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.

The master unit list website has gotten updated with like 4500 updated Alpha Strike card images.

http://www.masterunitlist.info/



I think I'll copy them into a word process, make them 3.5x2.5 and put them in card sleeves and use a dry or wet erase pen on them.

 frozenwastes wrote:


I think I'll copy them into a word process, make them 3.5x2.5 and put them in card sleeves and use a dry or wet erase pen on them.

Get them printed on 3.5x5 photos, glossy, and you won't need card sleeves. Dry erase works perfectly on true photographic paper. I use http://richmondcamera.photofinale.com (you need to install Silverlight) for 19 cent 3.5x5 and 4x6 prints.

Size matters. I can make them a deck of cards and have card holders already designed for them.

Making them pictures means I have to worry about other issues. It's also far more expensive to print on photo paper.

Just bought it. I was delaying the purchase to get the hardback, but a friend offered to print and bind it for me so I picked up the PDF.

Really looking forward to playing this with my club. We've got a bunch of rebased mechwarrior pieces that we use for 10mm gaming, so it should be a cinch to plug them into this ruleset. I'm sure they will also appreciate that most of their mechs and vehicles are already represented by BF cards!

 Eilif wrote:
Just bought it. I was delaying the purchase to get the hardback, but a friend offered to print and bind it for me so I picked up the PDF.

Really looking forward to playing this with my club. We've got a bunch of rebased mechwarrior pieces that we use for 10mm gaming, so it should be a cinch to plug them into this ruleset. I'm sure they will also appreciate that most of their mechs and vehicles are already represented by BF cards!

Take pics and post battle reports!

 judgedoug wrote:

 Eilif wrote:
Just bought it. I was delaying the purchase to get the hardback, but a friend offered to print and bind it for me so I picked up the PDF.

Really looking forward to playing this with my club. We've got a bunch of rebased mechwarrior pieces that we use for 10mm gaming, so it should be a cinch to plug them into this ruleset. I'm sure they will also appreciate that most of their mechs and vehicles are already represented by BF cards!

Take pics and post battle reports!

You can count on it.

Most every game we play goes up on our blog (link in my sig), even if it's just a couple pics and brief overview. I won't be playing for a month or so as we're still in the midst of our summer Song of Blades and Heroes campaign, but I do plan on at least one battle report. My friend will be bringing me the printup of the rules this week, so I hope to have a pre-play review of the rules up sooner than that.

judgedoug wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:


I think I'll copy them into a word process, make them 3.5x2.5 and put them in card sleeves and use a dry or wet erase pen on them.

Get them printed on 3.5x5 photos, glossy, and you won't need card sleeves. Dry erase works perfectly on true photographic paper. I use http://richmondcamera.photofinale.com (you need to install Silverlight) for 19 cent 3.5x5 and 4x6 prints.

This is such a good idea.

There's also card maker software here:
http://btengineer.blogspot.ca/2013/08/alpha-strike-card-maker-update.html

So I can look at the Master Unit List, put the stats into the card maker and produce full colour images I can take to have printed as pictures anywhere that prints digital camera prints. Fantastic!

EDIT: It looks like the card maker can load directly from the MUL. Also, I found a local place that does 4x6 prints for $0.15 + tax. Now all I need to do is get someone with a digital camera to take pictures of my mechs so I can put them on the cards.

 frozenwastes wrote:

judgedoug wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:


I think I'll copy them into a word process, make them 3.5x2.5 and put them in card sleeves and use a dry or wet erase pen on them.

Get them printed on 3.5x5 photos, glossy, and you won't need card sleeves. Dry erase works perfectly on true photographic paper. I use http://richmondcamera.photofinale.com (you need to install Silverlight) for 19 cent 3.5x5 and 4x6 prints.

This is such a good idea.

There's also card maker software here:
http://btengineer.blogspot.ca/2013/08/alpha-strike-card-maker-update.html

So I can look at the Master Unit List, put the stats into the card maker and produce full colour images I can take to have printed as pictures anywhere that prints digital camera prints. Fantastic!

EDIT: It looks like the card maker can load directly from the MUL. Also, I found a local place that does 4x6 prints for $0.15 + tax. Now all I need to do is get someone with a digital camera to take pictures of my mechs so I can put them on the cards.

Wow, that looks excellent, thanks for the link!

ALSO: Make sure that the prints are on true photographic paper processed chemically (preferably with Ektacolor/RA4 developer), and NOT dye-sublimation. Dye-sub is lower quality and due to the heat process that affixes a thin layer of transparent film onto the paper, is not very durable. Most photo kiosks are dye-sub as it's basically a Windows/USB printer.

I was thinking of putting some transparent tape of adhesive clear vinyl over the armour and structure dots anyway. Though in the end, I might just fill a page with colour 3.5x2.5 images, get it printed locally and still put them in sleeves. We'll see.

If you do the 3.5x2.5, buy some Magic: The Gathering lands (could buy a hundred for probably around a dollar) and glue the printed images to the cards. It'll help.

I'll just slide the land in behind the print. No reason to glue it.

So I've played six games of Alpha Strike. Half were introductory games with 4 mechs vs 4 mechs. The other was more of a full game with a few lances per side.

My thoughts:

It is fast. The 4 vs 4 games took half an hour. The full size games less than two hours.

It feels like Battletech. It has the same interactive back and forth turn structure and the same attack roll with a target number.

It supports a fuller and more conventional approach to warfare. Units like vehicles and artillery work and work well without any real slow down.

If you're willing to familiarize yourself with the classic BT rules and the construction system and the conversion process to Alpha Strike, you can build pretty much anything for 6mm sci-fi. And that assumes that of the 4000+ unit cards on the Master Unit List, you can't find what you're looking for already. Programs like Solaris Skunkwerks can do the building simply and easily as well.

I have a bunch of 6mm sci-fi that I might pull out and try a more infantry and tank heavy game.

I like the abstract aerospace rules and the off board and on board artillery rules.

Thanks for that!
I've really been curious to hear from folks who have tried the game regarding complexity and playing time.

I've played 2 games so far. Rules are not very complex, but I think there is a big issue with balance between mechs. I had a my 19 pt atlas get owned by a 16 awesome.

This can be a simple fix by catalyst by allowing the community to review/balance the points system.

Overall fun game.

mrfantastical wrote:
I've played 2 games so far. Rules are not very complex, but I think there is a big issue with balance between mechs. I had a my 19 pt atlas get owned by a 16 awesome.

This can be a simple fix by catalyst by allowing the community to review/balance the points system.

Overall fun game.

Atlas is a brawler - most weapons are short range, best for infighting. 5/5/2 damage. Awesome has three primary weapons which are good at pretty much all range bands. 3/3/3 damage. The Atlas also has 2 more points of armor. So at long range the Awesome is better but would be destroyed quickly by an Atlas up close.

They really named a mech "Awesome"?? I anxiously await the Cowabunga mech.

 warboss wrote:
They really named a mech "Awesome"?? I anxiously await the Cowabunga mech.

yeah, like 30 years ago.

 judgedoug wrote:

 warboss wrote:
They really named a mech "Awesome"?? I anxiously await the Cowabunga mech.

yeah, like 30 years ago.

Well, the years have not reduced the corniness of this apparently '80s choice of names.

 warboss wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

 warboss wrote:
They really named a mech "Awesome"?? I anxiously await the Cowabunga mech.

yeah, like 30 years ago.

Well, the years have not reduced the corniness of this apparently '80s choice of names.

so like the Ferret, Skink, Honest John, Super Sherman, Mae West, Wiesel... those are all real military vehicles.
even Macross has some ridiculous names like the Glamor Spider Bug and the Mom's Kitchen.

you could just refer to it as the AWS-8Q which is the "Awesome"'s model number.

 warboss wrote:

Well, the years have not reduced the corniness of this apparently '80s choice of names.

No no, just the timing of your joke, but rest assured that we have made it many times. To be fair, Battletech beyond maybe it's fiction wasn't terribly creative starting out. Half it's original mechs were lifted straight out of anime. Though I think naming mechs was done with a dart board and a keg due to volume.

 frozenwastes wrote:


It supports a fuller and more conventional approach to warfare. Units like vehicles and artillery work and work well without any real slow down.

I have a bunch of 6mm sci-fi that I might pull out and try a more infantry and tank heavy game.

I like the abstract aerospace rules and the off board and on board artillery rules.

These make me very happy, I have yet to use vehicles, infantry, artillery, etc in Quick-Strike/Battleforce. Very anxiously awaiting my hardcover Alpha Strike.

 judgedoug wrote:

mrfantastical wrote:
I've played 2 games so far. Rules are not very complex, but I think there is a big issue with balance between mechs. I had a my 19 pt atlas get owned by a 16 awesome.

This can be a simple fix by catalyst by allowing the community to review/balance the points system.

Overall fun game.

Atlas is a brawler - most weapons are short range, best for infighting. 5/5/2 damage. Awesome has three primary weapons which are good at pretty much all range bands. 3/3/3 damage. The Atlas also has 2 more points of armor. So at long range the Awesome is better but would be destroyed quickly by an Atlas up close.

Thanks didnt know the Atlas was meant for CC, no wonder I was out gunned.

mrfantastical wrote:

Thanks didnt know the Atlas was meant for CC, no wonder I was out gunned.

it also depends on the variant (different variants have slightly different loadouts), but yeah, the Atlas is a 100 ton monster, and a skilled pilot can put 5 pointsof hurt on any 'mech near him... usually enough to take down anyone in two salvos. While it's got a ton of armor it is a little vulnerable at long range so the classic tactic is to keep a light mech paired with your assault mech so when they get up close the light mech can dodge around assisting the assault mech by peppering enemy mechs with it's guns and also protecting the vulnerable rear of the assault. (or even spotting targets for the assault mech's indirect long range missile fire, if it has any)

Where are the conversion rules for Alpha Strike from Classic Battletech? Some of the stats seem off a bit.

-K

Korthu wrote:
Where are the conversion rules for Alpha Strike from Classic Battletech? Some of the stats seem off a bit.

-K

It's an incredibly complicated series of equations. I think someone has them posted somewhere on the official Battletech forums.

What is the actual problem? I know many modifications are made for certain things - such as any mechs with XL engines actually have less internal structure than those with Standard engines; damages at ranges are based on weapon damages divided by 10; things like that.

Stinger vs Locust; Stinger 1/1/0 while Locust 2/1/0. Same weapon load-out. The Stinger with 2 Med lasers has the same states exept its 1 point more expensive and has the energy weapon trait. I can eye ball changes but wanted to see how they came up with the stats themselves. Some of the old 3025 mech just don't feel right.

-K

Let's be honest about the points system:

It's just the Battletech BV2.0 points system divided by 100 and rounded appropriately. So that means you have the stuff statted out for one game, but the points system is based on how it performs in another game.

It's probably thought of as a good guide that will work most of the time, but it's very, very breakable. Just like in classic Battletech, plus now you're using it for a different game.

I would not recommend a 40k or Warmachine/Hordes approach to force building for either Battletech or Alpha Strike. If people go into it with the idea of making a broken force, they'll probably succeed. You have 4500+ units to choose from, then narrow them down to your era/technology base and then hunt for optimized choices.

You can break it if you want, but if you use it as a general guide, it should work. I built two 50 point demo lances and have played both and won and lost with both yesterday night. I gave each one a light, 2 mediums and a heavy and put a veteran pilot in the heavy. The end result was a very even matchup.

Now imagine I took that same 50 points and bought 20 2 point vehicles with indirect fire and 10 1 point fast spotting vehicles.





Things are going to breakdown unless you do some sort of force design beyond just "spend your points on whatever."

Korthu wrote:
Stinger vs Locust; Stinger 1/1/0 while Locust 2/1/0. Same weapon load-out. The Stinger with 2 Med lasers has the same states exept its 1 point more expensive and has the energy weapon trait. I can eye ball changes but wanted to see how they came up with the stats themselves. Some of the old 3025 mech just don't feel right.

-K

Damage is based on heat - and heat takes into account jumping iirc. So the Stinger will generate heat while the Locust won't, meaning the Locust does more damage.

Korthu wrote:
Stinger vs Locust; Stinger 1/1/0 while Locust 2/1/0. Same weapon load-out. The Stinger with 2 Med lasers has the same states exept its 1 point more expensive and has the energy weapon trait. I can eye ball changes but wanted to see how they came up with the stats themselves. Some of the old 3025 mech just don't feel right.

-K

I found a few different stingers and locust variants with different weapon loadouts, so I can't comment on the specifics as you didn't list the model numbers you are comparing (though they are pretty similar). Which two variants have the exact same weapon load out?

It's based on adding up possible weapon damages at different ranges and then some adjustments are made. Like if the mech doesn't have so many turns worth of ammo, it gets a damage downgrade. If it has heat issues, it can get a damage downgrade.

3025 mechs feel right on the table top, even if there are some stat discrepancies. The Stinger STG-3R is better than the STG-3G because it's just not worth it to pay an extra point for ENE on something that is likely to not have to worry about taking multiple critical hits (ENE means you have no on board ammo to explode on a crit).

Alpha Strike is also a different game than original battletech. It's simply not going to feel the same. Some designs that are total crap in one game are going to be great in the other. Other mechs will just stop making sense.

Korthu wrote:
Stinger vs Locust; Stinger 1/1/0 while Locust 2/1/0. Same weapon load-out. The Stinger with 2 Med lasers has the same states exept its 1 point more expensive and has the energy weapon trait. I can eye ball changes but wanted to see how they came up with the stats themselves. Some of the old 3025 mech just don't feel right.

-K

which variants? the base STG-3R and LCT-1V are both 4 points; their only difference is the locust has a 16" move and the stinger has a 12" jump. (not trying to be snarky, there's a billion variants)