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.

Is there a more specific question you could ask?

Besides both being Sci Fi and both being relatively popular, there really isn't a lot that is similar between the two.

Universe: They both have very extensive and well developed universes and backgrounds...
1) Battletech is set in the years 2439 (I use this year because it's the year in which the first Battlemech, the Mackie, entered combat) to 3138+ (where the Mechwarrior Dark Age stories have so far gone up to), while 40K is set, well, around the year 40,000 plus or minus a thousand years or two (pretty much starting around the Horus Heresy up to "now", whatever date that might be). You should know that the Battletech universe does progress significantly faster compared to the 40K universe.
2) Battletech has no aliens nor demons, where 40K is full of them.
3) Battletech has much less of a gothic and draconian background and universe compared to 40K, at least from the human background. Though Battletech does range from a very "junkyard" medieval feel to a very clean, polished, and sophisticated "future" feel depending on the time period and the unit involved.
4) And...of course, Battletech has a focus on 'mech combat (20-100 ton humanoid fighting machines piloted by a single human...though there are exceptions in both mass and shape), whereas 40K has a focus on infantry. There are stories in Battletech that focus on infantry and armor units, but that is relatively rare, just as there are stories in 40K about Titan operators and armor units which are relatively rare compared to stories about infantry.

Game:
1) By virtue of both sides getting access to pretty much the same equipment and the game's simultaneous turn sequence, Battletech is a very balanced game, whereas 40K...well...let's just say that there are balance issues with 40K and leave it at that.
2) Battletech started out as a hex based board game, but has since evolved also into a miniature game like 40K. It's up to the individual player preference which style they prefer.
3) Battletech games tend to have fewer units compared to 40K. It's common for Battletech games to consist only of just a handful of units for both sides, whereas 40K tends to require 50+ miniatures (much more for horde style armies) for the standard game. In fact, company level actions in Battletech (12 'mechs or more) tend to be pretty rare and take quite a long time to play. And depending on the players involved, Battletech games may include vehicles, infantry, and aerospace assets, depending on how complex the players want their games to be.
4) Battletech breaks it's rules into levels, with level 1 rules being the simplest and most straight forward and level 3 rules being very detailed and involving more technical aspects, which allows, again, for the players to determine the complexity of their games. 40K has one rule set and few optional rules, which can be good for players meeting for random pick up games.
5) Battletech does include record keeping, to keep track of the damage, ammunition, and heat levels of your units, while 40K has very little record keeping.
6) Battletech has more of an RPG style feel, especially if you are playing in a campaign, as there are rules that allow your pilots to increase their skills over time, whereas 40K tends to be played as on-off games. Moreover, Battletech campaigns allow for players to carry over 'mech damage and other statuses from one game to the next, which can give the games a lot more continuity.

Miniatures:
1) My opinion is that 40K has better quality miniatures compared to Battletech...but GW has much larger resources than Iron Wind Metal has, as well.
2) Battletech miniatures are a much smaller scale (6mm) than 40K's 28mm scale, which actually makes them easier to paint and faster to get to table top standard. But this also makes 40K miniatures a better canvas for modelers who wish to really pull off beautiful paint jobs. I'm not saying that you can't do a great job painting Battletech miniatures...I'm just saying that there are more details that you can pick out due to 40K's larger scale.

So if I got this right Battletech is more in depth than 40k. Also what would be a good way to start it (I like the clans).
-dragonfire

Well, I didn't say that. They are both pretty "in depth" considering that they are both over 20 years old and have a lot of background published for them. They just have a different feel from each other...and there's no reason why you cannot like both.

As Mattlov has said, a good way to start is to buy the Introductory Box Set. And yes, it comes with 24 'mechs. Total Warfare, IMHO, is a good purchase, along with the Starterbook: Sword and Dragon. That book gives a good background for two Inner Sphere units, the Mckinnon's Raiders and Sorenson's Sabres, and rules for a campaign involving the two units. Best of all, to use the Starterbook, all you really need is the Introductory Box Set (though you will have to proxy a few 'mechs, but all the rules are there).

I agree with Mattlov that playing Inner Sphere units first will give you a good handle on the game, as the Clan rules and Clan technology are built on Inner Sphere rules and technology. Also, as Ghaz as pointed out, it is true that Clans vs Inner Sphere games can be unbalanced.

If you are interested in some information for the Introductory Box Set, go here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/208138.page to read my post examining the use of Heroscape Tiles for use in Battletech games. In the thread somewhere, I give a mini-review of the Introductory Box Set, and all the minis shown are figures I painted myself from the Introductory Box Set, if you want a feel about the quality of the minis.

As for Heavy Gear...I don't play the miniatures game, so I have no input. Though I did enjoy the PC game that came out a while ago, which introduced me to the universe.

The Hunchback is a close-ranged brawler, with the ability to put great big holes in its opponents thanks to that massive AC/20. It works well in areas with heavy terrain or cities, which limit ranged combat and allow the Hunchback to engage in relatively close proximity. Or use it with 'mechs that can support it as it closes in on the enemy.

Forming a lance...woo...so many factors to take into account.

1) Is the lance part of a larger unit, such as a company? Typical Inner Sphere organization tends to form lances into units with particular functions, such as Recon, or Pursuit, or Fire, etc., including standard "Light", "Medium", "Heavy", and "Assault" lances. Therefore, members of a lance tend to have similar weight and speed, and either similar or complimentary functions. A fairly typical arrangement in a company is that of a Command Lance (consisting of Heavies and Mediums), a Medium Lance (consisting of Mediums), and a Recon Lance (consisting of fast 'mechs).

2) How fluffy do you want to be? Based on the background, certain 'mechs are more common in certain armies. For instance, the Commando and Zeus are generally regarded as 'mechs from the Lyran Commonwealth (House Steiner), while the Vindicator and Catapult are generally regarded as 'mechs from the Capellan Confederation (House Liao). How strict you want to stick to this is up to you, of course.

A good example of a lance using the above from 'mechs from the box set would be:

Grasshopper
Jagermech
Dervish
Enforcer

which could be a lance representative of the Federated Suns (House Davion).

Or:

Quickdraw
Dragon
Hunchback
Trebuchet

which could be a lance representative of the Draconis Combine (House Kurita).

Then there are the mercernary units...

Of course, these are your miniatures, so you can do whatever you want.

I think the Cyclops backs up the Atlas well in terms of their armaments. Not to mention that both, according to fluff, are typical as 'mechs piloted by officers and commanders, and the Cyclops is touted (by fluff) to have superior communications abilities.

Like I mentioned and H.B.M.C. has explicitly pointed out, lancemates should have similar or at least complimentary 'mechs.

I think that as Recon/Pursuit lances tend to go, a Cicada, a Spider, and a Jenner work well together. It's too bad they don't include a Mongoose in the box set, as I think it would round out the group well. But an Assassin works here, too. H.B.M.C. detailed the benefits of the Spider well...though I have to chime in for the Jenner...it's not as durable, since it's Medium Lasers are arm mounted and it carries ammunition (death sentence pretty much if the ammo gets hit)...but boy does it pack a close ranged punch...but then, I'm biased since I like the look of the 'mech, as well.

As for which 'mechs belong to which house (and which variant each house tends to field), you can find that information in the various Techinical Readouts, Sourcebooks, and Field Manuals that are published. But as a player, I think you have a good deal of flexibility...since you can always claim that your Kuritan company salvaged a Jagermech from fighting the Federated Suns...or that it got a Vindicator as part of a mutual arms trade with the Capellan Confederation. There are rough guidelines...but it won't stop you from fielding a few uncommon 'mechs in your force. Moreover, according to fluff, planets are changing hands throughout the various wars, and, as an example, the Cataphract, a design common to House Liao, is now common to House Davion, as House Davion took the planet that the Cataphract is manufactured from in a recent war.

Basically, what I am saying is that this is YOUR army...and if you like a 'mech and want to field it, then by all means, do so. Afterall, it's YOUR enjoyment of the game that's important.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Big news!!!

Frick-Ing-Awe-Some!

Does this mean they will bring back the minis? OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG.

I'm actually surprised at how happy this news makes me feel. I almost don't feel cynical at the moment.

H.B.M.C. wrote:And the good news is Catalyst is about to reveal their new boxed sets - the 25th Anniversary box, which should come with new plastics of all the unseens, and the Clan box, which comes with 15 of the original 16 invasion-era Omni-Mechs.

Those two boxes combined with the standard Intro Box will give you enough 'Mechs to last a long, long time.

NEW PLASTICS OF THE UNSEEN?!?!

OMG.

Catalyst is bringing Happy back.

palaeomerus wrote:Does anyone know if Heroscape tiles work well for Battletech hexes?

How many of the big sets would you need to buy for a decent table map?

I do an analysis of Heroscape Tiles for use in Battletech games here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/208138.page

That sucks.

At least we'll get the Scorpion, Goliath, Wolverine, Shadowhawk, Griffin, Thunderbolt, Battlemaster, Ostscout, and Ostol back. And those IIC Clan 'mechs.

I'm still looking forward to a few of these unseen making their way into my collection.