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.

NecronLord3 wrote:

Mattlov wrote:The problem with your reasoning is simple: Equal point value units in GW games aren't even either.

BV is actually more balanced that 40K points value, beccause there is consistency in Battletech. GW doesn't have balance, even amongst their own armies.

If I take two 5000 BV forces and relatively equal numbers, it will be an even fight. You can't say that of GW games unless you take the forces from the same army book or codex.

Ummm. No it is quite the opposite. With the exception of outdated codexes 40k is much more balanced than CBT could ever hope to be. Success in 40k is generally at the hands of the player/army builder.

Then you sir, need to work on you Battletech tactics more than complain about a balancing system.

In a properly designed, BV balanced game of Battletech, each side has the same side of winning. It comes down to tactics and luck. Scenario modifications or extremely favorable terrain can swing the general chances to one side or the other. Battletech assumes relatively even terrain on mapsheets because it is designed that way.

There is only one balance in GW games: Points. Terrain has a gigantic influence because the players choose where it goes. You can give yourself a huge advantage with terrain placement. GW games also have special characters, which are often more powerful than points value might indicate. Then throw in the arbitrary luck of the dice and a GW game can almost be decided before the first turn.

If GW games are so balanced, why can't ANY list win any tournament? Why are there "tournament builds" that are more powerful than other lists of the same points? Because GW is NOT balanced, and never has been. Never will be.

Battletech's system is balanced, since there are FAR fewer variables. A Battlemaster 1G is the same, no matter what for it's base BV. But yet, in codices of the SAME EQUIPMENT GW doesn't have the same points cost. Instead, nebulous modifiers are added for special rules. Here's an example, Space Marine Terminators with Storm Bolter and Power Fist:

Generic: 40 Points
Dark Angels: 43 Points
Black Templar: 40 Points
Blood Angel: 40 Points
Space Wolf: 43 Points

All have the same stat line. The Black Templar, Dark Angel, Blood Angel, and Space Wolf all have associated special rules above and beyond the "Generic" Terminator. But yet two of those types cost the same amount as a "generic" version. How exactly is that balanced?
Additionally, according to GW, the ability for a Dark Angel Terminator to Deep Strike on the first turn is worth the same amount as a Wolf Guard being able to join another squad and have Acute Senses, while having the ability to have Combat Squads and ATSKNF, which the Deathwing Terminator does NOT have.
The Blood Angel neither gains or loses point for potentially being dragged into the Death Company. So POSSIBLY getting Furious Charge and Fearless is worth the same as having ATSKNF.

No, GW is not balanced. Battletech can be balanced, but GW has too much of a random element and poor (if any) balance between different Codices and Army Books. I can make sure a Battletech game is balanced and fair. GW games cannot make that claim.

I thought the BV system had some serious holes with mechs that were generally under performers. Things such as a Jagermech being too many points for its actual usefulness. Is this actually not the case?

Endgame wrote:I thought the BV system had some serious holes with mechs that were generally under performers. Things such as a Jagermech being too many points for its actual usefulness. Is this actually not the case?

BV goes straight off of what the mech is made of...just like adding up the cost of parts to build something. An engine of XXX size costs XXX, a leg actuator costs XX, etc. Its very fair and even, as opposed to GW type points where they are almost randomly assigned a value, with little consistency.

However, you are right, some mechs just dont perform to their value...but this is true of real machines. How many cars just dont seem to perform up to their specs? They look good on paper, but after you drive it you say "meh, theres no way Im paying XXX for that thing, its a pig".

Im not sure if the BT designers purposely make some dogs, or if it just happened in the process of throwing together a set of specs to go with the artwork. Either way it seems to reflect reality very well.

M4M has it about right.

And a JagerMech can easily be worth it's BV (going by your example). It is a specialized machine, designed to harass at range, and provide additional damage. It isn't supposed to brawl or even get in close.

But say you have a lance of a Battlemaster, JagerMech, Hunchback and Whitworth. The Beemer and Hunchie go forward, while the other two hang back and exploit damage. Find a hill to give a good field of fire, and just keep the guns blazing.

The objective would be to have some decent shot groupings. The Hunchie and Beemer tear open holes with the big guns, and the other two exploit them. Think of using a JagerMech like a 65 ton SRM launcher. The objective is to find damage and create critical hit chances. It just has a lot better range than the average SRM launcher. In that role, the Jager can easily be worth it's BV in a fight.

By pairing it with the Whitworth, that gives a total of 5 medium lasers to bring to bear if someone gets close. Great damage? No, but not something a light little backstabber will want to face.

BV isnt really balanced, its not even balanced by components as the weapons cost is not as clearly thought out as it looks.

This is thus compounded when you pay for your poor components at less than fair prices in BV.

the big trouble is that as you get a component based BV value and some elements of that are fair people assumed Bv is fair, so they can take optimal mechs and say, I have adhered to BV, thus my unit is fair.

When balancing on an inherently unfair system like tonnage there is a lot of give and take. If you take 200tons of optimal mechs (whatever that means) your opponent can point out that you are being unreasonable. Mimnimaxing is frowned upon in old schoo, battletech, you are supposed to cionsider all mechsd as precious wunderwaffe and think about what mechs your faction most likely has and story them up.

With a lose system of tonnage based limit your unit becomes storied and balanced by negotiation.

Once you start adding points is when you start adding minimaxers. People know better than to make a 200pt lance of the same four optimised kustom 50 tonners, but if they worked out to the Bv limit they have excuse to say why cant I have this, you can take something else.

BV was a necessary mistake in my opinuion, Battltect was orginally a minitures/board wargame and by their nature they were not intended to be absolutely balanced all the time, you made do wirth what you had, especially in historicals. Battletech had the air of historical wargaming, it is only later that it mimiced competetive SF/fantasy wargaming.

Heres another point of view...sure balanced games are great and all, but if you really want to get down to it they are quite unrealistic.

How many battles through history started with balanced forces?

As someone already stated the big deciding factor in a balanced game is luck of the dice rolls.

Sometimes I like to set games up with a scenario. Fun part is...neither side knows the others objective.

Sometimes its pretty simply where one side is obviously a defender, and the other the attacker...only the defender doesnt know what exactly the attackers mission is...take an objective, destroy a certain unit, etc. You can make it as simple or complex as you want.








Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:BV isnt really balanced...competetive SF/fantasy wargaming.

Some of the older books actually had tables you would roll on to choose the mechs you got. Depending on the scenario you would roll X number of times on the light, med, hvy, assault tables and take what you got. The tables were divided into faction and had the commonly used mechs for that faction.

Orlanth wrote:in old schoo, battletech, you are supposed to cionsider all mechsd as precious wunderwaffe and think about what mechs your faction most likely has and story them up.

Really old school Battletech (when I started), all the houses had the same mechs.

skyth wrote:

Orlanth wrote:in old schoo, battletech, you are supposed to cionsider all mechsd as precious wunderwaffe and think about what mechs your faction most likely has and story them up.

Really old school Battletech (when I started), all the houses had the same mechs.

Ye they do, but the mechs were made in different factories in diffeent successor states.

So Kurita always made Panthers and Dragons, Liao Vindicators right from the 3025 era. Because of low production and maximised emphasis on scrounging anything remotely technical all the designs proliferated widely.

Actually, I was talking about before there were Panthers, Dragons, and Vindicators.

skyth wrote:Actually, I was talking about before there were Panthers, Dragons, and Vindicators.

Ah, back in the start when the only mechs were the anime rip offs...marauder, warhammer, etc.

Mad4Minis wrote:

skyth wrote:Actually, I was talking about before there were Panthers, Dragons, and Vindicators.

Ah, back in the start when the only mechs were the anime rip offs...marauder, warhammer, etc.

Sigh. Misinformation strikes again.

They weren't ripped off. At the time, the owners of the game thought they were legitimately buying the rights to use those images. It was not discovered until later that the person selling those rights did not actually have the proper authority to do so.

Mattlov wrote:

Mad4Minis wrote:

skyth wrote:Actually, I was talking about before there were Panthers, Dragons, and Vindicators.

Ah, back in the start when the only mechs were the anime rip offs...marauder, warhammer, etc.

Sigh. Misinformation strikes again.

They weren't ripped off. At the time, the owners of the game thought they were legitimately buying the rights to use those images. It was not discovered until later that the person selling those rights did not actually have the proper authority to do so.

I actually meant rip-off as in direct use, not a "kinda looks like". I knew there was some sort of dispute over them supposedly being able to use them, didnt know they had bought them from a unauthorized seller. I thought it was more of a verbal thing that got rescinded when the game got popular. Either way its still a damned shame and a loss to all the players/fans.

skyth wrote:Actually, I was talking about before there were Panthers, Dragons, and Vindicators.

You have Battledroids?

3025 came out with the name change, all the mechs except the Behemoth were ported into it.

No. I was just talking about the first Battletech boxed set. The one with only one type of autocannon in it.

I have a Copy of both BattleDroids and CritterTech

Tonnage, its always worked for me, and ive been playing over 20 years. BV just doesnt cut it.

NecronLord3 wrote:You're wrong, there are quite a few expressing interest in a system like this on the CBT site already.

Yeah, you're always going to find a few people who will embrace any crazy idea you can put forth. CBT as a whole is never going to go to a WH40K style of force building and if you're honest about it you know it. One of the biggest draws about CBT is how free form it is. You start locking people up in ever tighter "balancing" restrictions and a lot of the interest in the game goes away.

The whole point of a points system is that 1 game point should equal another single game point. Meaning that all things equal, 500 points should beat 500 points 50% of the time.

There is no game system in the world where you can grab units at random up to a point value and expect to beat someone who has taken the time to carefully choose their units. There isn't one. Point systems exist to balance games between players who understand the rules, how to use their units to best effect, and take the time to assemble a group of units who compliment one another and the player's play style. In that respect the BV system does very well. The level you are taking it to is so dumbed down that NO balancing system in the world works at that level.

A Hellion is going to lose every time(with the exception of lucky head shots or critical slots which the Hellion would have to achieve 2 for the former and 3 for the later), without fail no matter what; it's been proven.

See the above, if you're fighting a 95 ton assault mech in a 25 ton light mech no amount of points balance will save you because you're playing like an idiot. Used appropriately the Hellion's combination of speed and accurate but well chosen weapons allow it to pick its fights at will, hack apart support units and generally make a horrible nuisance of itself. Speedy light mechs can have an effect on a game far greater than their simple tonnage would suggest if you use them appropriately. If you trot them out to take on an assault mech one on one you deserve what you get.

The BV system balances units pretty well when they are used appropriately.

You aren't going to find two unbalanced units in 40k with a similar comparison. What the makers of 40k do is they have a calculation for each point value in the game and they use play testing to balance the points to make the game as balanced as possible.

...do you actually play 40K? The game where units with the same stat lines have different costs in different codices? Better yet, the units that have the same cost but radically differing abilities such as termies. Seriously? The next time you play test your own theory. Roll the dice and pick a codex at random. Pick units from it at random up to the point value of the game. Better yet let your opponent do it all from picking the codex to your list. Now play him. He will hand you your ass every single game. The mythical balance you attribute to 40K doesn't exist. 40K has balance issues even when the two people playing are equally skilled, take just as much time crafting their lists, and even thrown out the usual terrain issues. I like 40K, trying to pretend that it's a paragon of balance though is just ridiculous.

Battletech on the other hand has a calculation for each unit and whatever that comes out to be(which is basically impossible for you to figure out yourself) is the BV, no balancing, just math. Changes in pilot skill and the force sizes is even calculated out.

Because in CBT a clan ERPPC is an ERPPC regardless of what it's mounted on. It's damage doesn't magically change because a Jade Falcon is using it instead of a Ghost Bear. Wolves don't get special rules for it that Diamond Sharks don't. It's a clan ERPPC. Same thing with movement. No one gets special rules, modifiers, or different effects based off faction. Having a movement of 7/11/7 is the same across the game. Not inventing new special rules for every faction allows you to reduce the balance calculations to just math. And even if the system isn't perfect EVERYONE uses the same formulas.

Taking out any tactical advantage you should be able to achieve by playing the game.

The amount of just wrong in that sentence is amazing.
1) You don't gain tactical advantage in the points balancing. In fact isn't that what you've been arguing in this thread that an equally point balanced game should give no one the advantage? So you're wrong and a hypocrite in the same fifteen words.
2) You're talking about gaming the system. If you are getting a tactical advantage in the points balancing it's because you're gaming the system so your statement is a wonderful endorsement of the BV system. Instead of getting ahead when you pick your force, you've gotta play the actual game instead of trying to win it in force allocation.

However, it just doesn't work the BV system is still broken and I'm not the first to suggest or prove that fact.

BV has issues, certainly. I don't think anyone is going to actually argue that the BV system is perfect. The BV system isn't broken though and you have proven only that you probably don't play 40K, or at least pay zero attention to it when you do. The BV system does very well in scenarios where the only goal is to blow the gak out of each other. The moment you start introducing scenarios like any scenario the designer has to take that into account and tweak allocated BV to each side. BV works great for canon units. You only start to really see ridiculous BV abuse when you bring custom units into the game because they can be designed to abuse it.

The BV system has its issues and there is always reason to keep working on it and tweaking it. However like any balancing system it relies on both players knowing the rules, knowing how to use each unit effectively, and building a list suited to their goals and playstyle. Even then, there's an element of skill and an element of luck.

But hey, if that's asking too much I do know of a perfectly balanced game out there that elements the random element.
Enjoy

Tyyr wrote:
There is no game system in the world where you can grab units at random up to a point value and expect to beat someone who has taken the time to carefully choose their units. There isn't one. Point systems exist to balance games between players who understand the rules, how to use their units to best effect, and take the time to assemble a group of units who compliment one another and the player's play style. In that respect the BV system does very well. The level you are taking it to is so dumbed down that NO balancing system in the world works at that level.

I can flip random Warmachine cards to build a 50 point list and still beat players with preconstructed lists. Granted, you can specifically build a 50 point list that is nearly impossible to win with so its not a perfect system either, but thats a little different than what you proposed.

See the above, if you're fighting a 95 ton assault mech in a 25 ton light mech no amount of points balance will save you because you're playing like an idiot. Used appropriately the Hellion's combination of speed and accurate but well chosen weapons allow it to pick its fights at will, hack apart support units and generally make a horrible nuisance of itself. Speedy light mechs can have an effect on a game far greater than their simple tonnage would suggest if you use them appropriately. If you trot them out to take on an assault mech one on one you deserve what you get.

The BV system balances units pretty well when they are used appropriately.

So what your saying is that Tonnage should also be applied as a level of balance beyond BV?

Because in CBT a clan ERPPC is an ERPPC regardless of what it's mounted on. It's damage doesn't magically change because a Jade Falcon is using it instead of a Ghost Bear. Wolves don't get special rules for it that Diamond Sharks don't. It's a clan ERPPC. Same thing with movement. No one gets special rules, modifiers, or different effects based off faction. Having a movement of 7/11/7 is the same across the game. Not inventing new special rules for every faction allows you to reduce the balance calculations to just math. And even if the system isn't perfect EVERYONE uses the same formulas.

The problem with just giving a value to a Clan ERPPC doesn't help balance for other parts of the design. A Warhawk with 4 ERPPCs, a targeting computer and a LRM 10 gets more use out of those 4 ERPPCs than even 2 Ice Ferrets do, and 2 Ice Ferrets are higher BV and Tonnage. Only the C-Bill comparison between the two puts the advantage on the Warhawk's side.

Granted, I don't have much experience with BV2, but in my days of playing with BV1 we found plenty of holes in the system without even resorting to custom builds. For example, I'm not sure you can come up with a decent 5,500 point 3025 IS list to reliably take on a pair of Timberwolves.

Sure I can. 5500 BV to take out a pair of base Timber Wolves with 4/5 pilots?

That would be easier in BV1 over BV2, actually. BV1 had a lower cost multiplier for better pilots. But I could still do it pretty easily if it is just "beat this with 5500 BV."

SE T-bolt, 3 K Wolverines, and a H7 helicopter.

Though, choices actually depend a lot on the terrain.

Even tonnage is not a great balance system when technology is uneven.

Two of my friends challenged my brother and I with 400 tons of 3025 IS versus 100 tons of Clan. My brother and I were the Clanners. We developed a 45 ton Clan Omni that moved 7/11/7 and had a large pulse laser with a targeting computer. It could thus easily jump and shoot with an extra +4 to hit. My friends, Dave and Jeff, too a half dozen assaults and heavies with infantry. My brother and I each had the custom 45-tonner (called a Troubleshooter) and a point of Elementals.

It was a slaughter. The IS 'Mechs simply couldn't hit us while we hit every time. We kept our distance and jumped into woods, water, and behind cover to add to the difficulty. My brother got an instant head kill early on and later a torso crit to end two 'Mechs and I severely humiliated an Awesome. It took a while to play but my friends gave up. My Troubleshooter had taken a few minor hits but my brother's 'Mech was untouched and they were down to half their force. It was no contest.

With IS now having targeting computers and better weapons, it might prove even the odds, but tonnage simply doesn't cut it when weapons and tech play such a great part.

40K is by no means perfect. I've played Land Raiders in games where once I take out my opponent's lascannons or other anti-vehicle weapons, they simply give up because no matter how many points they have left, they can't take out a 14 armour rating vehicle. They may have 1200 points left on the table, but nothing that will touch my 250-point Land Raider which will simply run amok on the battlefield.

skyth wrote:SE T-bolt, 3 K Wolverines, and a H7 helicopter.

Though, choices actually depend a lot on the terrain.

Agreed on the terrain. A really dense board would remove a lot of the advantage the Timber Wolves would have.

As for the mech selection, that seems to be a good example of where the BV system fails. The listed variants are (IMO) better that the stock models for a very small increase to BV. If I were going to try it, Id probably go with something like Awesome, Stalker, Crusader, & Whitworth, but would probably end up getting out maneuvered and destroyed.

I had thought of heavies first (My favorite) then I realized that the ER larges the Timber Wolves have outrange anything the IS forces have and they have the speed advantage to keep thier distance. An Awesome would generally be chewed up and kept out of range and irrelevant.

skyth wrote:I had thought of heavies first (My favorite) then I realized that the ER larges the Timber Wolves have outrange anything the IS forces have and they have the speed advantage to keep thier distance. An Awesome would generally be chewed up and kept out of range and irrelevant.

It would be a delicate balancing act for the Timber Wolves. If they stay far enough out to only shoot the ER Larges, they can't fire their own LRMs but I can still advance and fire my LRMs. If they close to fire their LRMs, the Awesome will be in range to run and fire its PPCs.

The alternative would be to run something like Awesome, 2x Archers, & a Whitworth (haven't checked the points). That should provide more of a deterrent to just sitting at max ER LL range, but then the Timber wolves just advance into LRM range and chew apart the IS force.

Another option would be to run Stalker, Marauder, 2x Griffins -- still a decent amount of LRMs and it can close into PPC range fairly easily. The only problem is the Griffins become big targets and get shredded in a couple of volleys.

Witht he awesome having a 3/5 movement, and the Timber wolves having a 5/8, I don't see it being a factor unless the Clan player allows it to. Even if the Clan player loses the initiative, they will still be able to make the distance as long as possible.

This also depends on the terrain, and how big of a map we are playing on. If the field is open enough and big enough, the IS force will need to have mobility to get into range unless the Clan player wants to close the distance.

skyth wrote:Witht he awesome having a 3/5 movement, and the Timber wolves having a 5/8, I don't see it being a factor unless the Clan player allows it to. Even if the Clan player loses the initiative, they will still be able to make the distance as long as possible.

This also depends on the terrain, and how big of a map we are playing on. If the field is open enough and big enough, the IS force will need to have mobility to get into range unless the Clan player wants to close the distance.

True, but it depends on the Timber Wolves staying in ER Large Range only. If they close to fire the LRMs (Range 21) the awesome will be able to advance into PPC range (range 18). If they keep backing up (playing on a 100% open table) and stay out of PPC range (and thus out of their own LRM range) they are trading fire with 4 ER large lasers against 4 LRM 10s and 2 LRM 15s. Still advantage Clans, but its not terrible. If there is some lucky missile fire that happens to damage a leg one one of the Timber Wolves, things will get ugly for the clan side really quickly.

The moral of the story is, though, that even though the BVs are the same between the sides, the scales are tipped fairly heavily to the Clan Side.

For what it's worth...The timber wolves were mostly untouched. Granted, this is on big, open map against the computer.

Survivors are:
Timber Wolf Prime (Skyth)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5]
Kills : 2

Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Skyth)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5]
Kills : 3


Graveyard contains:
Whitworth WTH-1 (computer)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 2 hit(s) <ko> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Skyth)

Awesome AWS-8Q (computer)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime (Skyth)

MechWarrior Unnamed (computer)
Gunnery Skill : Unnamed [4] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime (Skyth)

MechWarrior Unnamed (computer)
Gunnery Skill : Unnamed [4] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Skyth)


The following utterly destroyed units are not available for salvage:
Stalker STK-3F (computer)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Skyth)

Crusader CRD-3R (computer)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by pilot error.

Heh, thats awesome. So much for my idea. Did yours work out any better?

I didn't try mine.

Granted, the scenario was extremely biased towards the Timber Wolves. First off, the map was completely open. Second, the bot was running the IS force. I split the Timber Wolves with one going towards the north side of the map, and the other going towards the south side. This somewhat paralyzed the bot with indecision, and allowed me to get a couple back shots in. If the bot had pressed me agressively, I don't think I would have gotten away as (mostly) scott free as I did.

In a similar scenario, I don't think my force would beat the T-wolves either. Granted, I think mine would do more damage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Did a bit more damage. This was done on a regular map with me playing both sides. The speed of the IS force made the clan force have to engage. Couple lucky shots by the clan force at the beginning of the battle made it almost a foregone conclusion. At least did a little critical damage to the clans.

Survivors are:
Timber Wolf Prime (Clan)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 1 hit(s) )
Kills : 3

Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Clan)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 1 hit(s) )
Kills : 2


Graveyard contains:
Wolverine WVR-6K (IS)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime (Clan)

Wolverine WVR-6K #2 (IS)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5]
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime (Clan)

Wolverine WVR-6K #3 (IS)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by pilot error.

MechWarrior Unnamed (IS)
Gunnery Skill : Unnamed [4] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime (Clan)


The following utterly destroyed units are not available for salvage:
Warrior Attack Helicopter H-7 (IS)
Driver : Unnamed [4/5]
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Clan)

Thunderbolt TDR-5SE (IS)
Pilot : Unnamed [4/5] ( 6 hit(s) <dead> )
Kills : 0
Destroyed by Timber Wolf Prime #2 (Clan)

For the IS to take on the Clans they need their own technological advantage rather than just numbers.

The new BattleMech Stealth Armor, developed by the Capellan Confederation, is one way to even the odds.

Give IS heavy 'Mechs stealth armor, XL engines, speed 5/8/5, Endo Steel skeletons, targeting computers, and decent weapons (all now available for the IS in the Tech Manual) and that will take away most of the Clan advantage at long range, which has always been the killer.