace?
And more are currently being written. In fact, check out the link below for synopses on the next three novels, including the return of Michael A. Stackpole to BattleTech!
Somewhere in the rules (not the tech readouts) it said the Battlemechs were between 7 and 17 meters tall. The 3025 tech readout specifically mentioned the Banshee as one of the tallest Battlemechs ever.
Btech was my very first miniatures game and I have always loved the universe. My only gripe was that planets could (and did) fall to a platoon of Mechs (read: 12) while millions of people still existed on the planet.
I liked the later eras where there were regiments and divisions of mechs were involved in conflicts. Then came the Jihad. Again, in the aftermath we have 5-6 mechs taking over planets and garrisoning them.
The only real drawback I see to Btech is that there are something like 400+ mechs, not variants. Individual designs. With no clear divisions of forces (all the houses use a variant of the Warhammer) even hoping to have most of the variants for a House is a financially daunting prospect.
Still... the fluff for the universe is top-notch, rich in detail and there's an amazing amount of it.
I always did like the idea of Battletech, but I just never could get into it. Originally because I had nobody to play it with in the 80s and 90s, and then because the "stuck-in-the-80s" designs were a turnoff for me. I think Battletech would greatly benefit from a reboot, using more modern designs, as well as using current knowledge of science and technology along with future concepts to help rewrite the story. As mentioned, the idea that a handful of mechs would conquer an entire planet just doesn't work, much like the 40K idea of a 100 Space Marines conquering a planet. Science Fiction has evolved a lot over the past 30 years, and Battletech could greatly benefit from that.
Tannhauser42 wrote: As mentioned, the idea that a handful of mechs would conquer an entire planet just doesn't work...
The background for the BattleTech Universe really hasn't reflected that since its earliest days when it was a Mad Max type setting, unless you're talking about some backwater colony world which would be the equivalent of a company of M1A1 Abrams tanks taking over Mayberry from The Andy Griffith Show.
Miguelsan wrote: I'm not sure that Stackpole's return is a good thing...
M.
I loved his Warrior Trilogy
Exactly. He's done some good stuff. I just have to grit my teeth every time a shot up mech is "engulfed by the miniature sun in its heart".
Even my favourite book, Close Quarters by Victor Milan suffered with the follow ups. Can't win them all...
Must admit I was not bothered by that
Ah did you not like the follow ups? Cassie and friends were good characters I thought............ I even made a card for her and her unit of the old CCG
Miguelsan wrote: I'm not sure that Stackpole's return is a good thing...
M.
I loved his Warrior Trilogy
Exactly. He's done some good stuff. I just have to grit my teeth every time a shot up mech is "engulfed by the miniature sun in its heart".
Even my favourite book, Close Quarters by Victor Milan suffered with the follow ups. Can't win them all...
Must admit I was not bothered by that
Ah did you not like the follow ups? Cassie and friends were good characters I thought............ I even made a card for her and her unit of the old CCG
I absolutely loved the first one. Made me want to make up a merc company with a random collection of nutcases. Fell in love with the idea of sticking an Arrow system on a Catapult!
The follow ups just went a bit too messy and cloak and dagger (not that the first one didn't have its share of that!) - felt like a bit of a divergence.
Cassie was played by Jessica Alba in my brain movie of the book.
The problem with Stackpole and BT is that he really doesn't understand the game... or if he does, he ignores it and writes cool stuff that can't happen in the game.
Although the worst offender for it will forever be the 'I Am Jade Falcon' maneuver, where a washed-up solhama warrior without even a bloodname to her credit manages to take out one of the greatest Mechwarriors ever to pilot a 'mech, in the clans OR the Inner Sphere.
Vulcan wrote: The problem with Stackpole and BT is that he really doesn't understand the game... or if he does, he ignores it and writes cool stuff that can't happen in the game.
Although the worst offender for it will forever be the 'I Am Jade Falcon' maneuver, where a washed-up solhama warrior without even a bloodname to her credit manages to take out one of the greatest Mechwarriors ever to pilot a 'mech, in the clans OR the Inner Sphere.
But you can do that attack......if you are playing with advanced rules.
And so can the worst taking out the best, luck does play a role in the game. How often do you see a Savannah Master drop a Timber Wolf on the first turn of the game? I did it, of all the dumb luck, floating crit for first hit, center torso location and boxcars for the crit roll. Gyro and 2 engine hits later the big boy is down, the pilot KO'd do to a failed Dashboard check, and the Savannah Master ran from his buddies for all he was worth.
Well there are a few "unseen" Robotech miniatures out with the Palladium Books kickstarter.
Marauder would be unusable: wrong scale.
You could see a few on eBay now since the KS is sucking large for "wave 2" with no end in sight for the other models.
Looking forward to these new versions though.
Stackpole happens all of the time.
We had this crazzed Hatcheman Pilot take out 1 Stalker, 1 Cyclops and an Atlas in two turns with a mix of Auto Cannon head Shots and Hatchet swings to the head and all of them were in base contact.
Vulcan wrote: The problem with Stackpole and BT is that he really doesn't understand the game... or if he does, he ignores it and writes cool stuff that can't happen in the game.
And that really bothers you? That he doesn't "follow the game rules" when writing the fiction?
Vulcan wrote: Although the worst offender for it will forever be the 'I Am Jade Falcon' maneuver, where a washed-up solhama warrior without even a bloodname to her credit manages to take out one of the greatest Mechwarriors ever to pilot a 'mech, in the clans OR the Inner Sphere.
Something which, as pointed out, is completely possible within the rules.
The Age of Darkness (or whatever followed the Jihad) had mixed companies of Mechs and vehicles taking over planets. Of course that was after Devlin Stone somehow convinced entire Houses and various warring factions to simply quit fighting. Cause, you know.... after 300 years, isn't that enough?
Srsly? WTF? Then the fluff kind of "rebooted" to the universe that exists now. Mechs are rarities and factions sprung up like mushrooms, oh and the HPG network is down.
IMHO, Btech needs are complete reboot (as was stated above). Military concepts such as drones and cyberwarfare didn't exist when Btech was thought of.
Bobby Hostile wrote: The Age of Darkness (or whatever followed the Jihad) had mixed companies of Mechs and vehicles taking over planets. Of course that was after Devlin Stone somehow convinced entire Houses and various warring factions to simply quit fighting. Cause, you know.... after 300 years, isn't that enough?
Are you basing your comments on actual BattleTech background and novels, or just the mess that the 'ClickyTech' game tried to introduce?
Bobby Hostile wrote: Military concepts such as drones and cyberwarfare didn't exist when Btech was thought of.
And yet somehow Technical Readout 3026, published in 1987 three years after the game was introduced had the Hi-Scout Drone Carrier.
Bobby Hostile wrote: TIMHO, Btech needs are complete reboot (as was stated above). Military concepts such as drones and cyberwarfare didn't exist when Btech was thought of.
Yeah, Battletech very much is "the future according to the 1980's".
When I was younger I always thought it would be interesting if the Shadowrun technology and timeline (but not the metahuman/magic aspects) were ported over to Battletech's history. It would allow for the historical technology levels to advance beyond 1984, at least.
One thing Catalyst is doing right in my opinion is pushing the different eras as gaming options. If you don't like the setting of the contemporary 3100's story line you can play in the past eras of either the Succession Wars, the Clan Wars, or Star League. While that has always been an option within Battletech, newer books and products are identified by the era they support allowing players to skip products that don't pertain to the era they play in.
I pretty much stick to the Succession Wars and Clan Wars stuff. Most of the newer story just doesn't interest me.
A reboot, though... I just don't see happening. I think it definitely needs to be done, and Battletech would be better off as a result, but I don't think the developers are willing to alienate the fan base.
I would love to see the game evolve into a true miniatures game and drop the "beer and pretzels" board game tag. While it is awesome that you can play the game with a 25 year-old rule book and some hex-shaped pieces of paper, but that low-level buy in doesn't really support the game all that much. And that is a major problem with the current fan base. So many see the game as a board game first, with miniatures and other accessories as expensive and optional buys. While I won't argue that Battletech can be the budget gamer's dream, I can't help but feel that mindset is keeping the game from expanding beyond its small player base.
And then there are the miniatures themselves, which as others have stated are dated and the immensely large catalog of figures make it nearly impossible for retailers to stock even half of the range.
The game needs help, but it looks like Catalyst is at least trying something, so I am willing to see where they take things.
Looking at the upcoming releases, it looks like they're going to be doing stuff based on different points in time.
There's a few mentions of Victor Davion as well as our favourite merc companies. None of this "Dark Age" guff, so it's smack in the middle of real Battletech.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: One thing Catalyst is doing right in my opinion is pushing the different eras as gaming options. If you don't like the setting of the contemporary 3100's story line you can play in the past eras of either the Succession Wars, the Clan Wars, or Star League. While that has always been an option within Battletech, newer books and products are identified by the era they support allowing players to skip products that don't pertain to the era they play in.
This is the thing I love about BTech. Don't like the Jihad, or the ClickTech era? Fine. It can be Operation Bird Dog/Bulldog for all eternity!
If they can sort out the scale issues, even better; the Project Phoenix ones were stupidly huge.
BattleTech is actually a board game and can be played without the minis. While having the mechs in scale with each other would be nice, its not really necessary and I'm not sure how feasible it would be with the mechs ranging anywhere from 20 to 100 tons.
That might have hold water up until Alpha Strike, which is most certainly not a board game and uses the same minis.
If they can sort out the scale issues, even better; the Project Phoenix ones were stupidly huge.
BattleTech is actually a board game and can be played without the minis. While having the mechs in scale with each other would be nice, its not really necessary and I'm not sure how feasible it would be with the mechs ranging anywhere from 20 to 100 tons.
That might have hold water up until Alpha Strike, which is most certainly not a board game and uses the same minis.
And is the game the company is currently pushing.
Hence why I only mentioned BattleTech and not Alpha Strike or A Time of War.
Ghaz wrote: Hence why I only mentioned BattleTech and not Alpha Strike or A Time of War.
Problem is, other than the ones from the starter, all the minis Catalyst is producing are for Alpha Strike (right to having card stats for them in the box), and these redesigns are tied directly to the new Alpha Strike starter.
But yes, you're absolutely right in that Btech doesn't have a problem with wonky scales. I myself am using RRT marauders, so... ^_^
Vulcan wrote: The problem with Stackpole and BT is that he really doesn't understand the game... or if he does, he ignores it and writes cool stuff that can't happen in the game.
Although the worst offender for it will forever be the 'I Am Jade Falcon' maneuver, where a washed-up solhama warrior without even a bloodname to her credit manages to take out one of the greatest Mechwarriors ever to pilot a 'mech, in the clans OR the Inner Sphere.
But you can do that attack......if you are playing with advanced rules.
And so can the worst taking out the best, luck does play a role in the game. How often do you see a Savannah Master drop a Timber Wolf on the first turn of the game? I did it, of all the dumb luck, floating crit for first hit, center torso location and boxcars for the crit roll. Gyro and 2 engine hits later the big boy is down, the pilot KO'd do to a failed Dashboard check, and the Savannah Master ran from his buddies for all he was worth.
I have one about a SRM platoon bagging a pristine Atlas after a crit on the ammo storage on the 1st turn I prefered Charrette over Stackpole. Stackpole liked balck and white characters too much for my taste, much like in his SW stories.
Vulcan wrote: The problem with Stackpole and BT is that he really doesn't understand the game... or if he does, he ignores it and writes cool stuff that can't happen in the game.
Although the worst offender for it will forever be the 'I Am Jade Falcon' maneuver, where a washed-up solhama warrior without even a bloodname to her credit manages to take out one of the greatest Mechwarriors ever to pilot a 'mech, in the clans OR the Inner Sphere.
But you can do that attack......if you are playing with advanced rules.
Those rules were written AFTER 'I Am Jade Falcon' was published, largely BECAUSE it happened in the book.
For the "IAJF" maneuver to work, Death From Above should also do IAJF damage - hey, you're JUMPING onto the enemy mech; you should do jump jet damage ON TOP OF 'charge' damage, yes?
But you don't.
And so can the worst taking out the best, luck does play a role in the game. How often do you see a Savannah Master drop a Timber Wolf on the first turn of the game? I did it, of all the dumb luck, floating crit for first hit, center torso location and boxcars for the crit roll. Gyro and 2 engine hits later the big boy is down, the pilot KO'd do to a failed Dashboard check, and the Savannah Master ran from his buddies for all he was worth.
I'll go you one better. First shot of the game was an LRM-5 on a Warhammer. ONE LRM hit, CT crit, MG ammo.... the ammo explosion that left a pair of smoking 'boots' where the undamaged mech had been standing. This was back in the BattleDROIDS era, by the by.
Yes, luck has always played a role in wargaming... but then, luck has also always played a role in actual warfare.
Sure, but I wanted to fight actual wars I'd go over the street to the recruiting office. I want to play games, which are the diametric opposite of war.
Nomeny wrote: Sure, but I wanted to fight actual wars I'd go over the street to the recruiting office. I want to play games, which are the diametric opposite of war.
Well, luck is a big part of basically each and every other miniature wargame in existence not named chess or go, after all...
Any realese date for the new models?Any idea if the will use metal or platic.?
I love the battletech universe , but the uglys , very 80' desing, mech models maked me to stay away.
saluti
Nothing conclusive so far, I'm afraid.
They will release 22 re-reseens and apparently many/most of them will be included in the IS company coming with the Alpha Strike starter. That would indicate plastics, but...
Are we talking prepainted figures or will we be building and painting them ourselves? I'm game for either but I'd prefer unpainted (or better yet, coloured plastic that still allows for applied paint like the halo fleet game) but I could live with prepainted figures
H.B.M.C. wrote: What scale is Alpha Strike? 'Cause if it's the smaller minis that Iron Wind made I'm not interested.
From the Alpha Strike rules:
Alpha Strike uses standard BattleTech miniatures to represent units. The BattleTech Introductory Box Set comes with a set of plastic miniatures and Iron Wind Metals sells BattleTech metal miniatures in both sets and individual packs. Each unit employed in an Alpha Strike army is represented by its own miniature.
Those small minis were fore Battleforce. They are actually really nicely done.
Alpha Strike is a 'Child' of Battleforce, using some of the same mechanics but changing the focus from a strategic game to tactical.
Alpha Strike and 'regular' BattleTech (Total Warfare)use the same minis. Yes GCL is pushing Alpha Strike, but Total Warfare isn't going anywhere. Indeed, all units have to be created using Total Warfare rules before be converted to Alpha Strike.
There has been no official decision on the unseen lams. The 'Mk 1s" still exist and can be usable.
The design looks more in line with MWO, which is a good thing. It actually looks like it could be a functional machine! Honestly, if they do more redesigns beyond just the unseen in this style, I might actually start buying Battletech minis again.
I think most of the 3039 'mechs look good, compared to some of the later offerings (such as the Verfolger and the Ninja-To). The main ones that need reworked are the Dragon, Quickdraw, JagerMech, Stalker and Banshee. That's not saying that a few of the sculpts couldn't use some tweaks to make them look better.
Banshee just got a "Primitive" version you might like. And the Stalker II just came out as well. It is technically a 3145 design, but since it is Battletech, no one will care what era you use it in!
Mattlov wrote: But it doesn't matter. Just use which ever one you like the best. No WYSIWYG police here...
Inconceivable! How will they know that the other guy is not cheating and is using a SSRM6 when the miniature clearly carries a SRM6? How can you diferenciate a LRM20 from a LRM20 with Artemis without different miniatures? What's next using your own color schemes?
Bobby Hostile wrote: The Age of Darkness (or whatever followed the Jihad) had mixed companies of Mechs and vehicles taking over planets. Of course that was after Devlin Stone somehow convinced entire Houses and various warring factions to simply quit fighting. Cause, you know.... after 300 years, isn't that enough?
Are you basing your comments on actual BattleTech background and novels, or just the mess that the 'ClickyTech' game tried to introduce?
Bobby Hostile wrote: Military concepts such as drones and cyberwarfare didn't exist when Btech was thought of.
And yet somehow Technical Readout 3026, published in 1987 three years after the game was introduced had the Hi-Scout Drone Carrier.
Hey, I'm not hating on Btech. Quite the opposite. I love the universe. It's SciFi with no hokey aliens that act like humans. As far as "in universe" history, there was a series of books written for the Dark Age, which was based on the gak that was the Clickytech fluff. I tried reading them and it just made me unhappy.
I remember the drone carrier, but the implementation of the "drones" wasn't what we have available today. They weighted like .5 tons and didn't do much.
Aside from strategic scouting, which is pretty useless in a tactical game but priceless in a campaign.
IF you know there's an assault company guarding this pass, and only a picket recon lance guarding that one, deciding which pass to take with your medium company becomes very simple.
Ghaz wrote: Neither Catalyst or Iron Wind Metals does prepainted models.
That isn't entirely true. Leviathans is Catalyst and they are pre-painted. Not that I expect these to be pre-painted though, however just saying the statement isn't entirely true.
Ghaz wrote: Neither Catalyst or Iron Wind Metals does prepainted models.
That isn't entirely true. Leviathans is Catalyst and they are pre-painted. Not that I expect these to be pre-painted though, however just saying the statement isn't entirely true.
Actually, Leviathans is a game by Catalyst with miniatures by Wargames Factory.
I'm really happy that the Unseens are coming back, redesigned.
I love Macross and Robotech, and I love Battletech. And it's always seemed weird to me to have the same designs in Battletech but with vastly different capabilities.
I also love Mechwarrior Online, and I love the MWO redesigns of Battletech mechs.
So, this is the best news for me. Macross designs can stay in Macross, and Battletech gets MWO-style redesigns of mechs.
Of which I will be buying many... to go with my large and ever growing collection of 3D printed Mechwarrior Online mechs in Battletech scale...
PGI has allowed people to use the 3d files (and other art assets) that are stored locally on your hard drive when you install mwo for personal and not-for-profit use. So ya gotta extract the 3d files in 3d software and get them cleaned up and then 3d printed
PGI has allowed people to use the 3d files (and other art assets) that are stored locally on your hard drive when you install mwo for personal and not-for-profit use. So ya gotta extract the 3d files in 3d software and get them cleaned up and then 3d printed
Beyond my talents, but the results are amazing!
If only they knew how much money they could make by selling them...
PGI has allowed people to use the 3d files (and other art assets) that are stored locally on your hard drive when you install mwo for personal and not-for-profit use. So ya gotta extract the 3d files in 3d software and get them cleaned up and then 3d printed
Beyond my talents, but the results are amazing!
If only they knew how much money they could make by selling them...
It is indeed a licensing issue - Mechwarrior is licensed by PGI from Microsoft, who owns the video game rights to Battletech. Catalyst would have to also license the designs from Microsoft. So it might have just been cheaper for them to create their own redesigns. (as the Dougram and Crusher Joe designs have already been made for MWO - Battlemaster, Shadow Hawk, Griffin, Wolverine, Thunderbolt; Locust)
Its more than just licensing costs. Its a policy that Catalyst has clarified on their forums multiple times that they will only use designs that they own outright.
SkaerKrow wrote: Don't get too excited; if all of the redesigns run this close to the originals then they'll never see the light of day. Harmony Gold watches BattleTech like a hawk, and with a RoboTech movie in production at Sony right now, they're vigorously defending their IPs.
After the last legal fight over the "unseen" designs, I'm sure Topps and Catalyst are very, very well aware of the IP issues involved in the old Macross/RoboTech based designs. I would be totally surprised if they (and their lawyers) did not carefully consider this before investing any time or money in developing new designs and minis. If they are at the point of announcing it and showing artwork of the redrawn "unseen" designs, I think we can be fairly sure they don't think they will be subject to any legal action.
Stormonu wrote: Wonder if we'll get LAMs for the Wasp, Stinger and Phoenix Hawk?
These are already done. They were selling them at GenCon this year and the minis are expected to be up for regular sale by this fall.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't get it. They already did redesign them for Project Phoenix? Why does this exist?
Because the PP designs were of new models of the old designs (ex. The original MAD-3R Marauder was like the 1967 Mustang while the MAD-5D version from Project Phoenix was like the 2015 model. Similar but really two different cars). These are redesigned artwork and minis of the original designs.
Alex C wrote: If only they knew how much money they could make by selling them...
The problem is, for a big video game company any money they could make licencing their IP to a small comany like Catalyst/IWM is chump change. Probably not worth getting the lawyers to write up the paperwork.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DarkTraveler777 wrote: A reboot, though... I just don't see happening. I think it definitely needs to be done, and Battletech would be better off as a result, but I don't think the developers are willing to alienate the fan base.
I agree that a reboot is unlikely, but I think that a bigger issue than the fanbase is that it would involve throwing out 30 years of game and universe development, and hundreds and hundreds of miniatures and starting the whole thing from scratch. Not gonna happen.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I would love to see the game evolve into a true miniatures game and drop the "beer and pretzels" board game tag.
IMO, given the number of rules and the complexity of record keeping BattleTech was never a "beer and pretzels" game.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: And that is a major problem with the current fan base. So many see the game as a board game first, with miniatures and other accessories as expensive and optional buys.
I don't know. I've played BattleTech since the 80's and while lots of people use the 2D hex maps, I've never seen the game played without miniatures.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: And then there are the miniatures themselves, which as others have stated are dated and the immensely large catalog of figures make it nearly impossible for retailers to stock even half of the range.
Some of the mini designs are dated, true. Catalyst keeps coming out with new designs as they advance the timeline of the BattleTech universe, though (its progressed about 150 years so far, more if you project the timeline back to the time of the original Star League). IWM is releasing new miniatures of these new designs ever year. Of course, they still share a certain... aestetic with the older designs in that they generally look like they belong in the same game but again changing that would require throwing out everything and starting again from scratch.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I would love to see the game evolve into a true miniatures game and drop the "beer and pretzels" board game tag.
IMO, given the number of rules and the complexity of record keeping BattleTech was never a "beer and pretzels" game.
Battledroids certainly was. I'd argue that Battletech through early 2nd edition was as well when you only had the single TRO: 3025 and some scenario books. Once multiple TRO's were released, the game got dense. But all the charts and "complex" rules are a relic of the time, no? I mean, weren't most games chart heavy back then?
Perhaps the real issue is that "beer and pretzels" is a subjective term. The definition I am most comfortable with centers on a game that requires little if any background knowledge on the players' part in order to play. That means you can have a quick game over some "beer and pretzels" with a few friends without having to study up on list creation, or even know much more about your `Mech than what is on your unit sheet. You don't need to be well versed in Battletech's history in order to enjoy a `Mech on `Mech or even a lance on lance battle and to play you only have to be able to count to 12, so again, perfect for beer drinking.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: And that is a major problem with the current fan base. So many see the game as a board game first, with miniatures and other accessories as expensive and optional buys.
I don't know. I've played BattleTech since the 80's and while lots of people use the 2D hex maps, I've never seen the game played without miniatures.
I played Battletech for years with nothing more than two miniatures. My group would trace hex-shaped tokens on paper, mark the front arcs, and write the unit name on the paper and be good to go. I have heard other player groups doing similar tricks to save cost. More to the point, the Battletech community members I have interacted with generally seem okay with this practice. The miniatures are viewed as secondary to the game, and completely optional. That can't be said for a true miniatures games like Warhammer 40k, or Warmachine.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: And then there are the miniatures themselves, which as others have stated are dated and the immensely large catalog of figures make it nearly impossible for retailers to stock even half of the range.
Some of the mini designs are dated, true. Catalyst keeps coming out with new designs as they advance the timeline of the BattleTech universe, though (its progressed about 150 years so far, more if you project the timeline back to the time of the original Star League). IWM is releasing new miniatures of these new designs ever year. Of course, they still share a certain... aestetic with the older designs in that they generally look like they belong in the same game but again changing that would require throwing out everything and starting again from scratch.
Some of the designs are just plain bad too. Like the Yeoman, or the Super Griffin (hey, look I am jumping, but really it looks like Vlad the Impaler got to me!) which are unfortunately tied to bad artwork that the sculptors dutifully translate to 3d models.
I disagree that everything would have to be thrown out. Catalyst could go really far with just updating artwork and miniatures without completely wiping units, historical events, and fluff. IWM already has to archive miniatures because their catalog is too big. Leaving those archived models in the past, and updating them based off new artwork and using new technology (like 3D sculpting) could really revitalize the miniatures line, and draw more players in. Look at how people are responding to the news of the redesigned unseen as evidence that the aesthetic is what is really dragging the game down.
And I say this as someone who loves old-school Battletech. I'd be fine if the timeline never advanced past 3058, and prefer to stick in the late 80's around 3030. But the game is a dinosaur, and needs to be kicked in the ass to carry on for another generation.
The core rules of Battletech, since the "advanced" option of Battledroids (which became the BT we know and love) is complex. The BT Intro Set with all 3025 tech, is complex.
Alpha Strike is much closer to "beer & pretzels" but merely because the system is more elegant; it still produces satisfying games with tactical depth.
judgedoug wrote: Battletech is a complex hex and counter wargame.
The core rules of Battletech, since the "advanced" option of Battledroids (which became the BT we know and love) is complex. The BT Intro Set with all 3025 tech, is complex.
Alpha Strike is much closer to "beer & pretzels" but merely because the system is more elegant; it still produces satisfying games with tactical depth.
It is really not all that complex, honestly. Detailed? yes. Complex? Hell, no.
As to AS, it really is a different experience, IMHO. Somewhat similar, eagle-view, but... not as visceral, shall we say. It loses a lot of neat stuff almost completely, like heat management (yes, there are overheating rules in AS, but it's really not the same).
judgedoug wrote: Battletech is a complex hex and counter wargame.
The core rules of Battletech, since the "advanced" option of Battledroids (which became the BT we know and love) is complex. The BT Intro Set with all 3025 tech, is complex.
Alpha Strike is much closer to "beer & pretzels" but merely because the system is more elegant; it still produces satisfying games with tactical depth.
Debatable. Battletech is complex if you want to use every optional rule for every optional unit that has been published since 1984. Battletech's core rules for `Mech on `Mech combat, though? I don't know if I would consider them complex. I haven't opened the current boxed set so I am not sure if this has changed, but older editions used to have all of the necessary charts printed on the back of the rule book, which was really all the reference you needed to play the game. No need to flip pages, or look for specific charts, everything was on a single page reference sheet. That seems pretty basic to me.
Now, if you want to roll up a couple of 3100's mixed-tech `Mech forces with conventional support and aerospace units, yeah that gets hairy pretty quickly. But a couple of `Mechs sucker punching one another can be taught to a newbie and played in 15 minutes.
I agree with Albertorius' word choice of detailed versus complex in regards to the core rules. They are detailed, and some phases could be left off easily to speed up game play (like heat, or physical attacks) but you lose some of the charm of the rule set at the same time when you start trimming basic rules away.
H.B.M.C. wrote: No, BattleTech rules are the very definition of complex. They're not complicated, they're complex.
Then I'd argue damn near every game except for Checkers and War is complex if we are using the literal definition of the word. If we are using complex to mean difficult to learn, which is what I understood judgedoug to mean, then no it isn't as long as you stay with the basic elements of `Mech on `Mech combat and leave out the 25+ years of additional weapons and optional rules that were added to the core system.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Then I'd argue damn near every game except for Checkers and War is complex if we are using the literal definition of the word. If we are using complex to mean difficult to learn, which is what I understood judgedoug to mean, then no it isn't as long as you stay with the basic elements of `Mech on `Mech combat and leave out the 25+ years of additional weapons and optional rules that were added to the core system.
Complex =/= Complicated. Complex things can be complicated, but the words do not have the same meaning.
They are two different things. Difficult to learn would imply it is complicated, as complicated implies a level of difficulty. Complex, on the other hand, just means that it has a great deal of structure/details/inherent components.
And BattleTech does have tons of components. The more books you add (Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, the various unit design rules, even just the jump from 3025 to 3050), the more complex it gets.
The game allows for a variety of environments and their impact.
The game allows for the tech for the unit to be explained and the consequences as systems fail.
It is a simulator of sorts which is understandable and manageable.
I would say less complicated than Star Fleet Battles but not lacking in the detail.
The real fun for me was designing mechs and trying them out.
The tech and universe tries very hard to be consistent and "believable" within it's rules and fluff.
I have been a long time fan (25 or so years) and still find the game fun.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Then I'd argue damn near every game except for Checkers and War is complex if we are using the literal definition of the word. If we are using complex to mean difficult to learn, which is what I understood judgedoug to mean, then no it isn't as long as you stay with the basic elements of `Mech on `Mech combat and leave out the 25+ years of additional weapons and optional rules that were added to the core system.
Complex =/= Complicated. Complex things can be complicated, but the words do not have the same meaning.
They are two different things. Difficult to learn would imply it is complicated, as complicated implies a level of difficulty. Complex, on the other hand, just means that it has a great deal of structure/details/inherent components.
And BattleTech does have tons of components. The more books you add (Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, the various unit design rules, even just the jump from 3025 to 3050), the more complex it gets.
In other words, it is not roll the dice and forget, you have to keep track on the resources and damage done to which parts, not just a simple amount of wounds like other games, i played with Miguel a few times, it takes a while to get into but i agree with HBMC
I would say less complicated than Star Fleet Battles but not lacking in the detail.
Real life is less complicated than SFB. I'm not sure that is a good yardstick. That's like saying a 28mm model has a more efficient parts count than a Robotech Destroid. While technically true, it's still not a great comparison.
I have not gotten to play it in years, but the last time I played, I still remembered 99% of the rules and almost all of the charts.
Yes it can be a little overwhelming at first, but after a few games you don't even need the books unless you are using some of the post 3060 Gear and Weapons.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Complex =/= Complicated. Complex things can be complicated, but the words do not have the same meaning.
Exactly the reason why I disagree completely. The core system of Battletech, which is what we were talking about, is quite simple, even taking it all into account (heat management, ammo, vehicles, infantry, even air support).
Infinity? Hells yeah, I would agree with you naming it "the very definition of complex". Battletech? Er, nope. And I like Infinity, mind, but it is orders of magnitude more complex.
They are two different things. Difficult to learn would imply it is complicated, as complicated implies a level of difficulty. Complex, on the other hand, just means that it has a great deal of structure/details/inherent components.
This might be me not being an english native speaker, but to me it feels like the meaning is the other way around.
And BattleTech does have tons of components. The more books you add (Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, the various unit design rules, even just the jump from 3025 to 3050), the more complex it gets.
Of course. Same way any other system gets when you add all supplements. To me, Warmahordes is insanely complex due to the insane amount of intricacies of the relations between units and casters/warlocks/whatever, but I kind of feel that way about most CCGs too. WFB/40k gets very complicated very fast, too, when you realize every single fething unit has its own load of non-universal rules that you have to account for.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Battledroids certainly was. I'd argue that Battletech through early 2nd edition was as well when you only had the single TRO: 3025 and some scenario books. Once multiple TRO's were released, the game got dense. But all the charts and "complex" rules are a relic of the time, no? I mean, weren't most games chart heavy back then?
Back then, complex rules did seem to be the norm, and that was actually one of the things I liked about BT.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Perhaps the real issue is that "beer and pretzels" is a subjective term. The definition I am most comfortable with centers on a game that requires little if any background knowledge on the players' part in order to play. That means you can have a quick game over some "beer and pretzels" with a few friends without having to study up on list creation, or even know much more about your `Mech than what is on your unit sheet. You don't need to be well versed in Battletech's history in order to enjoy a `Mech on `Mech or even a lance on lance battle and to play you only have to be able to count to 12, so again, perfect for beer drinking.
Its funny, if asked for a definition of BnP games I'd probably give almost the same as you, but to me BT still doesn't qualify. I've got a few of what I consider BnP games in my collection. Generally they are less than a dozen pages of rules, don't require more recordkeeping that will fit on a note card, and as you say don't require a lot of intense concentration to play. In the end, its all opinions though as long as we both know what the other is talking about.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I played Battletech for years with nothing more than two miniatures. My group would trace hex-shaped tokens on paper, mark the front arcs, and write the unit name on the paper and be good to go. I have heard other player groups doing similar tricks to save cost. More to the point, the Battletech community members I have interacted with generally seem okay with this practice. The miniatures are viewed as secondary to the game, and completely optional. That can't be said for a true miniatures games like Warhammer 40k, or Warmachine.
I'll agree that as written BT probably qualifies as a "board game" to be played on a 2D gameboard with 2D counters and the minis were a late addition to the system. Still, while your experience may be different I've just never seen anyone play without the miniatures.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Some of the designs are just plain bad too. Like the Yeoman, or the Super Griffin (hey, look I am jumping, but really it looks like Vlad the Impaler got to me!) which are unfortunately tied to bad artwork that the sculptors dutifully translate to 3d models.
Ugh! You would bring up the Yeoman! Without a doubt the ugliest thing in BT.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I disagree that everything would have to be thrown out. Catalyst could go really far with just updating artwork and miniatures without completely wiping units, historical events, and fluff. IWM already has to archive miniatures because their catalog is too big. Leaving those archived models in the past, and updating them based off new artwork and using new technology (like 3D sculpting) could really revitalize the miniatures line, and draw more players in. Look at how people are responding to the news of the redesigned unseen as evidence that the aesthetic is what is really dragging the game down.
Perhaps. A lot of the background could remain, but even some of that looks a bit dated at this point. As far as the rules, if I was in charge and was doing a total reboot I'd throw those out and rewrite a much simpler system. Actually, I think they have done a pretty good job with Alpha Strike. While its not perfect I think its a much better system for appealing to the modern gamers. For IWM metals, though, it would be a throwing everything out. I agree that one of the problems with the mini line is that its just too big. Too big for a retailer to stock all of it. Too confusing for many beginning gamers. The designs are all over the place in terms of looks making for a barely cohesive appearance on the table. Still, I think at this point its only the continued release of more new miniatures that keeps the line alive. I don't have access to IWM sales records, but I suspect that the new minis are the big profit makers. Maybe a total revamp of the minis and releasing a whole new line of mechs redesigned from the ground up would reinvigorate the game. It would be a huge gamble though, and if it didn't pay of could well kill the game.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: Some of the designs are just plain bad too. Like the Yeoman, or the Super Griffin (hey, look I am jumping, but really it looks like Vlad the Impaler got to me!) which are unfortunately tied to bad artwork that the sculptors dutifully translate to 3d models.
Ugh! You would bring up the Yeoman! Without a doubt the ugliest thing in BT.
Add to the fact that bare metal always looks worse than a painted model.
Things tend to move much faster and die a lot quicker.
The only issue with removing tracking of heat and ammo, then it can also become awfully one sided unless you are playing with stock mechs. If you didn't allow customization and only allowed stock and variants in the TRs, then it might not be so bad. Otherwise you'll have 4-6 PPC/ER PPCs running, alpha striking without having to manage heat (which was a part of BT, knowing when to hold back and when to open up).
Things tend to move much faster and die a lot quicker.
The only issue with removing tracking of heat and ammo, then it can also become awfully one sided unless you are playing with stock mechs. If you didn't allow customization and only allowed stock and variants in the TRs, then it might not be so bad. Otherwise you'll have 4-6 PPC/ER PPCs running, alpha striking without having to manage heat (which was a part of BT, knowing when to hold back and when to open up).
Well just don't be "THAT GUY" and bring that super customized CHEESE wagon, and you have nothing to worry about. I don't know about you, but I like the people I game with and want to keep them as friends.
Using the BV Calc to set points limits also mitigates a lot of garbage. Scenarios really shine to keep things level as well.
Throwing dice and drinking beer for a fast game of BT doesn't need to have the recordkeeping like a SrzBzns game.
judgedoug wrote: Battletech is a complex hex and counter wargame.
The core rules of Battletech, since the "advanced" option of Battledroids (which became the BT we know and love) is complex. The BT Intro Set with all 3025 tech, is complex.
Alpha Strike is much closer to "beer & pretzels" but merely because the system is more elegant; it still produces satisfying games with tactical depth.
I wouldn't say it is all that complex, you only need the control sheets, a Quick Ref sheet of the charts and an understanding of the core rules to play. It's not anything like as complex as Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, for instance.
So the original box used Hunchback and cicada vs Enforcer and Hermes II for its intro scenarios- any speculation on which will be the poster children for this round? I'm betting its Marauder vs Warhammer for sure, but don't know about the secondaries.
Guys, I said it was a complex hex and counter game, which it is.
Not complicated, but certainly more complex than the vast majority of other hex and counter games out there (which usually boil down to ratios and a single die roll for resolving combat between multiple units)
If you're not thinking about it in terms of a hex and counter game, then the best descriptor for Battletech is "lengthy", which it very much is (unless rolling locations for every point of damage from an LB-10X autocannon is quick for some people).
Does the RPG use pretty much the same combat rules for mech on mech action or something different? It would be interesting if the RPG actually simplified things compared to CBT. I'm not a fan of CBT (tried it three times in as many decades) but I would say that the heat management is one thing I definitely liked in theory and was iconic to the game.
warboss wrote: Does the RPG use pretty much the same combat rules for mech on mech action or something different? It would be interesting if the RPG actually simplified things compared to CBT. I'm not a fan of CBT (tried it three times in as many decades) but I would say that the heat management is one thing I definitely liked in theory and was iconic to the game.
A Time of War (the rpg) uses a system appropriate to an RPG, so, no, it's not like Battletech, haha. (keep track of your internal metabolism! cool down after running! replish your water ammo!)
Things tend to move much faster and die a lot quicker.
Completely missing the point that BattleTech, like real warfare, is about managing resources as much as anything else.
Half the fun is the heat. I spend most of my Battle with my Riflemen as 8-13 points of heat if not more, the best way to surprise people is to run your Mechs hot while they try not to overheat. This usually would let me pull out 50% more firepower in the first few turns that let me win a lot of games.
You're gamble cooking your targeting computer - and thus missing more often - against the benefits of potentially doing more damage.
It also allows for a long-range/short range weapons loadout. Take the basic WHM-6R - 2 PPCs, SRM-6, 2 Medium Lasers, 2 Small Lasers, and 2 MG. Potentially 34 heat if you fire everything and run... and only 18 heat sinks to dissipate heat.
You fire the PPCs during the approach battle to about range 6 (probably in a 2-2-1 volley pattern, to clear your overheat out during that last 'midrange' turn before switching to the short range suite). Then you switch over to a PPC and the mediums from range 6-3, and then dumping the PPC for the SRMS, smalls, and MGs at close range (incidentally leaving the arms free for punching, should the range get THAT close).
And if you loose a PPC on the way in, you've still got plenty of weaponry left to play with.
You're gamble cooking your targeting computer - and thus missing more often - against the benefits of potentially doing more damage.
It also allows for a long-range/short range weapons loadout. Take the basic WHM-6R - 2 PPCs, SRM-6, 2 Medium Lasers, 2 Small Lasers, and 2 MG. Potentially 34 heat if you fire everything and run... and only 18 heat sinks to dissipate heat.
You fire the PPCs during the approach battle to about range 6 (probably in a 2-2-1 volley pattern, to clear your overheat out during that last 'midrange' turn before switching to the short range suite). Then you switch over to a PPC and the mediums from range 6-3, and then dumping the PPC for the SRMS, smalls, and MGs at close range (incidentally leaving the arms free for punching, should the range get THAT close).
And if you loose a PPC on the way in, you've still got plenty of weaponry left to play with.
Ye-up, I love the classic 3025 setting, that and the war of 39. Not big on the Clan+ setting, but it is fun to pull out the high Tech stuff.
judgedoug wrote:Guys, I said it was a complex hex and counter game, which it is.
I still don't see it personally, but I can agree on that it matches your definition of complex.
Not complicated, but certainly more complex than the vast majority of other hex and counter games out there (which usually boil down to ratios and a single die roll for resolving combat between multiple units)
Having played my fill of Avalon Hill games back in the day... huh. Ok then.
If you're not thinking about it in terms of a hex and counter game, then the best descriptor for Battletech is "lengthy", which it very much is (unless rolling locations for every point of damage from an LB-10X autocannon is quick for some people).
On THAT I can absolutely agree. It is involved to very involved. But even then, third time you play you've already memorized the location table ^^.
warboss wrote:Does the RPG use pretty much the same combat rules for mech on mech action or something different? It would be interesting if the RPG actually simplified things compared to CBT. I'm not a fan of CBT (tried it three times in as many decades) but I would say that the heat management is one thing I definitely liked in theory and was iconic to the game.
Yes and no. Personal combat uses their own set of rules, tactical rules are more or less the CBT ones, but much, much, much more involved. If you think that regular CBT lance-on-lance is lenghty, this is what they have to say about the AtoW's tactical rules:
While standard Total Warfare rules can cover engagements of any size, from a one-on-one duel between units to a regimental scale engagement, the tactical combat rules addendum presented here provides far more detailed engagements that can bog down play. These rules are therefore best recommended when the tactical battle includes no more than 1
lance of vehicles or ’Mechs per side, and the players want to add another layer of play to regular Total Warfare games using A Time of War characters.
Personally, I'm currently running a Mechwarrior campaign, and after taking a good long look at the AtoW book, decided to use MW 2nd edition adding AToW's edges and flaws, with the regular CBT combat rules for vehicular characters (player side, I'm using Alpha Strike for NPCs).
judgedoug wrote:A Time of War (the rpg) uses a system appropriate to an RPG, so, no, it's not like Battletech, haha. (keep track of your internal metabolism! cool down after running! replish your water ammo!)
Er... yeah. It also has the most needlessly complicated and abstruse character creation system ever. It makes me, that am used to do fething Eclipse Phase characters in minutes, flee running and screaming.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anpu42 wrote: Half the fun is the heat. I spend most of my Battle with my Riflemen as 8-13 points of heat if not more, the best way to surprise people is to run your Mechs hot while they try not to overheat. This usually would let me pull out 50% more firepower in the first few turns that let me win a lot of games.
Agreed. This is why I still like 3025 the most. That and, you know, mech designs with actual defects that make you think on how to best use them.
The only modification I ever do the the RFL-3N is I move the Medium Lasers to Rear Facing and call it my 'Rear Armor'.
With the Flipping arms I also can what my opponents call 'Dancing' with them as at time I would turn around to give them my "Fresh" Armor, what little there is...
Complex rules are what drew me to BTech (the game, I already liked the universe from MechWarrior 2, 3, and later MechCommander). They were a good break from 40K.
Haven't played in years though, which is sad as I've got a whole ton of 'Mechs just waiting to be used.
Things tend to move much faster and die a lot quicker.
Completely missing the point that BattleTech, like real warfare, is about managing resources as much as anything else.
As someone who owns every Battletech publication made since the game was introduced, I can assure you, I'm not missing the point.
I simply said if you want to really speed the game up, remove those items. It really speeds the game up, trust me.
Personally, I don't think the game is that slow with everything thrown in. Just like with any other game, the more you play and learn the rules, the faster it becomes.
IMHO heat management is a key aspect of battletech. Without it, you just have another hex wargame. Although I’ll admit to being out of the loop. I think the last time I played was in the early 90s.
I was actually shocked when I looked on my shelf to find the wizkids/fanpro Classic battletech master rules ~2004 book there. I have no recollection of picking it up, or even playing during that era.
Minis are nice, and it’s nice to see some of the old stuff coming back to light. Better then the cardboard standies we used for years.
Anpu42 wrote: Off topic: Have you seen Federation Commander Rules set? It is like Alpha Strike is to BattleTech.
I have that!
I enjoyed the game.
It is also automatically set up for a lighter-still game with a different layout card on the back with less boxes / stats.
I would recommend it, I would also agree it has a more Alpha-strike feel.
Back on Topic: I want to see the Rebuild of my favorite BattleMech of all time, the RFL-3N Rifleman.
Things tend to move much faster and die a lot quicker.
Completely missing the point that BattleTech, like real warfare, is about managing resources as much as anything else.
As someone who owns every Battletech publication made since the game was introduced, I can assure you, I'm not missing the point.
I simply said if you want to really speed the game up, remove those items. It really speeds the game up, trust me.
Personally, I don't think the game is that slow with everything thrown in. Just like with any other game, the more you play and learn the rules, the faster it becomes.
We did the no Heat a few times and we came to some conclusions.
>It makes some Mechs Stupid Good like the Stalker
>It lost all the flavor, it quickly became lets see who could throw the most firepower out there.
No Ammo, well my Devastator with 4 AC/20s dropping into battle...nothing would last more than two turns with it out there.
It can me fun for a few games, but you need to do some level of balance between Heat vs. Firepower.
Our way of speeding things up was just go smaller, 4 Mechs, total Weight no more than 250 tons of Mechs. Those mad for some quick games if there was not a lot of terrain.
My favorite time killer was the 100-Ton-Maxi. One Map Board, Maximum 100 Tons on the field at a time. When your Mech was destroyed or you punched out you got to bring out another 100 Tones. Those games were a blast.
The most Insane one we had was 5 Locust vs. 20 Savina Masters.
Talizvar wrote: BUT my vote for best mech was the original "unseen" Marauder:
Both for looks and it's brutal capability.
Ah! The old Marauder/Glaug! My own favorite of the original mechs, and still one of my all time favorites. Cool looking, great damage potential but it required a bit of finess (due to heat issues) to get the most out of. I've got several of the old Ral Partha miniatures, and at least one example of every succeeding Marauder model. Can't wait to see how this new one turns out. The artwork looks very promising!
They both look similar to each other considering their different configurations, with the differences being in the weapon loadout (the -4X has a Binary Laser Cannon in each arm and a SRM-6 launcher in each side torso.
warboss wrote:Does the RPG use pretty much the same combat rules for mech on mech action or something different? It would be interesting if the RPG actually simplified things compared to CBT. I'm not a fan of CBT (tried it three times in as many decades) but I would say that the heat management is one thing I definitely liked in theory and was iconic to the game.
Yes and no. Personal combat uses their own set of rules, tactical rules are more or less the CBT ones, but much, much, much more involved. If you think that regular CBT lance-on-lance is lenghty, this is what they have to say about the AtoW's tactical rules:
While standard Total Warfare rules can cover engagements of any size, from a one-on-one duel between units to a regimental scale engagement, the tactical combat rules addendum presented here provides far more detailed engagements that can bog down play. These rules are therefore best recommended when the tactical battle includes no more than 1 lance of vehicles or ’Mechs per side, and the players want to add another layer of play to regular Total Warfare games using A Time of War characters.
Personally, I'm currently running a Mechwarrior campaign, and after taking a good long look at the AtoW book, decided to use MW 2nd edition adding AToW's edges and flaws, with the regular CBT combat rules for vehicular characters (player side, I'm using Alpha Strike for NPCs).
Wow.. more complicated/complex. Eh, to each his own. I do like the art of the new mechs though so hopefully this will be the first time since the original unseen that I pick up some mechs.
warboss wrote: Does the RPG use pretty much the same combat rules for mech on mech action or something different? It would be interesting if the RPG actually simplified things compared to CBT. I'm not a fan of CBT (tried it three times in as many decades) but I would say that the heat management is one thing I definitely liked in theory and was iconic to the game.
A Time of War (the rpg) uses a system appropriate to an RPG, so, no, it's not like Battletech, haha. (keep track of your internal metabolism! cool down after running! replish your water ammo!)
I'm guessing adding heat sinks to your character would involve shaving various body parts. The original question was more in reference to the inevitable mech combat in the RPG and whether it used the CBT rules for that portion or adapted/made up its own.
Our way of speeding things up was just go smaller, 4 Mechs, total Weight no more than 250 tons of Mechs. Those mad for some quick games if there was not a lot of terrain.
mdauben wrote: Perhaps. A lot of the background could remain, but even some of that looks a bit dated at this point.
Yeah, very true. I think in the background the Soviet Union falls in the late 21st century. There are definitely some areas that could be massaged a little and either cut or revamped to make things more relevant.
mdauben wrote: For IWM metals, though, it would be a throwing everything out. I agree that one of the problems with the mini line is that its just too big. Too big for a retailer to stock all of it. Too confusing for many beginning gamers. The designs are all over the place in terms of looks making for a barely cohesive appearance on the table. Still, I think at this point its only the continued release of more new miniatures that keeps the line alive. I don't have access to IWM sales records, but I suspect that the new minis are the big profit makers.Maybe a total revamp of the minis and releasing a whole new line of mechs redesigned from the ground up would reinvigorate the game. It would be a huge gamble though, and if it didn't pay of could well kill the game.
I don't disagree. While I love IWM and everything they have done to support Battletech, the line itself is a mess and I think you are correct regarding the sales of new models versus old. It has been a few years, and the posts may have been lost in one of the website crashes, but on the old ClassicBattletech forums there were debates about the viability of IWM keeping old designs around. This was around the time the archive business started, and people were upset that the whole range wasn't going to be available for purchase.
At that time one of the IWM associated posters revealed how infrequently many of the older models sold (I think for some it was less than 10 a year) and the space the molds and stock take up made keeping the whole range around a headache for IWM which made most of its money off of casting services for other companies, and selling other model ranges. Unless things have changed substantially in the last few years the new figures are definitely driving sales with the older models acting as dead weight around IWM's neck.
If IWM were to archive the majority of the current line (some of the models still hold up, anything Drew Williams sculpted is pretty much gold in my opinion) and move forward with new designs I'd be emptying my wallet with new purchases and I would imagine others would too.
CBT is complex in the sense that there is a good amount of stuff to keep track of on a unit-by-unit basis. But I was put off of it for many years based on misunderstanding people calling CBT complex ... I thought they meant it had some kind of extremely intricate set of mechanics or something, which is really not true or at least does not have to be. While admittedly complex, CBT's fundamental mechanics are pretty intuitive.
Observing some kind of common design basis for new models may revitalize the line.
Each mech has a couple distinct features to preserve to keep them recognizable.
Gun arms, cockpit shapes, chicken walker, jump jets, an oversized weapon, hand weapon, feet shape, quad legged, ammo hoppers, plating, limb thicknesses, vents/ports, joint features / plating overlap should have some commonality if not a distinct feature, it should work to make the models more cohesive.
At the very least a mech built from a given company should have a multitude of common features.
Our way of speeding things up was just go smaller, 4 Mechs, total Weight no more than 250 tons of Mechs. Those mad for some quick games if there was not a lot of terrain.
Ghaz wrote: Does a Volkswagen Beetle look like a Ferrari 458?
Does a Ford Fiesta look like a Ford Mustang?
So why should all 'mechs look alike?
Would you like some more Lada or Wartburg 353 styling with your Sci-Fi stomping robots?
Some common "good" styling or at least similar looking tech may avoid some prior butt ugly design.
There is a vast difference between agreeing on aesthetically pleasing common elements than the extreme "mechs looking alike".
Mixing 50's tailfin cars with 80's K car design would be painful to mix, some agreement on style for design would be logical right?
<edit> Heck, these are meant to be military machines, at least a nod of the head to robust design would be nice.
Talizvar wrote: Observing some kind of common design basis for new models may revitalize the line.
Each mech has a couple distinct features to preserve to keep them recognizable.
Gun arms, cockpit shapes, chicken walker, jump jets, an oversized weapon, hand weapon, feet shape, quad legged, ammo hoppers, plating, limb thicknesses, vents/ports, joint features / plating overlap should have some commonality if not a distinct feature, it should work to make the models more cohesive.
At the very least a mech built from a given company should have a multitude of common features.
That might be one of the few effective ways to go about a not from bedrock reboot; identify which vehicles should share or not share features instead of 'kitchen sink' artwork.
Inserting the Star League (2750) era vehicles into the 3025 era as replacements for the Unseen sure threw a monkey wrench into everything.
The fiction and fluff sure took a nosedive as well, as I don't think I've ever managed to get more than halfway (if that) through any Dark Age novel; they just do not at all read like a BattleTech story.
And even the Clan/post-Clan novels just came across so dumbed down as to not reflect any kind of military fiction intended to portray soldiers who've spent the better part of their lives waging war.
Hell, I think there were occasional stories from Battle Technology that in a dozen or less pages were better than some of the novels in their entirety, even before the less than 250/300 page-count limitation came into being.
Every time I've looked at BT over the past decade it just seems harder and harder IMO to try and figure out who exactly the various companies holding the IP at that time were trying to attract as players or fans.
The composition of a couple of the Alpha Strike lance packs are likewise, interesting, to say the least.
Our way of speeding things up was just go smaller, 4 Mechs, total Weight no more than 250 tons of Mechs. Those mad for some quick games if there was not a lot of terrain.
Why use tonnage when BV2 exists?
Cuz in my Day there was no BV system
I'm not sure what day you mean then. I've got a Mechforce News here with Battle Values in it from 30 years ago.
Our way of speeding things up was just go smaller, 4 Mechs, total Weight no more than 250 tons of Mechs. Those mad for some quick games if there was not a lot of terrain.
Why use tonnage when BV2 exists?
Cuz in my Day there was no BV system
I'm not sure what day you mean then. I've got a Mechforce News here with Battle Values in it from 30 years ago.
BattlDriods, BattleTech, CityTech. I have been playing this game way to long
mdauben wrote: Can't wait to see how this new one turns out. The artwork looks very promising!
It will probably bear a strong resemblance to the MAD-4X Marauder from XTRO: Succession Wars.
I hope not. We've already got the MAD-4X miniatures (I think I've got two). I'm hoping it looks more like the Marauder shown in this artwork. This design looks more like the original unseen MAD-3R than anything Catalyst and IWM have done to date (and is better looking that most of the current "Marauder" miniatueres, IMO).
The mech in the lower right corner really looks nothing like the MAD-4X.
Valhallan42nd wrote: Don't forget it's ability to make you swear like a sailor when putting the blasted thing together.
I'll admit the original unseen Marauder was a little challenging to assemble, but its nothing compared to the unseen Marauder IIC or the current "stork legged" Marauder MAD-5L!
Except for the longer torso they look very similar.
The cockpit design on that Marauder is ridiculously stupid. Unless that is a penal machine meant to sacrifice the pilot inside I can't imagine why anyone would design a warmachine like that.
I'd put hidden cockpits way up there on my wish list for aesthetic changes made to Battletech's `Mechs. Going back to the unseen Battlemaster and Griffin, through the Timberwolf/Mad Cat and crap like the Marauder above, a large number of Battletech's designs share a ludicrous legacy of prominent cockpits that would draw all kinds of enemy fire in combat. That crap needs to change. `Mechs have a full suite of sensors/cameras and do not need to have fishbowl cockpits jutting forward from their torsos in order to function.
DarkTraveler777 wrote: That crap needs to change. `Mechs have a full suite of sensors/cameras and do not need to have fishbowl cockpits jutting forward from their torsos in order to function.
Yet a large amount of the weapon systems still miss their target.
Even with today's technology we have ballistic weapons that can accurately hit miles out, but in the future they aren't 100% accurate? Hell, even 85% accurate.
The prominent cockpits, to me, are like Space Marines with no helmets. They don't make much sense other than to "humanize" the war machines.
Lots of mechs have cockpits that are dead center in the chest. That makes even less since when you are usually aiming for center mass.
Cockpits can also be a big thing for a Pilot. Look at the evolution of WWII Fighters like the P-51 and P-47. They both started with the back part as part of the tail section. It gave great coverage from shots from the rear, but at the cost of viability.
When they went to the bubble Canopy they lost some of that protection, but gained viability which turned out to be more important.
Now with the F-22 they have made it so you have full 360* vision, but that did not come cheaply.
The ones with Bubble Canopies are probably cheaper to manufacture and sell, thus will be more common. While the mostly enclosed Cockpits with the 360* Sensors are going to cost alot more.
There is also another factor that a lot overlook when it comes to pilots, a lot trust their eyes more than sensors.
Anpu42 wrote: Cockpits can also be a big thing for a Pilot. Look at the evolution of WWII Fighters like the P-51 and P-47. They both started with the back part as part of the tail section. It gave great coverage from shots from the rear, but at the cost of viability.
When they went to the bubble Canopy they lost some of that protection, but gained viability which turned out to be more important.
Now with the F-22 they have made it so you have full 360* vision, but that did not come cheaply.
The ones with Bubble Canopies are probably cheaper to manufacture and sell, thus will be more common. While the mostly enclosed Cockpits with the 360* Sensors are going to cost alot more.
There is also another factor that a lot overlook when it comes to pilots, a lot trust their eyes more than sensors.
Yea, I'd rather have my peripheral vision than a camera subject to malfunctions, jamming, etc...
DarkTraveler777 wrote: That crap needs to change. `Mechs have a full suite of sensors/cameras and do not need to have fishbowl cockpits jutting forward from their torsos in order to function.
Yet a large amount of the weapon systems still miss their target.
Even with today's technology we have ballistic weapons that can accurately hit miles out, but in the future they aren't 100% accurate? Hell, even 85% accurate.
Those are issues of the abstracted game rules (same issue with the super-short weapon ranges) and shouldn't be a factor for the in-universe `Mech designs.
Honestly, would a `Mechwarrior want to ride in that Marauder above? I doubt it. If the pilot didn't get blasted by the incoming weapons fire they'd likely get crushed the first time the `Mech fell forward.
TalonZahn wrote: [The prominent cockpits, to me, are like Space Marines with no helmets. They don't make much sense other than to "humanize" the war machines.
While that may be, it is still a dumb design philosophy to take when designing war machines. So much effort goes into adding realism to Battletech that big honking cockpits (which are made unnecessary by the fluff) just make no sense. `Mechs have a full spectrum of sensors, and the pilots can "see" 360 degrees around them due to these sensors. Hell, in game terms those sensors take up two of the six critical slots in a `Mech's head location, so they aren't insignificant to the `Mech's internal composition. But apparently a `Mech is blind unless it has paneled cockpits giving its pilot a scenic view of the battlefield? That. Is. Dumb.
Also, isn't the glass supposed to be polarized to protect against laser and PPC blasts in the fluff? So you shouldn't be able to see the pilots anyway, making the potential to humanize the war machines even less possible.
To be fair, the anine derived stuff was generally better designed than the original Battletech designs. Most of them had unexposed cocpits. Sure, the Dougram stuff all had the big glass cockpits, but at least in its source material, there was a reason for it. And, when they redid those designs for the Japanese market, they completely did away with the exposed cockpits on nearly every design.
Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Heck, even their LASERS are not laser-guided accurate. How do you miss with a laser? (Okay, I know how you miss with a laser. But why don't you build it so the laser fires in two stages - a low-power targeting laser, and then main battery that only goes off if the targeting laser is on target?)
20th century laser designators are like 20 lbs, and the sensor package on a LGB isn't much more. Compared to the vast bulk of even a small BattleMech they're tiny.
Obviously technology in the 24th-plus-century took a huge nosedive in reliability. The only sensor a MechWarrior CAN rely on is the good old Mk 1 Mod 0 eyeball.
Vulcan wrote: Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Battletech's technology is super reliable. Most of the `Mechs kicking around in the 4th Succession War were centuries old! Imagine going into battle today with a musket, I bet it wouldn't nearly be as reliable as great-great-great grandma's SHD-1R Shadowhawk was on Galtor III.
Vulcan wrote: Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Heck, even their LASERS are not laser-guided accurate. How do you miss with a laser? (Okay, I know how you miss with a laser. But why don't you build it so the laser fires in two stages - a low-power targeting laser, and then main battery that only goes off if the targeting laser is on target?)
20th century laser designators are like 20 lbs, and the sensor package on a LGB isn't much more. Compared to the vast bulk of even a small BattleMech they're tiny.
Obviously technology in the 24th-plus-century took a huge nosedive in reliability. The only sensor a MechWarrior CAN rely on is the good old Mk 1 Mod 0 eyeball.
Remember, Battletech is the future FROM THE 80's. That is a point they consistently keep up to represent why certain technology is bad or doesn't exist.
Vertrucio wrote: I honestly think the primary reason for Battletech limping along for the past decade has been its refusal to update the miniatures. Someone will of course chime in saying how much they still love BT and still play it, but that's a tiny drop in a dwindling wargaming scene.
Instead of making use of all the brilliant new mechanical artists and new ways of crafting miniatures, they wallowed in a pit of nostalgia for which there were already plenty of old mech model....
No. It has more to do with the refusal to actually promote the game. Minis are fine but you don't see CGL actually doing anything to show the game is alive and well to the gaming commumity. But rather just markets it to us die hards tgat have been around forever.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormonu wrote: Wonder if we'll get LAMs for the Wasp, Stinger and Phoenix Hawk?
This looks much better and more in line with the original models than the Project Phoenix designs from a decade ago and I am always eager to pick up a model of a Warhammer (and Battlemaster & Locust).
Yes on LAMs. They were seen at gen con if I recall correctly. No clue on timetable. Also not sure which LAMS they are but there are models.....
Actually, we do promote it. Catalyst Demo Agents (like me) are running games all the time. The problem we find is that people will jump in and play a game, but won't buy the system.
Mattlov wrote: Actually, we do promote it. Catalyst Demo Agents (like me) are running games all the time. The problem we find is that people will jump in and play a game, but won't buy the system.
I am not a Demo Agent, and have a similar problem with getting people involved. Lots of jump in to play, very little buying into, or back into in some case, the game. I have a group near me that supposedly plays, but my emails through the Catalyst sight went unanswered. I don't know if the site functions correctly anymore, or if those who used it gave up. I occasionally get an automated Email from it, but not very often, so I am leaning toward a bug in the system.
I do have to say, that the new game store near me has had a bit of interest, 2 returning players, and a couple of one of their children, and one MTG player who is showing more interest each time he plays. So 5 ish players, of which none have asked to buy any new product, and one is looking for his old box of Battletech. The kids are easily bored and start to wander, look at the other games going on about half way through, which is normal for young kids.
Mattlov wrote: I did a kill and keep games, giving away FREE PAINTED MINIS, and even that didn't convince others to buy in, or even come back!
Hm. Last time I initiated newbies we did a Mechwarrior campaign. So far, the players have bought their mechs, 1 starter, 2 copies of Total Warfare and 2 of Alpha Strike. Different strokes, I guess.
Vulcan wrote: Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Heck, even their LASERS are not laser-guided accurate. How do you miss with a laser? (Okay, I know how you miss with a laser. But why don't you build it so the laser fires in two stages - a low-power targeting laser, and then main battery that only goes off if the targeting laser is on target?)
20th century laser designators are like 20 lbs, and the sensor package on a LGB isn't much more. Compared to the vast bulk of even a small BattleMech they're tiny.
Obviously technology in the 24th-plus-century took a huge nosedive in reliability. The only sensor a MechWarrior CAN rely on is the good old Mk 1 Mod 0 eyeball.
You can't start down that path. Battletech works because giant robots are cool, even though we know in our hearts that they're kind of impractical. Once you start trying to make things realistic, then you're onto a slippery slope that will eventually lead to unmanned drones shooting invisible lasers at each other from the opposite horizon.
Battletech has it quirks that some people love and others hate. I'm in the camp that once you start talking about giant robots logic and physics are more or less out the window. No matter how aged or unrealistic it may be I still love old school battletech.
For the uninitiated, what is the significance of rolling a double 5 with an urban mech laser? Ammo hit or core breach damage locations or something? Exploding sixes ala spartan games?
Nothing that I'm aware of it (been playing since 2E). But if you do hit and roll a 2 for location, that's a hit to the center torso with a possible critical. 12 would be the head, which would be pretty painful. Nothing as awesome as in that video, so I'm left scratching my head on that one.
PS: Our group calls the Urbanmech the walking trashcan. You step on it's foot, and the head swings up...
Vulcan wrote: Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Heck, even their LASERS are not laser-guided accurate. How do you miss with a laser? (Okay, I know how you miss with a laser. But why don't you build it so the laser fires in two stages - a low-power targeting laser, and then main battery that only goes off if the targeting laser is on target?)
20th century laser designators are like 20 lbs, and the sensor package on a LGB isn't much more. Compared to the vast bulk of even a small BattleMech they're tiny.
Obviously technology in the 24th-plus-century took a huge nosedive in reliability. The only sensor a MechWarrior CAN rely on is the good old Mk 1 Mod 0 eyeball.
You can't start down that path. Battletech works because giant robots are cool, even though we know in our hearts that they're kind of impractical. Once you start trying to make things realistic, then you're onto a slippery slope that will eventually lead to unmanned drones shooting invisible lasers at each other from the opposite horizon.
Which was rather my point, because I was responding to posts complaining about the unrealistic nature of the big canopies on some 'Mechs.
Stormonu wrote: Nothing that I'm aware of it (been playing since 2E). But if you do hit and roll a 2 for location, that's a hit to the center torso with a possible critical. 12 would be the head, which would be pretty painful. Nothing as awesome as in that video, so I'm left scratching my head on that one.
PS: Our group calls the Urbanmech the walking trashcan. You step on it's foot, and the head swings up...
Ours is R2 with a 10 Guage [especially with an LB-X]
My favorite Mod
Remove the Small Laser and AC/10
Double the Heat Sinks.
Add ERSL
Add MRM40
Vulcan wrote: Given the reliability of BattleTech technology, the very last thing I'd want to rely on is external sensors.
Heck, even their LASERS are not laser-guided accurate. How do you miss with a laser? (Okay, I know how you miss with a laser. But why don't you build it so the laser fires in two stages - a low-power targeting laser, and then main battery that only goes off if the targeting laser is on target?)
20th century laser designators are like 20 lbs, and the sensor package on a LGB isn't much more. Compared to the vast bulk of even a small BattleMech they're tiny.
Obviously technology in the 24th-plus-century took a huge nosedive in reliability. The only sensor a MechWarrior CAN rely on is the good old Mk 1 Mod 0 eyeball.
You can't start down that path. Battletech works because giant robots are cool, even though we know in our hearts that they're kind of impractical. Once you start trying to make things realistic, then you're onto a slippery slope that will eventually lead to unmanned drones shooting invisible lasers at each other from the opposite horizon.
Which was rather my point, because I was responding to posts complaining about the unrealistic nature of the big canopies on some 'Mechs.
But if that was your point then EVERY `Mech should have large canopies to counter the inherent flaws with `Mech sensors. However, the fluff doesn't bear that out, and states that `Mech sensors are so good a pilot doesn't need to rely on visuals to be combat effect.
The `Mechs with large canopies have them because the artist thought they'd look cool. Simple as that. There are a lot of flawed technologies in Battletech, but sensors surprisingly aren't one of them.
warboss wrote: For the uninitiated, what is the significance of rolling a double 5 with an urban mech laser? Ammo hit or core breach damage locations or something? Exploding sixes ala spartan games?
None whatsoever, AFAIK. It could be 2 critical hits, I guess.
I think it's a critical in the Megamek rules mod (ignore armor effect). The point of the video is that you can have the worst and fugliest mech possible and still blow stuff up with the right combination of luck.
The urbanmech is probably the worst of all the 80's designs and it also has absolutely horrible stats (slowest mech in the game armed with only one small laser which in reality does nothing), but it has that intangible something to it that makes battletech awesome despite the derpiness.
MWO's contribution to the running joke that is the glory of Urbanmech. I love the cockpit's speed gauge reading "slow and slower"
DarkTraveler777 wrote: But if that was your point then EVERY `Mech should have large canopies to counter the inherent flaws with `Mech sensors. However, the fluff doesn't bear that out, and states that `Mech sensors are so good a pilot doesn't need to rely on visuals to be combat effect.
The `Mechs with large canopies have them because the artist thought they'd look cool. Simple as that. There are a lot of flawed technologies in Battletech, but sensors surprisingly aren't one of them.
There are rules for a Torso Cockpit if you desire to construct a 'mech with such:
Torso Cockpits weigh 4 tons and replace the standard Cockpit. Torso Cockpits occupy two spaces in the Center Torso, one for the cockpit and one sensor package. The head mounted Life Support systems are moved to the side torsos. This leaves four critical slots open in the 'Mech's head. The cramped conditions impose a 1 point penalty on all Piloting skill rolls. When the first sensor system is destroyed, add a 2 point penalty on all to-hit rolls. After the second sensor system is destroyed, impose a 4 point to-hit penalty. (If the destroyed sensor systems are both in the head, the 'Mech is effectively blinded and the penalty applies to Piloting skill rolls and physical attacks as well.) If all three sensor systems are destroyed, the 'Mech is completely blind and cannot make weapon attacks as well as suffering a 4 point penalty to Piloting skill rolls.
The proximity to the engine makes a MechWarrior's life difficult as well. The torso mounted life support systems are critical to the operation of the Mech. If one Life Support system is destroyed, the MechWarrior will take a point of damage each turn a Torso Cockpit equipped 'Mech is overheated by 1 to 14 points on the mech heat scale. If the Mech is overheated by 15 points or more and a Life Support system is destroyed, the MechWarrior will take 2 points of damage.
Sensors may make it unnecessary to rely on visuals, but if your sensors get knocked out you're going to be playing blind man's bluff.
paulson games wrote: The urbanmech is probably the worst of all the 80's designs and it also has absolutely horrible stats (slowest mech in the game with only one small laser), but it has that intangible something to it that makes battletech awesome despite the derpiness.
Actually, ugly as it is (and the old trash can is indeed quite ugly, but charming anyway), it is a quite good design, for what it was designed to do, namely urban warfare. Yes, it's slow but it is heavily armed (you forgot the AC/10 that goes with that small laser) and armored for a 30-tonner and can jump over buildings, which makes a world of difference in urban engagements.
It's just that what it was designed to do is just not very glamourous or PC-like, but a lance of them in a dense urban zone are a holy terror against something equivalent, believe you me, and more than able of fething the gak up of any assault cocky enough to get in their killing ground.
I remember that the main 3025 variant swapped the AC/10 for a 20. On a 30-ton frame. That can ruin the day of anything ^_^
Ghaz wrote: Sensors may make it unnecessary to rely on visuals, but if your sensors get knocked out you're going to be playing blind man's bluff.
Yes, but if you lost both sensor critical slots that means your 'Mech's head has taken 2 critical hits and likely in a world of pain anyway. Unless you are the aforementioned Victor Steiner-Davion who can take Gauss Rifle slugs to the head and keep on fighting!
Ghaz wrote: Sensors may make it unnecessary to rely on visuals, but if your sensors get knocked out you're going to be playing blind man's bluff.
Yes, but if you lost both sensor critical slots that means your 'Mech's head has taken 2 critical hits and likely in a world of pain anyway. Unless you are the aforementioned Victor Steiner-Davion who can take Gauss Rifle slugs to the head and keep on fighting!
What does any of that have to do with a torso cockpit, i.e. a cockpit which is not in the 'mech's head but is in the center torso behind all of the center torso armor?
H.B.M.C. wrote: The Urbie is amazing machine. Never question its beauty or tactical use. Even the Clans respected the Urbie, making a IIC version for themselves!
Ghaz wrote: Sensors may make it unnecessary to rely on visuals, but if your sensors get knocked out you're going to be playing blind man's bluff.
Yes, but if you lost both sensor critical slots that means your 'Mech's head has taken 2 critical hits and likely in a world of pain anyway. Unless you are the aforementioned Victor Steiner-Davion who can take Gauss Rifle slugs to the head and keep on fighting!
Point of order: Victor took a Gauss ricochet off his arm, not a direct hit.
paulson games wrote: I think it's a critical in the Megamek rules mod (ignore armor effect). The point of the video is that you can have the worst and fugliest mech possible and still blow stuff up with the right combination of luck.
The urbanmech is probably the worst of all the 80's designs and it also has absolutely horrible stats (slowest mech in the game armed with only one small laser which in reality does nothing), but it has that intangible something to it that makes battletech awesome despite the derpiness.
MWO's contribution to the running joke that is the glory of Urbanmech. I love the cockpit's speed gauge reading "slow and slower"
paulson games wrote: I think it's a critical in the Megamek rules mod (ignore armor effect). The point of the video is that you can have the worst and fugliest mech possible and still blow stuff up with the right combination of luck.
The urbanmech is probably the worst of all the 80's designs and it also has absolutely horrible stats (slowest mech in the game armed with only one small laser which in reality does nothing), but it has that intangible something to it that makes battletech awesome despite the derpiness.
Except for the longer torso they look very similar.
If that's the artwork a potential reimagined MAD-3R is going to be based on, I'm sorely disappointed. The rendering in the artwork I posted above is 1000% better. All IMO of course but my excitement over this project was based on the Black Widow company artwork, not this recycled MAD-4X look.
Actually for the Archer its almost universally agreed that the cockpit is at the front of the 'mech (the black bar above the cylindrical object in the image below)
There are however some 'mechs where the location of the cockpit is in doubt (e.g, the Assassin). Regardless, they're all considered to be in the 'head' wherever the art places that head on the body.
Ghaz wrote: Actually for the Archer its almost universally agreed that the cockpit is at the front of the 'mech (the black bar above the cylindrical object in the image below)
There are however some 'mechs where the location of the cockpit is in doubt (e.g, the Assassin). Regardless, they're all considered to be in the 'head' wherever the art places that head on the body.
Hahaha, oh man, I just went to see if any other art also made the massively stupid decision to put the cockpit there and I found this
That's just awful. What the hell? Haaaahahaaaaa
"Hey guys, I know we are using these _amazing_ Shoji Kawamori designs, so let's ignore all of the brilliant technical design work that went into producing them and place the cockpit, uh, wherever, and also, when you guys draw this, please PLEASE exaggerate the proportions so badly that it looks like it was built using legos by a child who once saw a Macross Spartan model kit in a dusty comic store and is trying to remember what it looks like but obviously runs out of legos when he gets to the arms.... PERFECT!"
Man, I love me some Battletech, in spite of how badly the IP wants to do itself in.
judgedoug wrote: "Hey guys, I know we are using these _amazing_ Shoji Kawamori designs, so let's ignore all of the brilliant technical design work that went into producing them and place the cockpit, uh, wherever, and also, when you guys draw this, please PLEASE exaggerate the proportions so badly that it looks like it was built using legos by a child who once saw a Macross Spartan model kit in a dusty comic store and is trying to remember what it looks like but obviously runs out of legos when he gets to the arms.... PERFECT!"
Ghaz wrote: Sensors may make it unnecessary to rely on visuals, but if your sensors get knocked out you're going to be playing blind man's bluff.
Yes, but if you lost both sensor critical slots that means your 'Mech's head has taken 2 critical hits and likely in a world of pain anyway. Unless you are the aforementioned Victor Steiner-Davion who can take Gauss Rifle slugs to the head and keep on fighting!
What does any of that have to do with a torso cockpit, i.e. a cockpit which is not in the 'mech's head but is in the center torso behind all of the center torso armor?
Looks like I misconstrued your statement. I thought you went back to talking about losing sensors in the head. Still, torso mounted cockpits have nothing to do with my criticism of some of the artwork depicting `Mechs with excessively large cockpit canopies.
My point has been that the fluff makes the need for large, transparent canopies unnecessary. Yes, torso mounted cockpits exist as an optional design rule, but you don't need torso mounted cockpits to represent fully armored "closed" head-mounted cockpits. In fact plenty of `Mechs have minimal cockpit profiles which don't need to giant canopies to convey "cockpit".
Torso mounted cockpits were introduced to allow players to design `Mechs without the fatal head shot flaw common in the game. Torso mounted cockpits were not introduced to mesh the artwork with the game rules. So what do torso mounted cockpits have to do with artists drawing stupidly unnecessary canopies?
Ghaz wrote: No. As mentioned that is the artwork for the MAD-4X Marauder from XTRO: Succession Wars.
Okay, I'm confused now, Ghaz. Are you saying that the new MAD-3R design will be similar to the picture you posted or not? I like the MAD-4X well enough, I am just hoping the new MAD-3R looks more like one in the Black Widow Company artwork that was posted earlier in this thread and not the 4X.
As noted the MAD-3R and the MAD-4X are different models of the same 'mech, just like the Leman Russ Demolisher and the Leman Russ Vanquisher are different models of the same Astra Militarum tank. They will look similar, but they're not the same 'mech so we have no indication how many differences there will be between the -4X and what may be the -3R seen here.
To clear everything up, the cool art that has been posted shows the new designs that will be made in miniature. The new cool art shows the new retcon designs.
Basically, ignore any other pictures of the Marauder in this thread other than the one in the new cool art. They're all from other supplements or whatever and are unrelated in content to the new retcon designs.
PS the retcon mechs are done by Sentinel373 / Alex Immerzeel right?
Ghaz wrote: As noted the MAD-3R and the MAD-4X are different models of the same 'mech, just like the Leman Russ Demolisher and the Leman Russ Vanquisher are different models of the same Astra Militarum tank. They will look similar, but they're not the same 'mech so we have no indication how many differences there will be between the -4X and what may be the -3R seen here.
Okay, I guess I misunderstood your posts. Even ignoring the II and IIC models, though, there are currently four different MAD-# miniatures in production by IWN, and none of them look all that much like each other except in the most general way.
judgedoug wrote: To clear everything up, the cool art that has been posted shows the new designs that will be made in miniature. The new cool art shows the new retcon designs.
Ghaz wrote: Actually for the Archer its almost universally agreed that the cockpit is at the front of the 'mech (the black bar above the cylindrical object in the image below) [..]
I think one of the earlier specific mentions of that was in the original 3025 TRO, as the Mechwarrior 1 book used the image already linked to.
judgedoug wrote: [..] Man, I love me some Battletech, in spite of how badly the IP wants to do itself in.
Yeah, it definitely does not help any setting when the best option is to ignore most all of the fluff, rules, or whatnot because something was done so poorly in the first place, let alone for subsequent 'revisions'.
A lot of the original material isn't all that bad though, I think it mostly just suffers from a too excessive inclusion of Easter Egg items that was likewise carried too far in the later material.
Ah, no wonder the new designs looked so good. They had someone with an actual sense for aesthetics do them. I love Shimmering Sword's art style. Now, have him redesign everything else. Oh, and bring in Flyingdebris' protomech redesigns, too.
Barzam wrote: Ah, no wonder the new designs looked so good. They had someone with an actual sense for aesthetics do them. I love Shimmering Sword's art style. Now, have him redesign everything else. Oh, and bring in Flyingdebris' protomech redesigns, too.
Best thing about it is that I think they feel very much like Battletech, which many artists' mech designs don't, even among the published ones.
judgedoug wrote: PS the retcon mechs are done by Sentinel373 / Alex Immerzeel right?
AFAIK, they've been done by Anthony Scroggins, aka Shimmering-Sword:
You 100% sure? I could have sword the thread on the Catalyst Battletech forums talked about Immerzeel doing the art.
Not 100%, no, but the Warhammer and Griffin in Shimmering Sword's images are very clearly the same designs as the ones from the Dragoons' pic, and I've had the second one as my laptop's wallpaper for about half a year already, quite a bit before the announcement.
Anthony/Shimmering Sword did the concept work and finished art for the news mechs. Alex/Immerzeel did the 3d warhammer model based off of Anthony's drawings. Anthony was also overseeing the 3d as he's acting as the project manager on the revised unseens. (which then goes to cgl for final approval)
(I chat with Anthony quite frequently so that's straight from him)
paulson games wrote: Anthony/Shimmering Sword did the concept work and finished art for the news mechs. Alex/Immerzeel did the 3d warhammer model based off of Anthony's drawings. Anthony was also overseeing the 3d as he's acting as the project manager on the revised unseens. (which then goes to cgl for final approval)
(I chat with Anthony quite frequently so that's straight from him)
Ah, there you have it, right from the horse's mouth. Turns out both statements were true XD.
Well then, let me say it here, congratulations to everyone involved, those look very cool.
BattleTech has had some great announcements the last few months. Catalyst began in July show-casing our re-imagined Warhammer.
Then the great crew at Harebrained Schemes up-notch-kicked that something fierce with the news they would shortly launch a Kickstarter for a turn-based PCBattleTech game.
Then Monday Piranha Games joined the deluge in style, posting up a pre-order for their re-imagine Marauder for MechWarrior Online.
Well, Piranha showed us theirs, so only fair we show them ours…this final line drawing of our re-imagined Marauder just came in this morning and as usual, immediately sharing.
As I’m working on scripts for some short videos to go along with HBSBattleTech Kickstarter, watching this re-imagined artwork flowing in for our coming Combat Manuals (and other books), and salivating at the idea of playing a Warhammer in MechWarrior Online…what a great time to be a BattleTech fan.
BattleTech has had some great announcements the last few months. Catalyst began in July show-casing our re-imagined Warhammer.
Then the great crew at Harebrained Schemes up-notch-kicked that something fierce with the news they would shortly launch a Kickstarter for a turn-based PCBattleTech game.
Then Monday Piranha Games joined the deluge in style, posting up a pre-order for their re-imagine Marauder for MechWarrior Online.
Well, Piranha showed us theirs, so only fair we show them ours…this final line drawing of our re-imagined Marauder just came in this morning and as usual, immediately sharing.
As I’m working on scripts for some short videos to go along with HBSBattleTech Kickstarter, watching this re-imagined artwork flowing in for our coming Combat Manuals (and other books), and salivating at the idea of playing a Warhammer in MechWarrior Online…what a great time to be a BattleTech fan.
Next few years are gonna be one amazing ride!
Randall
Now only the minis actually looked this good instead of what they have now.
Tamwulf wrote: I got into the hype by preordering the Maruader in Mech Warrior Online. I'm a little disappointed that I won't get it until 1 December.
Played a game with a Locust on my team. OMG, was that thing FAST. And the guy piloting it was a master of Light Mechs.
Seeing all these older mechs being subtly redesigned and released back into the universe brings back a lot of nostalgia.
Locusts are fun in MWO - not easy but often fun - especially if you are a good pilot I am average at best and I enjoy mine a lot. especially my 1E and Pirates bane (Lori Kalmar Carlyle's 'mech)
At present, all we know is that we will see the 3025 Unseen (the Locust, Stinger, Wasp, Valkyrie, Phoenix Hawk, Griffin, Scorpion, Shadow Hawk, Wolverine, Rifleman, Crusader, Thunderbolt, Archer, Warhammer, Marauder, Goliath, BattleMaster, Longbow, and Marauder II) and I believe there are plans to redo the Ostscout, Ostsol and Ostroc as well
I'm actually pretty excited for new mech models, the old designs, whist quaint, really don't stand up these days in mini form, I'd love to see the mad cat get a modern day face lift, it would look ace.
I didn't like the Locust when I started Btech years ago but I've changed my views. What I don't like is the current sculpt but running Project Phoenix Locust (a lovely design) with that new miniature is Heaven on Earth.
I have 3 old school models but I'm totally in for a dozen more. Now holding my breath for the other two bug mechs.
Battletech always looked like a cool game to me and i have fond memories growing up playing Mechwarrior. Always wanted to get into battletech but i dont know a single person that plays it.
Which is really sad since it seems to be coming back with fury.
Shadow Hawk isn't loading for me, but the Ostscout did. It's a significant improvement. If they keep this up, I might actually have to buy Battletech minis again.
I am a proud backer of the kickstarter. I have been playing the game since the first boxed set. It was my first strategy/tactical game. Once I started reading the novels I was hooked. I have collected them all. Glad to see this making a comeback
I love the new Shadow Hawk, can't wait to get a few of the new minis whenever they arrive. I'm somewhat ambivalent on the new Ostscout. Its a nice looking design, but it just does not look like an Ostscout to me.
According to the Ostscout's original fluff, it did not have arms. What looks like arms were actually sensor rods which would move about as the scout performed its mission.
Not all variants had the Beagle Active Probe, and not all 'mechs with Beagle Active Probes have sensor rods.
The BattleTech developers are very detail-oriented. If the updated art has arms, its because it was an intentional retcon on their part and not because they thought those were 'arms' in the older artwork.
FWIW, my copy of the 3025/3026 Record Sheets book lists the Ostscout (OTT-7J) with upper and lower arm actuators, as do the -7K, -9CS, and -9S variants in Heavy Metal.
I see where you're getting that, but I disagree that the intent is that there are no arms.
"To avoid interference from the magnetohydrodynamic systems, the sensor arrays were installed outside of the main chassis. The OTT uses its actuator systems to aim its sensor arrays."
The last rumor I heard was that these would be in the Alpha Strike Box set, when it comes out. I haven't heard anything official though.
I did preorder the Alpha Strike box set at my FNGS he knows it's coming, just not when, he has me down for a copy when he is actually able to order it.
That's the real question. Theories abound that it will herald an alpha strike starter box, with all 12 of these reseen in plastic opposite 10 Clan plastic omnimechs. If not, I assume they'd end up in alpha strike lance packs, much like they did last year. Either way, there isn't any release date information that I'm aware of.
Release date for Catalyst products seems to be "Sometime in the *mumble mumble mumble*".
I mean, just look at their list of upcoming products and product lines (discounting novels/fiction):
Interstellar Operations - I think that's been in beta since before my parents got married.
Combat Manual: Mercenaries - Just went into beta.
The First Succession War - Yo DJ, spin that wheel (to avoid having to commit to writing anything for the new post-RotS era)
Combat Manual: Kurita - For Alpha Strike, and likely won't be out until CM: Mercs is out, which will be never because CGL 'beta' means 'no work to be done here'.
Campaign Companion - I want this book more than I need oxygen to live... so... 6 years away? 7 maybe?
Combat Manual: Steiner - As above with the other two. If this comes out before 2020 I'll be shocked.
Turning Points: Epsilon Eridani (E-Publication) - This has a graphic for the front cover, so this probably isn't far off.
Experimental Technical Readout: Primitives V - Another online only thing, and they're pretty good at churning these out (and that means they don't have to work on ilClan).
Combat Manual: Davion - Etc. etc. For Alpha Strike.
Experimental Technical Readout: Succession Wars II - Subtitle fore this one would be "Another One!".
Record Sheets: Prototypes Unabridged - Fair enough.
The Second Succession War - Just when you thought it was safe to assume CGL would actually do something with ilClan, they go backwards to another SW to keep the groggy's at bay.
Technical Readout: Golden Century - When people drive through muddy fields they don't intend to get stuck there because they want to get to their destination. Not CGL. They see ilClan up ahead and know it means putting in the effort, so they try to get as many wheels on their vehicle bogged down at the same time.
Technical Readout: IrregularTech - Shouldn't this be Technical Readout: Bottom of the Barrel?
ilClan - By the time we get this it will be 3155!
Or maybe it won't be 3155 as they have 5 - count 'em - 5 new whole product lines they're going to never finish:
Milestones
OpFor
Spotlight On
Touring the Stars
Gladiator Gazette
And in none of that is there any mention of an Alpha Strike box.
I just purchased the AS, AS:C, and new mercs beta pack. I am not a fan of digital products but am glad I can finally play AS (kids have limited my game times to less than two hours).
The new mercs beta pdf is great! They have pics of a few of the mwo unseens (yay warhammer!!) They also have a gallery of painted minis, several of which are the new warhammer sculpt we have been teased.
Really excited for that mini and the AS starter set. I hope they start producing more mwo sculpts. They seem like the best 'modern' but yet classic mech design without the over the top looks some have had recently.
455_PWR wrote: They have pics of a few of the mwo unseens (yay warhammer!!)
Note that they're not MW Online designs. Similar yes, but still not the same. Ever since the debacle with the Unseen, Battletech has a strict policy that all artwork is done "in house".
Some of the old "Unseen" models had odd features due to the anime designs they used being for something a different size to what it was portrayed in Battletech. This redesign should eliminate those oddities as a side effect (like the Scorpion having two cockpits).
