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 have a question for those who claim the rules are too complex:

What do you find complicated? The game requires very simple math, and a small set of charts to play. In basic play, it is a far more simple game than 40K is these days.

So what is it that REALLY "scares you off?"

We might all be talking about different things.

Classic Battletech - is the old style, hundreds of armor points, 8 hour game that is the Intro box set (and Total Warfare), played on hex grid maps. To be fair, while the rules are very clunky, the recent releases have been very well laid out and it's not that complicated of a system, just takes a looong time to play.
Best played with lance on lance, maybe a little larger (4-8 models per side)

Alpha Strike - is the streamlined ruleset, originally called Quick Strike with BattleForce - which were publishing in a book called Strategic Operations but in two different sections so you had to jump around a lot. It was harder to play this as you needed a giant supplement book and the rules were all over the place in a 500-page book. AlphaStrike is those rules reorganized and streamlined into it's own product, instead of appendix rules in a supplement.
Easily playable with multiple companies (12-24 mechs per side)

I personally believe Alpha Strike (QS/BF) is a superior game system, allowing you to play much larger games, not using hexes - using terrain and inches, and your mech info all fits on a small card. It should be the way Battletech is marketed, as it not only allows new players to jump into it but also means they'll sell more figures (you play with more per side!)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wasn’t the whole point of Total Warfare to remove that back and forth? I mean it’s everything you need for standard games in a single book. The rest is optional – even the ‘Mech construction rules – and thus they get separate books.

Maybe, it's been ages since I played Battletech. We didn't have all the new fangled rule books these young wippersnappers have. We had to read the book uphill, both ways, in two feet of snow and we were grateful for it. These young punks with their E-books on their I-pads don't know how good they got it. Probably use calculators to figure out all the to hit modifiers and keep track of heat.

Get off my lawn.

 Andrew1975 wrote:
Who designs their miniatures. He needs to be taken out back and put down. They are just so bad. Seriously the minis I have from about 20 years ago look better than these.

Yeah, updating to plastic means nothing if the designs themselves are awful.

 judgedoug wrote:
We might all be talking about different things.

Classic Battletech - is the old style, hundreds of armor points, 8 hour game that is the Intro box set (and Total Warfare), played on hex grid maps. To be fair, while the rules are very clunky, the recent releases have been very well laid out and it's not that complicated of a system, just takes a looong time to play.
Best played with lance on lance, maybe a little larger (4-8 models per side)

Alpha Strike - is the streamlined ruleset, originally called Quick Strike with BattleForce - which were publishing in a book called Strategic Operations but in two different sections so you had to jump around a lot. It was harder to play this as you needed a giant supplement book and the rules were all over the place in a 500-page book. AlphaStrike is those rules reorganized and streamlined into it's own product, instead of appendix rules in a supplement.
Easily playable with multiple companies (12-24 mechs per side)

I personally believe Alpha Strike (QS/BF) is a superior game system, allowing you to play much larger games, not using hexes - using terrain and inches, and your mech info all fits on a small card. It should be the way Battletech is marketed, as it not only allows new players to jump into it but also means they'll sell more figures (you play with more per side!)

I think this shows the issue...expectations.

Back when we played the old battletech, 4 models a side was what everyone played - not because complexity forced us too...but because that was what we were expecting to play.

If we wanted to play a game with 20+ minis a side, we would play a wargame (fantasy, squad leader, etc.). BT was fun because you had minis and you could get in a game in short period of time.

If we wanted to play a game with even less minis minis but even more complexity, we would play star fleet battles.

Its the difference between mech warrior and mech commander and dawn of war - are you a guy in a mech, a squad, or a general really.

Anyway, I will pick up the new rules, and play with my old metal guys....heh.

And just to be sure people know this, but Classic Battletech can be played with minis and terrain (the rules are in Total War), just as Alpha/Quick Strike can be played on hex-maps. I tend to prefer hex maps for everything simply because it gives me a huge amount of variety and can be stored easily (and you will never have a range/LOS argument; at least not one that doesn't have a single non-subjective answer). But all varieties of Battletech can be used without hex maps or with them as the players wish.

And I am still fond of 4-on-4's, myself. Just the right amount of crunchy micro-management and only takes an hour to an hour and a half.

But AS will be nice for allowing me to field large chuncks of my Lyran Guard battalion in a single game, which is nice.

I may look in to the new starter. I was one of the people who pre-ordered the first run of the 25th Anniversary set (needed that drop ship marker!) but a few "updated" 3025 classics and the two plastics sound pretty nice and I can always use more of those double-sided hex-boards.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Andrew1975 wrote:
Who designs their miniatures. He needs to be taken out back and put down. They are just so bad. Seriously the minis I have from about 20 years ago look better than these.

I agree. They should run a KS to hire a sculptor to resculpt the mechs and base them off the MechWarrior Online designs by Alex Iglesias. I'd pledge for that.

Please don't blame the sculptor for the artist's bad design.

 Mattlov wrote:
I have a question for those who claim the rules are too complex:

What do you find complicated? The game requires very simple math, and a small set of charts to play. In basic play, it is a far more simple game than 40K is these days.

So what is it that REALLY "scares you off?"

This...

vs


There was more than that in my last attempt (and prior ones years and decades earlier) but I don't recall it off the top of my head. You may be used to it but that character sheet is very imposing to new players unfamiliar with the rules. I assume every one of those little damage entries has special rules associated with the subsystem as well. I've played plenty of games with complicated character and vehicle sheets in the 90's but I'm just past that point in my life. I'm not interested in a hugely complicated sheet that needs to be deciphered before learning to play. The second alpha strike style sheet fits the bill for me at least. I'm not saying that they should get rid of the complexity but rather that the perfect spot to place the simplified sheets and rules would be into the intro starter set, not an expansion book that some players will never get to after being scared off by the full shebang.

Mattlov wrote:The game requires very simple math, and a small set of charts to play. In basic play, it is a far more simple game than 40K is these days.

This is probably a topic that warrants it's own thread. However, I'd like to say 40k isn't exactly the ideal baseline to use. I would hasten to add I also consider 40k to be far, far too complex and in fact still have not bought the 6th edition rulebook largely because of how long it took me to get a good understanding of the 5th edition one.

I think the fact there have been well over 27,000 threads in 40K YMDC since 2006 sort of speaks for itself on that topic.

Warboss said it quite well:

warboss wrote:I've played plenty of games with complicated character and vehicle sheets in the 90's but I'm just past that point in my life. I'm not interested in a hugely complicated sheet that needs to be deciphered before learning to play.

I'm just too old, perhaps. Maybe if I was younger, maybe if I knew a circle of friends I could convince to play (and believe me, I can't find 4 or 5 people ALSO willing to commit to learning that)... in both cases though, that's not the way it is.

Mechwarrior Clix for me was about perfect in terms of complexity vs accessibility.

So far as the current product, if there are quick start rules, I'll probably pick it up even if I'm sure I won't get into it.

Also interesting - they're doing all these re-sculpts, re-working, etc and are not jacking up the price at all. "This is great news!" as they say (albeit not usually in that tone, though).

 warboss wrote:

 Mattlov wrote:
I have a question for those who claim the rules are too complex:

What do you find complicated? The game requires very simple math, and a small set of charts to play. In basic play, it is a far more simple game than 40K is these days.

So what is it that REALLY "scares you off?"

This...

Spoiler:

vs

Spoiler:

There was more than that in my last attempt (and prior ones years and decades earlier) but I don't recall it off the top of my head. You may be used to it but that character sheet is very imposing to new players unfamiliar with the rules. I assume every one of those little damage entries has special rules associated with the subsystem as well. I've played plenty of games with complicated character and vehicle sheets in the 90's but I'm just past that point in my life. I'm not interested in a hugely complicated sheet that needs to be deciphered before learning to play. The second alpha strike style sheet fits the bill for me at least. I'm not saying that they should get rid of the complexity but rather that the perfect spot to place the simplified sheets and rules would be into the intro starter set, not an expansion book that some players will never get to after being scared off by the full shebang.

I got in to the game, for the robots and the complexity. Believe it or not, but I have never seen anyone who has seen a DND character sheet scared of the mech record sheet.

The real problem is that there is no good entry point in to the system.

When I started, I wanted to play with mercenaries.

I purchased the BMR:r and the Field Manual: Mercenaries (Paperbacks, cheap but still in one piece)

This allowed me to:

Play with mechs.
Build mechs.
Salvage mechs.
Repair mechs.
Manage a mercenary company (Including contract negotiation, and MechWarrior 3rd compatible rules)
Play a Mercenary Campaign.

In the new rules system, this same setup (a very common one) requires:

Total Warfare (Expensive Hardcover)
Techmanual (Expensive Hardcover)
Strategic Operations (Expensive Hardcover)
Interstellar Operations (Not In Print) (Expensive Hardcover)
Potentially, it will still require FM: Mercs

Now, in the new system, you also get a lot of other rules, allowing you to play a lot of different games.

But the startup costs are frankly ridiculous. In Australia this is 220+ dollars before miniatures and map sheets. Not to mention it has been 7? years since total warfare launched and we still don't have all these rules.

I love battletech, but if someone asked me whether they should start playing with this use case, I would say no.

Releasing other games, even dumbed down ones, side by side with battletech isn't the answer. They should simply produce 1 Hardcover, with Mech rules, Merc rules, repair rules and campaign rules all in one.

Build it like MW4: Mercs, All in one rules for the Brand New Mercenary Company.

 warboss wrote:
This...

Spoiler:

Somewhat disingenuous.

The punch, kick, hit location, missile hit, Level 3 heat and especially the movement record chart (which I've never used) are completely optional parts of that record sheet.

Awesome! I love that they've found a new plastics guy, and that they're doing a plastic Battlemaster. Even more, I'm thrilled about what this may mean for the ever-rumoured Clan starter set. Better quality at the same price is always a good thing. I couldn't justify buying the 25th Anniversary because I already had a starter, but I can definitely justify a full set of recast Battlemechs.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 warboss wrote:
This...

Spoiler:

Somewhat disingenuous.

The punch, kick, hit location, missile hit, Level 3 heat and especially the movement record chart (which I've never used) are completely optional parts of that record sheet.

Well put, H.B.M.C.

I can understand that the full record sheet looks daunting, but as has been pointed out there are quite a few charts listed on the Turkina B record sheet that are optional. Also, it should be noted that a Turkina B is an Assault class `Mech which means it has more weapons, armor, and heat dissipation capabilities than smaller `Mech classes making it more of an advanced unit. When I teach new people to play Battletech I prefer to start with lighter classes of `Mechs so as to not overwhelm the new players with too many options.

Look at something like this `Mech sheet from the Introductory Rules file (free from the Battletech website: http://bg.battletech.com/download/CAT3500A_BoxSet_RecordSheets_with_Counters.pdf



That sheet represents a Light `Mech which has fewer weapons, less armor, and is generally a good starting place for new players to learn the gaming mechanics of movement and weapons fire.

There is quite a difference between the two record sheets and the optional charts are missing from the Commando's record sheet making the record sheet more approachable.

Obviously, using all of the advanced rules in the game (which the Turkina B sheet represents) is going to produce a more grueling learning curve for a novice player than if the basic rules were in play.

Now, I'll be the first to admit Battletech is a clunkier system than 40k, Warmachine, or a Clix game but so many of the rules are optional and intended to add as much realism as possible to a gaming scenario that most of that clunkiness can be streamlined and removed from your games. If you just want to bash giant robots into each other Battletech can provide that experience with a minimum of chart referencing.

And to the poster who said you need a calculator to determine dice modifiers well, that is only true if you can't count past twelve (2D6 dice system, so anything past twelve is an impossible shot).

Three things have prevented me from really getting into Battletech.

The main reason is that I simply don't have a circle of friends that play it. I know two people that used to play it, but they aren't particularly eager to get anything started. That leaves it up to me to provide the impetus, and the other two issues prevent me from doing so.

The organization of the rules confuses the heck out of me. Do I just need Total Warfare? Do I need Total Warfare, Techmanual, and Strat Op (pulling those from an earlier post)? What about all the year-based books? Do I need those? Can I play 2078 vs 3051, or do I need to keep the same year? Oh, to hell with it, I'll just play 40k.

The miniatures are pretty lackluster. They also seem to be made by multiple manufacturers, which isn't a huge deal, but it does add a bit to the feeling of being overwhelmed that the rule structure provides.

I imagine it's all perfectly clear once you get into the game a little bit (I'm sure D&D is a hopelessly impenetrable mess to the complete outsider,) but right now? Ugh. Never the damn well mind.

All that said, I'll probably give the intro box a go, since it's designed to help people get a grip on how the game is organized. I'll get a bunch of mechs, rules to play them, and all the other bits I'll need. I can worry about expanding further into the game after that initial purchase.

 Ouze wrote:

Mechwarrior Clix for me was about perfect in terms of complexity vs accessibility.

Oh hey! I'm not the only person that actually thought that was a pretty decent game. It was actually my first real foray into miniatures. I kept a bunch of my minis for that game because it really was a nice, quick game. If you used the arena rules for mechs that some people made (and then took down, but I still have a print-out or two laying around,) it was even better (or just use the official rules and go mech only.)

Nothing complex about that sheet. 3/4s of it is simply charts you roll on or reprints from the rule book. If you cant figure it out easily then you either havent finished grade school or you do not need to be playng wargames.

Loved this game since before the clans showed up, just hard to find fellow players, especially fellow players who like playing after the clans arrived. Most people I know that do play prefer the old stuff when mechs were held together by duct tape and bubble gum. Evene though I own about two battalions of battle mechs already, I might have to pick this up when released, just for support. The new Robotech release makes coming up with Unseens fairly easy as well finally. One might think that the timing was intentional.

The only book that is needed is the main rule book, anything else is just extra stuff or reprints. The old Battletech Compendium even though its twenty years old, the rules still apply the same for anything up to 3055 in technology which is farther forward than most people play that I am aware of. The tech readouts are usually good buys as well, just pick a time period.

Col. Dash wrote:
Nothing complex about that sheet. 3/4s of it is simply charts you roll on or reprints from the rule book. If you cant figure it out easily then you either havent finished grade school or you do not need to be playng wargames.

Or you simply don't know the rules to the game.

While we're at it, if you're going to toss around casual insults about intelligence, you might want to watch your spelling and grammar a bit better.

Not being insulting but its just not that complicated if you look at it. Armor points, internal structure and weapons are the only variables on there and the weapons are just something you look at and cross out when they get disabled, the rest is charts you roll on. When you are only using the typical 4 or 5 mechs, its not that hard to keep track of.

 Ouze wrote:

Mattlov wrote:The game requires very simple math, and a small set of charts to play. In basic play, it is a far more simple game than 40K is these days.

This is probably a topic that warrants it's own thread. However, I'd like to say 40k isn't exactly the ideal baseline to use. I would hasten to add I also consider 40k to be far, far too complex and in fact still have not bought the 6th edition rulebook largely because of how long it took me to get a good understanding of the 5th edition one.

I think the fact there have been well over 27,000 threads in 40K YMDC since 2006 sort of speaks for itself on that topic.

Warboss said it quite well:

warboss wrote:I've played plenty of games with complicated character and vehicle sheets in the 90's but I'm just past that point in my life. I'm not interested in a hugely complicated sheet that needs to be deciphered before learning to play.

I'm just too old, perhaps. Maybe if I was younger, maybe if I knew a circle of friends I could convince to play (and believe me, I can't find 4 or 5 people ALSO willing to commit to learning that)... in both cases though, that's not the way it is.

Mechwarrior Clix for me was about perfect in terms of complexity vs accessibility.

So far as the current product, if there are quick start rules, I'll probably pick it up even if I'm sure I won't get into it.

Also interesting - they're doing all these re-sculpts, re-working, etc and are not jacking up the price at all. "This is great news!" as they say (albeit not usually in that tone, though).

Add me to the "just too old" list. Im simply past the "uber detail and complexity" stage. I dont need fine detail, I need a game that moves, and basic Battletech simply doesnt. Tons of dice rolls, even worse if someone is firing a lot of missiles. BT will always have a place, as it was my introduction to miniatures gaming. One of the things I liked least about it is how it bogs down and drags out if you try to go more than lance vs lance, star vs star, or lance vs star. My buddy and I would go 8 vs 8 or 12 vs 12, and it was just too slow. The idea of the new rule set allowing those games easily is great. I havent played BT is several years, and those rules will probably make it a regular game for me again.

Very true, anything involving more than a lance does take forever especially if you have multiple players who do not work well as a team. The complexity for me is a draw however, especially since the slow degradation of 40k from Ultimate Edition to what we have now(flyers withstanding). I would be willing to try the fast stuff if it increases the player base. Would give me a reason to use my battalions of mechs anyway which is always a plus for things taking up space heheh.

Lots of strong feelings here about BT and it's complexity. I'm in the camp of folks who just want fast-playing rules and not alot of record keeping, chart checking or tracking. However, I understand that many folks want a more simulation-ish ruleset and CBT is a great system for those who really want strong differentiation between units, customizability and choice.

Perhaps rather than denigrating someone elses choice of game, we can just be happy that there will now be two very different ways to play the game and both will be very accessible via published rulebooks.

CBT: Very detailed mech game, almost a simulation that allows players to dive into the depth of the Battletech universe.

Alpha Strike: A fast playing tactical game for those preferring larger engagements tabletop play and streamlined rulesets.

I'm in the camp of folks who want intuitive and innovative game mechanics that allow for an incredible sense of depth with ease and rewards for thinking tactically.

Classic Battletech offers _none_ of the above. It was great when it came out - as a sort of advanced form of the Avalong Hill chit-based wargames - but other rulesets have evolved over the years. Battletech has not evolved, only bolted on additional rules. The core rules are unchanged, and that's the problem. They're "just okay", and have been for 30 years. Most of the mech designs are lackluster and outdated.

I played Battletech a lot 20 years ago. I have played it off and on since then, from the 2nd edition box set to 3rd edition to Compendium to Master Rules (and Revised) to the current incarnation. Each time has been more and more of a struggle to play because it's not intuitive, it's not smooth, it's not a fast-play game, and all those reasons make sure it's the absolute hardest game to get new players for. I've seen more people want to play Advanced Squad Leader than ever want to play Battletech again.

It's very, very sad, because Battletech has such a rich universe. But a company can't exist on a very, very small user-base and good fiction alone.

Quick-Strike/Battleforce re-invigorated my love for Battletech and the 5 other people who played with me also loved it and have asked me to run it again.

That is the reason I believe Catalyst should relaunch Battletech using Alpha-Strike as the core rules and relegating the Classic Battletech rules to advanced, optional rules. Alpha-Strike with redesigned miniatures based on Alex Iglesias' artwork launched as the core game would revitalize Catalyst Games and the Battletech brand. I have no doubt it my mind that it would get it played in every game store and sell incredibly well, especially as a tie-in with Mechwarrior Online.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


Somewhat disingenuous.

The punch, kick, hit location, missile hit, Level 3 heat and especially the movement record chart (which I've never used) are completely optional parts of that record sheet.

dis·in·gen·u·ous : Not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

And a new player knows they're optional how from simply looking at the sheet? Please don't assume knowledge is universal . Is that the official mech sheet for that mech? (Don't know.. found it with google image search and it looked official). If it is, the info is there and it's imposing. I certainly never got far enough to know that it's all optional.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

I can understand that the full record sheet looks daunting, but as has been pointed out there are quite a few charts listed on the Turkina B record sheet that are optional. Also, it should be noted that a Turkina B is an Assault class `Mech which means it has more weapons, armor, and heat dissipation capabilities than smaller `Mech classes making it more of an advanced unit. When I teach new people to play Battletech I prefer to start with lighter classes of `Mechs so as to not overwhelm the new players with too many options.

Look at something like this `Mech sheet from the Introductory Rules file (free from the Battletech website: http://bg.battletech.com/download/CAT3500A_BoxSet_RecordSheets_with_Counters.pdf

Spoiler:

That sheet represents a Light `Mech which has fewer weapons, less armor, and is generally a good starting place for new players to learn the gaming mechanics of movement and weapons fire.

There is quite a difference between the two record sheets and the optional charts are missing from the Commando's record sheet making the record sheet more approachable.

Obviously, using all of the advanced rules in the game (which the Turkina B sheet represents) is going to produce a more grueling learning curve for a novice player than if the basic rules were in play.

Now, I'll be the first to admit Battletech is a clunkier system than 40k, Warmachine, or a Clix game but so many of the rules are optional and intended to add as much realism as possible to a gaming scenario that most of that clunkiness can be streamlined and removed from your games. If you just want to bash giant robots into each other Battletech can provide that experience with a minimum of chart referencing.

Can you find a sheet that compares the same mech using both systems? Im guessing you know of more battletech sheet resources than the google search I'd end up using. Even though the one you presented is simpler than what I found, it's still over an order of magnitude more info/text than the alpha strike one and relatively incomprehensible to me. I realize that some people specifically choose Battletech for that complexity and that's a perfectly reasonable choice for them. For me, the dated minis and complexity of the rules/mech sheet (whether perceived or real) is what has turned me off to the game multiple times in the last 20 years. This isn't just me as a Heavy Gear fan ripping into the "other" more popular Mech game or anything like that in case someone is assuming it. I created a Heavy Gear blog and the first thing I did was to simplify the mech sheet equivalent in that game as well as I found it (not imposing) but too cluttered and containing repeated info.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

And to the poster who said you need a calculator to determine dice modifiers well, that is only true if you can't count past twelve (2D6 dice system, so anything past twelve is an impossible shot).

I suspect his use of the word "whippersnapper" and telling people to get off his lawn indicated humor as the intent of the entirety of the post. I'm not trying to be too serious here as well but simply am genuinely surprised that the most streamlined and simplified version that might entice me to try the game again won't be included in what I consider the no-brainer of places, the intro box.

I played Battletech back in the '80s when it was Battleoids... Played it all the way up until the mid '90s when I fully swapped over to 40K. In those days, it was just accepted that you would have 1-2 mechs vs. your opponent and his 1-2 mechs, and you would play literally all day (sometimes 2-3 days when you used Lances or Stars of mechs). I spent more time carefully counting MPs, heat, filling in little bubbles on a bubble sheet, and calculating complicated to hit modifiers for a 2d6 game. I gave up. I wanted to play Lances, Battalions, Stars and Galaxies in a game, not 1-2 mechs that could get blown away with one lucky shot (always fun to see your 75 ton heavy mech one shoted in the head by a 12 on 2d6- with no other damage!). Yes, there was the strategic level rules, but they were balls and did nothing to capture the flavor of mech warfare in the 31st Century (or what ever era you played in). I hate to say the Clans broke the game, but they kinda did. I'm a Clanner, and loved the mechs, but it was insane that a 35 ton Clan medium mech could take on a 75 ton Inner Sphere mech and win. It was always insane to me that if I was "taking cover" behind a hill, my opponent would get to roll on the punch table for hit location. In other words, the chances to hit you in the head increased by over 30%. The BPV system... really, really needed an overhaul. In the end, the game was clunky, and very, very time consuming. I never liked playing on a hex map. Most of the models were terrible.

There is just a huge barrier to play for new players to get into Battletech. So many little rules have a dramatic effect on the game, and there are soooo many of them! The models themselves are getting better, but I really, really wish they would work on scale. a 15 ton light mech should not be the same size as a 100 ton assault mech. Moving to plastic by Catalyst is a great start.

When Catalyst took over the reigns, I had high hopes. I even knew one of the play testers and got to play what I feel was the best set of mech rules ever. When the actual game came out, he was pissed that they basically stuck with the old rules, and bastardized the play test rules into the quick start stuff. I have no doubt that the new Alpha Strike rules are those play test rules from back in 2006. No hex maps. No bubble sheets. No 10,000 little rules to remember. It's a completely different game. Plays fast and smooth and still has the Battletech flavor.

I may just get back into the game using those Alpha Strike rules.

 judgedoug wrote:


That is the reason I believe Catalyst should relaunch Battletech using Alpha-Strike as the core rules and relegating the Classic Battletech rules to advanced, optional rules. Alpha-Strike with redesigned miniatures based on Alex Iglesias' artwork launched as the core game would revitalize Catalyst Games and the Battletech brand. I have no doubt it my mind that it would get it played in every game store and sell incredibly well, especially as a tie-in with Mechwarrior Online.

Or more likely, it would suffer the same fate as the other games that were re-released with the dumbed down rules...

see Confrontation for a wonderful example.

 warboss wrote:
Is that the official mech sheet for that mech?

It's not. It's a record sheet with a lot of added optional sheets, something that a number of 'Mech building programs allow you to add for ease of reference. As I said, the actual record sheets ditch about half that crap.

Maybe I'm the exception, but when I was playing battletech in the mid-90's my core gaming group typically (four people) played company on company battles (12 on 12) often with armor and infantry support and we almost always able to wrap up in 3 hours or so.

Maybe it was just our familiarity with the rules that streamlined things, I still remember most of the damage location results, but I never felt that is was overly complex.

 Tamwulf wrote:


When Catalyst took over the reigns, I had high hopes. I even knew one of the play testers and got to play what I feel was the best set of mech rules ever. When the actual game came out, he was pissed that they basically stuck with the old rules, and bastardized the play test rules into the quick start stuff. I have no doubt that the new Alpha Strike rules are those play test rules from back in 2006. No hex maps. No bubble sheets. No 10,000 little rules to remember. It's a completely different game. Plays fast and smooth and still has the Battletech flavor.

I may just get back into the game using those Alpha Strike rules.

Can't argue about the complexity, but I do know that for many BT fans, the fact that the rules have changed little over the past 25 years is one of the things that they really appreciate about the system. It means that except for certain rulebooks, nearly every BT supplement, ever produced can still be used in the game. Your sourcebooks never get nerfed or made obsolete. In fact, the "Introductory Rules" (used to be called level 1) have changed so little that you can probably use the same box set rulebooks from the 90's with little/no change.

As for the Alpha Strike rules, I can't say for sure that none of those play test rules will be incorporated, but I wouldn't count on it. It's already been made fairly clear that Alpha Strike is just a new layout (much needed), standalone vehicle for the Quick-Strike rules (which are a mod of Battleforce), possibly with a few tweaks. If you want a feel for what the rules will be like, download the Battleforce intro rules and Quick-Strike sample cards here:
http://bg.battletech.com/?page_id=27

This is pretty neat news. I bought the intro awhile back I thought the minis were ok for what it was. But this makes it an even better purchase. Plastic Mad Cat is awesome as well.

You know what they need to make the game faster....an app. Yeah, a phone app that keeps track of everything for you and tells you what you need to role. Probably wouldn't even be that hard to do.

 Andrew1975 wrote:
You know what they need to make the game faster....an app. Yeah, a phone app that keeps track of everything for you and tells you what you need to role. Probably wouldn't even be that hard to do.

I have to admit, that electronic record sheets would be a pretty cool addition. I really enjoy the feel of a mech slowly being shot to slag around me, so I don't imagine I'll enjoy Alpha Strike. The granularity and detail is what keeps it so very real for me. The action is by necessity small, but it is intimate violence. You feel it every time your armor is stripped away and your vitals are exposed to the threat of criticals. When that Valkyrie drops its LRM rack into the Hunchback's rear and sets off the ammo, it is a huge blow to the Hunchback owner, and the moment of the game that will live on forever in the mind of the guy behind the Valkyrie. The same goes for the first time your Axeman waddles up to a Madcat and decapitates it.


I absolutely appreciate the coolness of going company on company, and recognize that it is impractical with the standard Battletech rules. But to take away the intense drama of mech on mech combat and still calling it Battletech would be like replacing the Mechwarrior video games with Mech Assault.