Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm not seeing that.

The rules do what they are supposed to, they arn't anything special, but they are what came with the FASA set at the time. As for the talk about "Ripping off..." I don't see you as knowing what your talking about when they were BOTH going at it the same way that mech models did and still do in Asia.

Predominatly in China and Japan, the giant robot thing is almost part in parcel with the setting. Maybe its the Magna thing, maybe its the loose copywrite laws there in general, but I was building THOSE SAME MODELS almost six or eight months before robotech even came out, they came with US SPACY decals and everything. They came in later in both the robotech boxes, and the REVELL line.

I've seen these models in many a market all over the world, and they really don't have a stable "ROBOTECH" home. From near as I can tell, the bottom line goes to whoever has the molds, has the models. I've seen this sort of thing from everything from Hot-wheels, to G.I.Joes, to the giant Gundam robots. when a company loses control of the item, it gets snatched up from third and fourth string company types who then squeeze the thing a little more for extra cash. When the revell models came out, they were in this status. The robotech stuff IIRC was in hiatus, and the FASA guys popped this game out along the same time that Pallidium was putting out it's own Robotech game alongside RIFTS.

http://www.toysnjoys.com/macross_models.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotech_Defenders

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotech

http://www.purplepawn.com/2010/03/the-convoluted-story-of-iron-wind-metals-ral-partha-and-battletech-miniatures/

The appeal of the system is that it is simple, and the mechs were for all intensive purposes running on thier last legs, combining the road warrior aspect with the giant robots, and there you go. The game was an instant success at the time. Along with that, the ROBOTECH thing came about and wasn't like front page news.

The difficulty with the copywrite issue is that these robots were THE SAME. They didn't even have the courtesy to remove all of the robotech marking from the models, or even do the courtesy of the robotec fans to even agknowledge the idea. So in that respect, I can understand the responses.

Grot 6, to my understanding at least for a while FASA had a definite claim to the designs as they had actually licensed them from the original designers. Then things got weird, but others have explained that better than I. I think the 'ZOMG! They stole from Robotech!' issue is a dead horse, at least for this thread. We should probably try to keep the discussion on the box set. (And it is cool to see an old-fashioned box set like that.)

Balance wrote:

Kalamadea wrote:I had to delete this post 3 times as I was geting too heated. My main point of those delted posts is that if you got offended this set has cheap mechs, you're not at all the target audience for it, and there's far better options for you to get into the game with. If you ARE the set's intended audience, the intro set is absolutely AMAZING. Full, complete game for an affordable price that has high-quality components with a good art design? And it actually comes with figs and costs the same amount as a game that didn't come with any figs, even if they're cheap supermarket quarter-machine quality? AND, for those modeling enthusuasts, they license a complete line of high quality metal figs to replace your cheapo plastics with? AND they make a large series of expansion books that allow you to add as much or as litle extra detail as your gaming group could possibly ever want? Phenominal.

I've mostly held my tongue as I do work for a company that makes another mecha game but keep in mind that a lot of people on the thread are looking at this boxed set as an introduction to the setting. I have some background with BT, so I know that weird designs are a core of the setting. You know that. New people don't, and they're seeing not-great plastics (but as you said, they're priced right, and look reasonably faithful to some of the original source art) combined with not-great mechanical designs (I'm talking spindly legs, not how many SRMs or heat sinks a design has) and the combo is unappealing. It's not putting the best front forward, unfortunately.

I'm coming from the other side of it, as I worked in a FLGS at the time this set originally released, and it was a MAJOR hit, especially amongst the newer, younger (high school and early college) gamers for whom it was literally the intro set to battletech, they either hadn't seen it before or had only heard it referanced by the veterans. It was perfect for them, gave them everything they needed for them and their friends to try it out and really play it. Many of them ordered a lot of the expansion rulebooks and mapssets and ordered IWM mechs, some got into clan era, some into jihad stuff. For a lot of the veterans, it was pure nostalgia bringing them back, and the original plastech mechs were just as bad. Many of those gamers still had a few mechs in their closets that finally got to see light of day again, sometimes with fresh coats of paint.

And the fact that the set sold out so quickly shows that my shop wasn't alone in that reaction. You may hate the figs (they're pretty bad by other miniature standards) but the value of the set as a whole, especially considering it has so many figs and how much those figs would have cost in metal makes it an incredible starter. So I can understand if you hate the figs. I can understand if you hate the mechanical designs (I tend to dislike about 2/3s of them myself). I can understand if you don't like how the rules play. I can understand if the starter set as presented isn't your cup o tea for any of those reasons and more. But saying it's a terrible set, just becuase YOU don't like that (and I'm speaking to everyone, not a specific poster)? Thats just flat out wrong, it's one of the best starters ever released becuase it does EXACTLY what it's meant to do, and it does it well. For a retail store, it's perfect becuase you can carry the box and the main rulebook and the people that want anything beyond that are usually the kind of people willing to special order it, and the kind of people that are just fine and dandy with the starter as is probably wouldn't have picked up the rulebook AND the mapsets AND the miniatures for $10 a pop. For those gamers who just want it as a side game to break out every once in a while it's perfect becuase everything fits back in the same box and can get shoved in the back of the closet till you feel like playing it again. Thats whats upsetting to me, is the inability to recognize that for a lot of people it's a really good set, even if you personally despise it.

Just a side thing I noticed, as people are all talking about the flaws in battletech rules and needing an update:

I have played Warhammer 40k for a while, Battletech for eons. I have noticed that competative 40k players are often very dickish about interpretation of rules, nudging figures or distances, arguing the win, getting nitpicky over milimeters and LOS vagueness when it helps them, while paying little attention to such details when it doesn't, cheesy list building , etc.

None of that ever happens in battletech. Being a winning battletech player had nothing to do with being an argumentative ass to get an advantage. If anything that says it is a much better set of rules than our beloved 40k, because you don't get stupid arguements about RAI vs RAW and 'roll a dice for it if you cannot agree' gak that favors whoever has the loudest mouth and splits the most hairs.

Incidentally, I know some good 40k players who also play btech occasionally, and are convinced their wins are purely result of great tactical genius at 40k, not cheesy army lists, luck, or any of that. Funny how when on a hex map with precise rules and forces that cannot be minmaxed with the latest flavor of codex creep, their tactical genius looks like a bunch of smoking heaps of salvage rights.

unrelated thought: part of the speed problem and hit rolls in btech was the new technology making ridiculously fast mechs easy to build. The hit charts and modifiers were written with 3025 technology as the only thing that existed. A lot of oldschool btech players still only play 3025 because a 7/11/7 mech is a rare thing and at the time, there were no XL engines, ferro armor, MASC, double sinks, and such to save weight and go faster anyway with more armor. If you wanted to go that fast or be heat-efficient it meant you were very undergunned and underarmored. Clans and lostech made it a lot more common. A 75 ton mech moving at 5/8 like a MadCat was unheard of. I have played at all levels and I still think good ol' 3025 technology is a much more fun game. The newer technology can be gimicky fun, but it can make for some ridiculous overkill and mishap. It's more fun and balanced when everyone is flawed and less than optimal.

yeenoghu wrote:Just a side thing I noticed, as people are all talking about the flaws in battletech rules and needing an update:

I have played Warhammer 40k for a while, Battletech for eons. I have noticed that competative 40k players are often very dickish about interpretation of rules, nudging figures or distances, arguing the win, getting nitpicky over milimeters and LOS vagueness when it helps them, while paying little attention to such details when it doesn't, cheesy list building , etc.

None of that ever happens in battletech. Being a winning battletech player had nothing to do with being an argumentative ass to get an advantage. If anything that says it is a much better set of rules than our beloved 40k, because you don't get stupid arguements about RAI vs RAW and 'roll a dice for it if you cannot agree' gak that favors whoever has the loudest mouth and splits the most hairs.

Incidentally, I know some good 40k players who also play btech occasionally, and are convinced their wins are purely result of great tactical genius at 40k, not cheesy army lists, luck, or any of that. Funny how when on a hex map with precise rules and forces that cannot be minmaxed with the latest flavor of codex creep, their tactical genius looks like a bunch of smoking heaps of salvage rights.

Amen brother. For all its flaws at least they never fell to super powered options like many other games. Even the most powerful weapons are restricted by the construction rules. Building custom mechs was always my favorite part. IMO Heavy Metal Pro is one of the best things a battletech player can have. Full mech construction right on your PC.


As far as the new tech...after a game or two its kinda meh. I like either 3025 or 3050.

Couldn't the whole 'Clan' thing be a rather monumental (and divisive) example of Codex Creep?

Not really. Btech wasn't about collecting miniatures. In 40k you invest a lot of $$$ into a specific army, only to have something else come along and make it obsolete by comparison. Clan stuff upped the power level of the entire game, not just some specific players. If Btech could have codex creep, it would be like saying only Clan Wolf gets pulse lasers while clan bear gets ultra cannons or something like that. The technology and the rules are available to all players of all factions. Through inventive roleplaying 'fluff' plenty of IS forces had clan technology, even if fluffy it was rare, if you wanted a good game you don't just say 'you get 4 mechs and I get 4 mechs, you look at the BV of those mechs for an even match. Clan will always be outnumbered because their mechs are worth more.

The huge difference is in the investment. GWs WYSIWYG does not apply to a game that is more rules focused and less miniatures focused. Any player can play any mech. Scenarios dictate the mechs, not which figure collection you have. There is no codex creep in btech, just a choice of which rules you like to play. If you play 3055, double HS and XL engines exist and clan weapons are lighter and better than IS versions, if you play 3025 they haven't arrived yet, if you play 3065+ all sorts of other goodies are available, to anyone. This is not an option for someone with $2000 worth of figures having to say their Necrons are now Space Wolves because they like those rules better.

yeenoghu wrote: This is not an option for someone with $2000 worth of figures having to say their Necrons are now Space Wolves because they like those rules better.

I'll have to introduce you to Goatboy on BoLs.

I agree completely though on that line of thought yeenoghu.

Which is why my BT timeline stops at 3049.

No WYSIWYG is a fun aspect of Battletech. Ive been on both sides of a surprise Gauss Rifle. Its also nice since you can use one mini to represent several variants, keeps from spending a bunch on extra minis.

However, if I build a variant mech and it turns out to be something I use regularly Ill convert a mini to represent it. Thats mostly just because I like doing conversions to things.


Man, all this BT talk is making me want to play.

I agree Mad4Minis. But an Archer is still an Archer on the outside, despite the countless variants. I liked modelling my custom mechs too, but it isn't a game rule in btech. an Archer is still an Archer whether it is working for Davion or Hendrik of Oberon. Still represented by the same counter/figure/cardboard standup. still accesses the same rules whether its shooting a LRM built by Liao or Kurita. It's nice that there's only a few figs on the board so it is reasonable to keep track of. If anybody has ever played a btech game with even close to the number of figs as a 500 point 40k game, I'd love to hear about it, and find you a therapist.

Grot 6 wrote:The difficulty with the copywrite issue is that these robots were THE SAME. They didn't even have the courtesy to remove all of the robotech marking from the models, or even do the courtesy of the robotec fans to even agknowledge the idea. So in that respect, I can understand the responses.

What are you blithering about? You’re making it out that FASA simply took the designs from Macross (and a few other places) wholesale, didn’t tell anyone that they did, and then started using them in the hope that no one would notice. That couldn’t be further from the truth.

As for the comparison between the box-art... yeah, that’s intentional. Isn’t that obvious? It’s a homage to the classic box art of the game. The ‘Mech that’s being used there on the new box, the Hammerhands, is described in the fluff as the forerunner to the venerable Warhammer (the ‘Mech on the original box). It’s designed as a piece of nostalgia, not some sneaky attempt to rewrite history or pretend that what happened with the Unseen didn’t happen.

Personally, I'm pretty pumped about this. Of course, the miniatures are not the highest quality, but Battletech's miniatures have always been a bit more utilitarian. As others have said, with a decent paint job, they are almost as good as the Iron Wind Metals.

Also, in case anyone missed it, not only does this boxed set come with the mechs, it also comes with game-board quality maps, which is a really big step up from the previous boxed sets and map packs. I'm pretty sure I'll be buying this one.

What is with all the Battletech hate here? It is a great system. It's a bit too slow some people say? Well 40K and Fantasy can bog down as well and become really slow as well.

Rules are clear, concise and with a hex board, you can't really cheat, like there goes on in 40K. As someone said already, there is no nudging millimeters to get an edge, no arguing about 40K rules and RAI or RAW.

You can even get all the introductory rules for free if you want from the Catalyst web site. They even give you paper cut outs like we used 27 years ago, all for Free. I don't see GW giving anything for free.

So again, why all the hate?

Checker players can't handle Chess either.

Another note for the fans...if you want 3D terrain but the simplicity of the hex movement and measurement try using Heroscape terrain. its 3D, hex based, and the hexes are just a bit bigger than the BT hexes. Also it can be had relatively cheap on ebay for those who dont already have some.

I think we already mentioned the wonderful Heroscape terrain

But that just shows its awesomeness!

Davor wrote:What is with all the Battletech hate here?

Who knows? I mean, War Machine, Hordes, Infinity, Malifaux and half a dozen other games get the focus here all the time without so much vitriol levelled at them. But mention Battletech and we get a veritable shitstorm of negativity what with all the clueless people making statements about FASA ‘ripping off’ Macross (they didn’t), or how they went out of business because of it (they didn’t) and then all the Heavy Gear trolls crawl out of the woodwork to try and tell us that their big smashy robot is game is better than this big smashy robot game.

It is quite perplexing.

Well, some of us still appreciate the Battletech action, H.B.M.C. It is interesting though how fast the misinformation can spread until people start acting like it's public knowledge that FASA ripped off Macross or Robotech (which as you said, is not the case).

Kalamadea wrote:Besides, a decent coat of paint on those mechs makes all the differance in the world. A camo scheme, a few highlights, and a heavy coat of GW wash and they look just fine.

lol, that technique doesn't work with really ugly women nor does it work on really ugly minis. i realize that nostalgia is a powerful thing but wow... battletech needs to incorporate modern sculpting styles into their minis (like some of the plasticrack ones broSRM mentioned) if they want to attract new players and not just double dip their old ones.

I liked the ral partha figs long ago. They existed long before the standard became all exaggerated like modern figs, so we don't get gun barrels the size of heads or anything like that, but the old ral parthas had decent sculpting I thought, they just weren't flamboyant or action posed or anything like we are used to.

warboss wrote:

Kalamadea wrote:Besides, a decent coat of paint on those mechs makes all the differance in the world. A camo scheme, a few highlights, and a heavy coat of GW wash and they look just fine.

lol, that technique doesn't work with really ugly women nor does it work on really ugly minis. i realize that nostalgia is a powerful thing but wow... battletech needs to incorporate modern sculpting styles into their minis (like some of the plasticrack ones broSRM mentioned) if they want to attract new players and not just double dip their old ones.

Key thing is, those minis are just candy. You don't like them? You don't need minis at all to play Battletech on a hex map. Just a counter to identify it, and a way to tell what way it is facing. Battletech is really one of the easiest high quality games to get into.

Intro Box, which you don't even need! You can download Quick Start rules for free!

The only thing you HAVE to spend money on is mapsheets. That's it. And there is a program called Heavy Metal Map which lets you print your own!

Solaris Skunk Werks is free 'Mech creation software.

Say you want the full Tournament Rules. You buy Total Warfare.

So a Mapsheet compilation you can find on Ebay, and Total Warfare. $70 is all you need to invest and play this game forever. You already downloaded Quick Start for free to get used to the game.

That doesn't even get you a starter box for 40K, let alone a playable army with a codex. Battletech wins.

Mattlov wrote:Key thing is, those minis are just candy. You don't like them? You don't need minis at all to play Battletech on a hex map. Just a counter to identify it, and a way to tell what way it is facing. Battletech is really one of the easiest high quality games to get into.

Intro Box, which you don't even need! You can download Quick Start rules for free!

The only thing you HAVE to spend money on is mapsheets. That's it. And there is a program called Heavy Metal Map which lets you print your own!

Solaris Skunk Werks is free 'Mech creation software.

Say you want the full Tournament Rules. You buy Total Warfare.

So a Mapsheet compilation you can find on Ebay, and Total Warfare. $70 is all you need to invest and play this game forever. You already downloaded Quick Start for free to get used to the game.

That doesn't even get you a starter box for 40K, let alone a playable army with a codex. Battletech wins.

first off, it's not a contest so battletech doesn't "win" anything. the two games are completely separate subgenres (large mechs with occassional infantry vs lots of infantry with occasional mech) that aren't really in competition with each other except in your own post. heavy gear.. sure.. that's a competitor. cav.. sure assuming its still in print (haven't seen or heard about it in years). epic is the closest thing in the GW series of games to it and that comparison is a stretch.

what you described is possible but the VAST MAJORITY of players will spend alot more as one of the biggest draws to playing a tabletop game is to see pretty minis on an actual table with terrain. you can technically play 40k with a $15 small rulebook, some paper terrain, and a bunch of skittles vs m&m's as armies but that doesn't mean the vast majority of people want to. those of us who are NOT battletech players are generally saying that this anniversary set fails to interest us in the game and are giving the reasons why. you can disagree with those reasons but the game you are obviously so passionate about isn't going to grow unless new players replace the vets who die or move on to other games. battletech has gone from the number one minis game with a lucrative videogame and book license to a game that is usually referred to in the past tense as an inspiration for the current popular ones.

The minis can look decent with paint. For examples go to http://www.camospecs.com/MiniList.asp and search for "Beginners Set". As others have said, the Loki and Thor mechs that come in the set are high quality. Here is a picture of the plastic Thor painted up on camospecs: http://www.camospecs.com/Miniature.asp?ID=5042

warboss wrote:battletech needs to incorporate modern sculpting styles into their minis (like some of the plasticrack ones broSRM mentioned) if they want to attract new players and not just double dip their old ones.

Except that they don’t, because Catalyst are not in the business of making miniatures. The aim of the StarterBox the same as it has always been since the very first ones that came with miniatures – to get people started with some very simple plastic ‘Mechs to represent the 24 types in the box. These are cheap and cheerful one-piece (in some cases two-piece) plastic ‘Mechs to get players started. And what has been said about them not being required is true. Two different versions of the 4th Ed box had card-board stand-ups, and I’ve played many a’game with them as my ‘miniatures’.

For some of it they are victims of circumstance. The two ‘premium’ plastic ‘Mechs are far more advanced than the basic ones, but they are only in the box as a sort of conciliation prize. We would have got new plastics of the old classics had the 25th anniversary Unseen-to-Reseen thing not been messed up at the last moment.

The actual miniature manufacturer is Iron Wind Metals, who do all the ‘Mechs/Vehicles/Aerospace Fighters/Star Ships/etc. in metal. Now they don’t have the world’s greatest quality control in the world, and there’s a decided ‘scale creep’ that has permeated releases over the past couple of years, but they are the ones to talk to about this. Catalyst has done the ‘premium’ plastics as a test, and that’s as far as it’s gone – a test. Whether it amounts to anything in the future, such as a full range of multi-part plastics, has yet to be seen.

thefiddler wrote:The minis can look decent with paint. For examples go to http://www.camospecs.com/MiniList.asp and search for "Beginners Set". As others have said, the Loki and Thor mechs that come in the set are high quality. Here is a picture of the plastic Thor painted up on camospecs: http://www.camospecs.com/Miniature.asp?ID=5042

while there are some truly nice paintjobs shown there that display alot of skill and effort, there is no amount of polishing that will take the stink of the turd design that is the mech below...



this one is included in the starter (and so included in the anniversary set). is this really one of the first impressions you want the company to make on prospective new players?

warboss wrote:

Kalamadea wrote:Besides, a decent coat of paint on those mechs makes all the differance in the world. A camo scheme, a few highlights, and a heavy coat of GW wash and they look just fine.

lol, that technique doesn't work with really ugly women nor does it work on really ugly minis. i realize that nostalgia is a powerful thing but wow... battletech needs to incorporate modern sculpting styles into their minis (like some of the plasticrack ones broSRM mentioned) if they want to attract new players and not just double dip their old ones.

Far from my best minis, but they were quick and look fine from 2 feet away. All I did was prime grey, paint them vallejo buff, paint some vallejo medium green and gw calthan brown cammo patterns, light drybrush of dheneb stone then heavy wash of devlan mud, base and g2g.


http://www.pbase.com/emberviii/image/132904519/original

These I spent a little more time on mostly becuase they were done before GW washes. Not gonna win any contests, but even the old plastics look ok with a coat of proper paint, which is my point. Maybe it's just polishing a turd, but it turns out you can make it a bit shiny after all.


http://www.pbase.com/image/132904521

Again, nothing outstanding but they like just fine 2 feet away on the table.

Kalamadea wrote:[
http://www.pbase.com/image/132904520

Again, nothing outstanding but they like just fine 2 feet away on the table.

my problem isn't with the battletech paint jobs (which are nice, both yours and the camospec ones) but the actual mini designs which i find ugly. you've posted the only ones other than the madcat that i like (namely the ones that were macross designs and NOT created by FASA/battletech originally). i'm not actively trying to dislike the game (i've given it two separate tries in two separate decades and absolutely loved playing the mechwarrior 1 and 2 PC games as a kid) but the minis and rules have stayed *roughly* the same over that 20 year time span. i think they'd do better in attracting new players by included some of the prepainted plastic designs which seem like more modern designs from a quick look on google images... but then they'd risk alienating those who have stuck with them over the years. it's a double edged sword and no one knows which method would be more successful over the long term. catalyst have chosen the safe route (catering to existing players) much like palladium books does with their rpgs.

The designs actually are evolving. If you look through the newer Technical Readouts, like 3085 for instance, you see that the aesthetic is sort of moving in that direction (though some clicky tech stuff is pretty ridiculous, like designs with exposed ammo belts, horrible idea...). The reason these designs that come in the box are still the same, is because during that time period (3025) the technology was simpler, and thus easier for a new player to learn the game with. IWM also does make lance packs with newer mechs that have pretty paint jobs on the covers, though these go for about $40, which is steep for a new player and you only get 4 mechs.

@Warboss: then you're having a completely seperate argument. There's no arguing against personal preferance, beauty and eyes and beholders and all that jazz. If you don't like the actual designs of this line of giant space robots then you don't like the designs, and there's plenty of other giant space robot games that should better suit your preferred aesthetics. But, you're arguing your opinion as fact instead of opinion when you say "that stink of a turd design", when the miniature that follows that design is actually not that bad, and the paint on it is prety darn nice. The design is neither here nor there, we're discussing how well the models follow that design and my point was that while the miniatures aren't that great, the models can look passable with a little love.

What you just described as the direction Btech should go is exactly what they already did with Mechwarrior: Dark Ages that wizkids made. They redesigned a lot of the mechs and vehicles for a more modern, often anime-inspired look, the models were prepainted just like you said, and the game was heavily streamlined to play much, much faster. And some of the new desings were awesomely cool (insert an IMHO here). It worked, it was pretty popular especially in some gaming circles, but it was a differant game entirely.

Which is exactly where this intro set comes into play. There is a reason the website is called classicbatletech.com, it was named that after the prepainted line came out becuase a lot of the older players still enjoyed the original game as it originally existed. It would be like GW (or actually, licensing it off and another company) rereleasing the old Rogue Trader. Some people would love it, some would complain that the rules were clunky and the designs outdated and should be modernized, but thats not what Rogue Trader was. They released new editions of 40k, with newer models and streamlined rules. But it's not the same game. Nor is it meant to be. Nor is classic battletech meant to be mechwarrior: DA either.

So is Battletech a good game and more importantly a good set? I argue yes, not becuase I like the game (I obviously do) but based on the numbers of sets I have seen people buy, seen people try out, and seen people stick with and continue to play and enjoy. I personally thought mechwarrior: DA was a terrible game, but enough people played it and had fun with it that I can't really say it was a bad game, just not a game i enjoyed playing.

a much better reasoned post than the last and i agree with most of your points (the mini design i posted IS a turd though.. ). the thing for me is that i WANT to like battletech as i do have some nostalgia for it (specifically the novels and pc games on floppy discs!) but each new version of it just feels to this particular outsider as more of the same stuff that i didn't like in the first place. i keep hoping for a meaningful change to the tabletop minis game but i agree that the change i'm looking for would cease any claim to still be "classic" btech.