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.

 adamsouza wrote:
Okay, what is the deal with Urbanmech love? BATTLETECH: URBANMECH COMPANY BOX

It's like infantry. One dude with a rifle is helpless before a 'mech unless he has plot armor. A battalion can wreck a mech in one go.

Likewise, one UrbanMech is pretty useless. Twelve can dominate the whole area in range of their AC/10s, especially in dense terrain. You need significant long-range firepower to root out a company of UrbanMechs.

And let's face it. There are a lot of bad 'Mechs in BattleTech. As one of (if not THE) worst of the lot, it becomes a challenge to make good use of them in the actual game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 adamsouza wrote:


It's the Tie FIghter of Battletech?

That's a good way to look at it... at least from a PC's point of view. The OPFOR has to cover large numbers of targets simultaneously, while you are only attacking one. Having a cheap company of relatively static defenders allows you to economize, and reinforce the point of actual attack with mobile reserves. So if the PCs attack in, say, two lances or a company, a company of Urbies backed up by a lance of fast heavies is a reasonable OPFOR. They probably outclass all the defenders individually, but are outnumbered. This makes the victory all the more meaningful.

And if the OPFOR wins, well, winning with UrbanMechs is pretty special too.

 Pointman wrote:
each one carrying a nuclear reactor and mechwarrior inside don't sound cheap.

AC/10's in carriages would probably last longer too if hidden in ambush.

To a point. A platoon of infantry can man 2 AC-10s, but after they take 28 points of damage the platoon is gone. Odds are an UrbanMech will still be shooting after 28 points of damage. Where the platoon of infantry is superior is concealability...but you're wasting a lot of the longer range of the AC-10 if you wait to shoot until point-blank range. Better to go with a pair of AC-20s under those circumstances.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

Mercenaries Box Set (GenCon)
1 - 2x Maxim (Size 2, Striker, 16"h)
2 - 2x Galleon (Size 1, Scout, 12"t)
2x Inner Sphere Standard Battle Armor (Ambusher, 6"j) - WolfNet Ep. 50 confirmed

Gotta love having 4 APCs, but only 2 units of Infantry...

When did the Galleon light tank get an infantry complement? Last I heard it was just 3 lasers with (relatively) high-speed tank treads.

 Charistoph wrote:

Vulcan wrote:
When did the Galleon light tank get an infantry complement? Last I heard it was just 3 lasers with (relatively) high-speed tank treads.

As noted earlier, I misremembered.

No biggie. I was just worried that I didn't remember it right...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And my point was that the post came from the BattleTech Forums, where Alpha Strike is as much BattleTech as Total War is and they would disagree with his opinion.

Don't know why you're calling it "Total War". That'd be like saying "Oh I play BattleMech Manual! Have you heard of that game?". It's the name of a book. Not the game.

BattleTech is BattleTech. AlphaStrike is a different game, and it is decidedly not BattleTech.

Yeah, it's a lot more like BattleForce than BattleTech. Same universe, different feel.

That doesn't make it a bad game, mind you. Just not the same as BattleTech.

 Charistoph wrote:

I guess you're one of those who don't think AeroTech or BattleSpace is Battletech, either. I'm sorry, but that's just not a platform I can join you with.

Depends on what you mean by 'is BattleTech". Are they part of the basic rules? No. Do they feature optional rules that allow them to be integrated into a game of BattleTech? Yes. Are they required to play a game of BattleTech? Not even slightly. So... context and POV make that question a matter of opinion.

BattleForce and Alpha Strike are separate games that CANNOT be integrated into a game of BattleTech. They are a different set of rules intended for a different purpose - larger scale combat in the BatlleTech universe. So they're part of the BT UNIVERSE, but not part of the BT GAME, yes?

I suppose that's the issue. When you say 'Is not BattleTech", do you mean 'not part of the BT universe', or 'not part of the game CALLED BattleTech'? The answer varies from there.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Out of all the 'Mechs coming in the new Kickstarter, and the few new ones we've had in the store exclusive packs, which ones would fit with ComStar forces?

I doubt they're going to do any more Level II boxes, so out of the 'Mechs we are getting elsewhere, what fits with ComStar?

In general? Star League era designs. Lots of stuff out of 2750, some tech refits out of 3050.

If you get us a 'mech list, we can probably help you with what armor would best complement it.

 Formosa wrote:
Good point.

Catapult C1 (the dual LRM 20 one)
Warhammer 6R
Wolverine
Locust

I have plenty of other mechs to use but this is the basis for the lance

So we're looking at 3025 then?

The LRM-20 version of the Catapult seems to be the C4 version. Heaven help it if someone gets close; 2 S. Lasers will struggle even against a Stinger or Hussar. Base model Warhammer works well; nicely balanced and versatile 'mech.

Which Wolverine and Locust variants?


Your base unit speed is 64 kph, so the vehicles should be at least that fast. C4 Catapult has the long-range fire covered reasonably well. Warhammer and Wolverine are decent brawlers. Locust is a bit light for a skirmisher, but it is what it is.

So are we looking at a combined arms company then? Mech lance, vehicle platoon, and infantry platoon?

The 'mech force will leave even jump and motorized infantry behind fairly quickly, so I'm guessing you're going to use foot infantry and some form of transport. This can go from little 10-ton APCs carrying a squad each, VTOLs (read: Helicopters), up to the 45-ton Goblin 'medium tank' (really an Infantry Fighting Vehicle for one squad) and the Maxim Heavy Hover Transport (one vehicle holding the full platoon).

For the armor... fast hovertanks can deliver impressive firepower and speed, but are pretty useless in any sort of close terrain. But they could be an impressive support squad to back up the Locust; stuff like the Saracen/Saladin/Scimitar trio, or the Drillison and Condor heavy hovertanks. For fast tanks with full off-road capabilities - i.e. tracks - you're pretty much stuck with the Galleon, and it's slower than the Locust and no better armed.

If you're looking for something to back up the main force, you have the Bulldog, Manticore, Rommel, and Patton heavy tanks. All are capable of keeping up with the Warhammer, all have decent(ish) armor, and bring varying degrees of firepower to the job.

Left up to my own devices? For fast armor I'd take a pair of Saracens (8/12, AC/20 assault guns) backed up by a single Saladin (same chassis; AC 5 and 2 SRM-2) and Scimitar (LRM-10 and 3 SRM-2). Nothing like distracting someone with a Locust and a pair of long-range hovertanks, and having a pair of Saracens sneak up behind them...

For heavy tanks, a pair of Pattons (the most heavily armored, 4/6, with LRM-5 and AC/10) backed up by a Rommel (same speed, LRM-5 and AC/20) and a Manticore (same speed, PPC, LRM-10, SRM-6, and ML). They'd tend to stick around the Warhammer and keep the lot between the enemy and the Catapult. Let the Locust and the Wolverine slide out to a flank when possible.

For the infantry transports I'd either go cheap and fast with 4 Ferret Scout VTOLs (15/23, virtually no armor, and a MG it has no business using); take a Maxim (8/12 and a bunch of light weapons for infantry support) and back it up with some support vehicles - MASH unit, Engineering vehicle, and Coolant truck; or go heavy with four Goblins - 3 with Large Lasers, one with SRMs.

Unless you expect to fight infantry on infantry, go SRM infantry all the way. If you expect to fight infantry, go MGs. But in general, let the vehicles and mechs fight infantry; use your infantry to ambush vehicles and light mechs. If your infantry is just there to provide site security for your techs and noncombatants, take cheap wheeled APCs (6/9, not much armor, 2 MGs) and rifles.

(And I'd go with the 1E Locust and the 6M Wolverine...)

Yeah, if I'm doing a combined arms company I prefer to use vehicles for indirect support. Hunter light tanks (5/8 tracked LRM 20) or Scimitars are good mobile support. For more defensive actions, LRM carriers can't be beat. SturmFeurs are nice too, and have decent armor, but lack speed to keep up with anything other than slow assault mechs.

The LRM-10s and PPCs on the Manticores are also useful in the fire support role too.

I agree on the preferred Catapult and Warhammer variants (especially the K1 Catapult), but the OP said he already had those locked down, so...

Wolverine 6M is just plain unfair. It has a decent chance of beating the Warhammer 6R, assuming equal pilot and player skills.

Locusts... well, if it gets hit it's pretty well screwed, so might as well go big firepower. YMMV.

The fun part of that trio of hovertanks is that they are variants on the same chassis; designed with interchangable parts for easy logistics. The Scimitar and Saladin especially are identical except for the weapon loadout. Saracens are a little different; a little more heavily armored (no turret) but an 8/12 AC/20 is well worth the effort.

As far as I can tell, the Rommel and Manticore have very similar armor (looking at the vehicle sheets). I'd have to dig out the relevant TROs to get exact armor numbers...

There's an artillery Rommel? I suppose one could mount a Thumper with minimal alterations; I don't think you can quite sneak in a Sniper without a major redesign and rebuild.

There is that; split the armor platoon and cover both the fast strike and heavy support roles. You wind up not doing either of them as well, but cover both options reasonably. The J.Edgars are nice little fast hovertanks, but again don't bring much more firepower than the Locust does itself. That's why I advocated for the slower but more heavily armed medium to heavy hovertanks.

And if you're going to go that route, a pair of Manticores are definitely the way to go. Similar weapons loadout to the Warhammer, but with LRMs to back up the Catapult.


What's your thought on infantry and APCs/IFVs at this level of unit building? Worth the effort to go big like the Goblin or Maxim? Fast VTOLs for maximum mobility? Or keep it cheap and use APCs? Is it worth accepting the loss of operational unit mobility to use motorized infantry and get access to assault guns?

 Rihgu wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Anyone else thinking that Battletech is about to explode in popularity ?

Today it was trending on Twitter alongside #GoWokeGoBroke, so if it's making those types mad it's about to go the opposite of broke, most likely.

Which has what to do with BattleTech?

I mean, sure, one could argue that BT has been 'woke' since the 1980s, what with Natasha Kerensky being a major MechWarrior character and all, and all the female and minorities in leadership roles... but it wasn't done for political/'earn brownie points with an incredibly outspoken segment of the population that doesn't even play the game" reasons; it was done because it made SENSE within the context of the story at the time.

EDIT: Ah, I see now. Good point.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Alternate buyers guide.

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/The_BattleTech_Compendium

The rules haven't changed, so pick up any old copy from ebay.

There are expansions, but 99.9% of the time you wont need them. The 0.1% of the time your mech stands in front of a train with five carriages moving at speed 7, there are lengthy calculations you can use to determine how destroyed the mech is and where the derailed train scatters.

That is not entirely true. While the basic ruleset is the same, many values and concepts have changed since then.

Just focusing on the rule changes for Mechs, and not including new tech:
Inclusion of Battle Value for a way of determining a unit's value.
The order in which over-number units are moved is changed.
TAG operates in its own Phase, and allows the spotter to shoot.
TAG affects all Indirect Fire, not just Arrow IV.
Dumping Ammo, Indirect Fire, Four-legged Mechs, and Flipping Arms are standard rules instead of Special Case Rules now.
GATOR is introduced to help keeping track of To-Hit (technically not a rule, but still a very good update).
Partial Cover is changed from a +3 to a +1, and instead of using the Punch Table, Leg Hits are ignored.
Target Movement Modifiers adjusted from a maximum 4+ at 10+ to a 6+ at 25+.
Physical Attacks use the Piloting Skill as a base.
Hatchet and Pushing Attacks provide a -1 To-Hit.
Kicking provide a -2 To-Hit.
Environmental Heat rule limiting the amount of Heat a 'Mech can receive from outside sources in a turn is added.
Infernos are changed to an absolute Heat increase based on the number that hit that turn instead of just adding to the duration it lasts.

And that's just for the 'Mechs. The other units, including the addition of Protomechs, have seen a lot more changes across the board. Most of them were for the better (at least for them).

But not one of those changes the basic mechanics, feel, or tactics of the game to any meaningful degree. The game itself still plays just like it did in 1985, and someone who hasn't played since then will not be troubled by these changes.

The new technology will probably overwhelm them, sure, but they can still play basic, level 1, 3025 technology just fine.

 Charistoph wrote:

Vulcan wrote:But not one of those changes the basic mechanics, feel, or tactics of the game to any meaningful degree. The game itself still plays just like it did in 1985, and someone who hasn't played since then will not be troubled by these changes.

I rather disagree, and I played with the Compendium. If you think that values and how rules are processed don't change feel of a game, then you really haven't had to deal with subtle changes before. For example, having your "Defense" reduced by 2 in a situation is huge. Changing from a 1/6 chance of a Head Hit to a 1/36 chance is huge. Plasma Cannons and Rifles created the necessity for the Environmental Heat rule, which allowed Infernos to apply Heat as an increasing force. Physical Attacks are now more accurate than before. And that's all within Total Warfare.

While the changes are not hard to deal with and adjust to, they do have a notable impact on how the game feels in the situations where they did change, and Partial Cover (the most notable) is one that comes up a lot in every game I play.

I'll grant the change to the partial cover did make partial cover useable, rather than something to be avoided in game. But that's a small change in the tactics of playing the game. Physical attacks being slightly less accurate didn't prevent us from making them left, right, and center when the opportunity arose before the changes.

The biggest changes to the feel of the game come not from those fairly trivial changes to the rules, but the ongoing proliferation of technology as time passes. But when playing 3025 rules, the game still plays virtually identically to the way it did in 1985, small changes in tactics aside. In fact, one of the bigger changes you mention, environmental heat, comes strictly from the changes in technology, not changes in the basic rules of the game.

 Charistoph wrote:

Vulcan wrote:I'll grant the change to the partial cover did make partial cover useable, rather than something to be avoided in game. But that's a small change in the tactics of playing the game. Physical attacks being slightly less accurate didn't prevent us from making them left, right, and center when the opportunity arose before the changes.

Again, I disagree because I'm talking about how the game rules FEEL. I didn't really address the tactics at all.

Partial Cover was usable back then because of the +3 To-Hit, even with the worse Hit Chart. It didn't change my tactics at all, really. Getting in to water was a viable tactic for a sniper back then, and it is now. Finding those sniper nests on a map were equally as useful. It is how it was useful that changed, which alters the FEEL of the game.

Physical Attacks are now something to be more sought out as well as they become more and more effective. As I said, it changed the FEEL, not necessarily the tactics.

Vulcan wrote:The biggest changes to the feel of the game come not from those fairly trivial changes to the rules, but the ongoing proliferation of technology as time passes. But when playing 3025 rules, the game still plays virtually identically to the way it did in 1985, small changes in tactics aside. In fact, one of the bigger changes you mention, environmental heat, comes strictly from the changes in technology, not changes in the basic rules of the game.

I don't disagree that the tech race changed a lot of the feel of the game, but we haven't seen as much new technology with Total Warfare, but it was rampant in the 90s and just became more formalized in Tactical Operations. I believe that Plasma Weapons and Hyper-Assault Gauss are the only weapons that didn't have something based on it by the time of the Master Rules book. They showed up in MechClix, but they weren't in the CBT rules until Total Warfare came out.

Just pointing out the advancing technology has done FAR more to change the feel of the game since 3025 than the changes to the actual rules of the game, that's all.

3025 games still feel the same now, 2023, as they did in 1985. It really is that simple.

 Charistoph wrote:
A great deal if you can handle the format.

Yeah, if I could read novels from a tablet I'd be all over that. Sadly, reading from a tablet gives me a headache in short order.

No idea why reading from a tablet affects me so differently than browsing forums, but there we are.

 Rihgu wrote:
Is there an easy way to find out what books I need to buy to get the stats on mechs I own?

A decade or more ago I bought the starter box with the 26 or so plastic mechs and it came with record sheets for each of them.

Now I've got two of the newer plastic packs (Heavy Star and Wolf's Dragoon Star) but don't know what all they do besides the Alpha Strike cards they come with?

Also, what am I missing out on if I run just the basic rules out of said starter box with these newer Clan boxes?

You want the Technical Readouts for the stats, or Reinforcement Packs for the actual record sheets.

 Charistoph wrote:
Which would you rather all see next?

Solaris 7 with new arena maps and updated ruleset?

Operation Bulldog with Inner Sphere Omnimechs?

Depends. Is it going to be Solaris 3025 with optional rules for later tech periods, or Solaris 31xx with all the abusable tech combinations thereof as core?

Drunken missile flights are built into the rules. Why did you think there was even a 'missiles hit' table in the first place?

Ah, the Star-League era designs optimized to fight the Clans. One of the bigger boo-boos in Battletech lore...

 Elmir wrote:
Jumped into the game a few ago and painted up a Grey Watch lance for the Northwind Highlanders:

Now THAT'S impressive!

Regular long-range headcapping is one of the big reasons I prefer 3025. It can make games way too short to be fun.

There's a reason the only 3025 weapon that can headcap in one shot has such a short range.

To each their own. Whatever you feel is most fun.

Is this just an ad for https://camospecs.com/, which has been around for years now?

Or is this something new?

 Ghaz wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Then there are more Vehicle Support Packs being possible, too. TRO: 3026 carried a LOT of interesting designs.

I wouldn't expect any more Vehicle Support Packs until they see how well the ones coming in the Kickstarter do in general retail.

I'd be delighted to help with that, if they ever DO reach general retail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rihgu wrote:
As a Hell's Horses guy, I'd love a Clan Vehicle Pack. Gimme my combined arms!

Also, fairly new to the game. Trying out Arrow IVs for the first time. What's the use case for the default ammo?

Without homing, it doesn't seem to do a whole lot between the massive hit penalty (7!) and taking time to hit the point. Do you just bully immobile enemies? Do area denial?

Should I just ignore the non-homing ammo and bring a few TAGs?

Non-homing ammo is just an artillery rocket. it's for area saturation, not pinpoint damage. Blowing up infantry positions, bunkers, maybe eliminating the odd light building the enemy is hiding behind, that sort of thing.

 Rihgu wrote:
Does Battletech have any in lore excuses for factions to cross great distances to battle each other?

Trying to figure out how to add a more narrative slant to our games than "meet up and shoot each other", and step 1 is figuring out what our factions' goals are.

Problem is, we've decided Civil War era (specifically 3067), and I'm Hell's Horses (no planets in the Inner Sphere at that time?), one guy is FedCom (Really Federated Suns at this point, from what I understand) and the last is the Marian Hegemony...

So, 3 different parts of the Sphere...

Would Hell's Horses even have any capability to getting through/around the entire Sphere to battle those guys? Can we blame it on a bad dropship jump from 1+ parties and now they're stranded?

Just trying to come up with fluff justified missions to run, like "destroy the factory" or "assassinate the Lance Leader" that make sense for the sort of conflicts this factions would be fighting.

Interstellar travel in the BT universe is accomplished by Jumpships, which... well, jump between stars. It's a bit like the Dune Highliners; they go from here to there so fast no one has been able to measure the amount of time taken. Granted, the jump range is pretty limited and it takes dozens of jumps to cross the Inner Sphere, not to mention a dozen or so jumps to get from the Pentagon Worlds to the Inner Sphere. Jumping takes vast amounts of energy, which is generally gathered by enormous solar panels.

However, deep raids are easily possible, especially for the Clans. For every inhabited system, there are dozens of uninhabited ones that can be used to recharge the jump drive. The Inner Sphere can use them, but centuries of lost technology has rendered much of their transport fleets old and not terribly reliable. At least in an inhabited system you can ask for help if you break down.

So yes. the Clans absolutely can do deep-strikes into the Inner Sphere at need. And Operation Bulldog, basically a deep raid on a grand scale, showed that the Inner Sphere can do the same to the Clans with sufficient motivation.

Most campaigns don't worry about it overmuch. If you get detailed about it, there's should be the risk of running into the other side's naval forces, and in that time period that often means capital ships. A lone jumpship carrying a company of mechs at most is little more than target practice for a full Warship, and where's the fun in playing THAT out?

 LordofHats wrote:


To add to this, attacking jump ships is also considered an extreme action in the setting since they're very hard to replace. If everyone just started destroying their enemies jump ships, interstellar travel would end. So they generally don't attack jump ships which means deep raiders can often get away if they can avoid boarding actions.

Well, it's an extreme action for most IS factions for that reason. I think the Clans have their own manufacturing resources, so they'd be far less reluctant to blow away an invading jumpship.

Now I kinda want to paint my Clan OPFOR as 'Clan Brown Trousers'...

If you think BattleTech is bad, try Star Fleet Battles sometime. It's the poster-child for overly complex rules.

But it can be fun, to someone who doesn't mind crunchy rules.

There is a certain amount of luck in Battletech. After all, the first turn through-armor critical taking out an engine or gyro or cockpit is a thing.

But yes, once you understand the probabilities and the math involved your game will improve significantly.

Fast light spam can work in heavily built up terrain, but not so well on open ground.

 Rihgu wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
Fast light spam can work in heavily built up terrain, but not so well on open ground.

Yea, I figured. I've been thinking "if there was just woods and plains between us, I would've been toast from turn 1". None of my mechs were fast enough to cross open ground in 1 go. It was purely the jump jets making navigating city streets a breeze. Still wildly fun, though. Going to need to find a way to uh, set up more city games...

It's worth remembering stuff like Phoenix Hawk, Exterminator, Griffin, Shadow Hawk, Wolverine, Grasshopper, and Victor all have similar city maneuverability... and way better armor and firepower.