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.

 bosky wrote:


Yeah I've played plenty of dead and unsupported games so a live community doesn't matter in this case.

Very much agreed. With less popular games, if you can provide the necessary figures and have friends willing to try them, there's really no reason to worry about "community". Unless someone is lucky enough to have local interest, most mech games fall into this category. That's why I highly recommend CAV1 and Mech Attack. Good rulesets that have proven themselves, even if the "community" as moved on. Best of all, you can get both for less than $20 total, so you can experience a few different kinds of mech games without committing to one expensive system.

I mostly play games that are either unsupported (WarEngine) or so indie that the only way to find opponents is to convert them yourselves (Song of Blades, Panzer 8, etc)

I would say that CAV is still a "live" game as you can still get everything that was released for it from the Reaper store, under the tabs for "CAV", and for the "Robot Supply Depot". The only problem is that some of the CAVs are oddly expensive for some reason. You can either get the 2.0 rules/stat cards for free from Reaper, or the three rulebooks you need for CAV 1.0 from Troll and Toad for about 18 dollars, shipped.

I think one of the best game rule-sets you can cheaply get that will support the use of Battletech minis is Mech Attack. It is quite simplistic compared to most games out there, but it's super cheap if you get he bundle (then you get the terrain rules), and allows you to do simple but effective custom mech/vehicle builds. It's like the Battletech "beer and pretzels" edition.

Of course the new Alpha Strike BT rules are a given if you already like the Battletech universe.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I would say that CAV is still a "live" game as you can still get everything that was released for it from the Reaper store, under the tabs for "CAV", and for the "Robot Supply Depot". The only problem is that some of the CAVs are oddly expensive for some reason. You can either get the 2.0 rules/stat cards for free from Reaper, or the three rulebooks you need for CAV 1.0 from Troll and Toad for about 18 dollars, shipped.

I think one of the best game rule-sets you can cheaply get that will support the use of Battletech minis is Mech Attack. It is quite simplistic compared to most games out there, but it's super cheap if you get he bundle (then you get the terrain rules), and allows you to do simple but effective custom mech/vehicle builds. It's like the Battletech "beer and pretzels" edition.

Of course the new Alpha Strike BT rules are a given if you already like the Battletech universe.

Some of the prices for CAVs are odd, but some can be explained in that the "Robot Supply" CAVs are no longer part of the new "CAV Strike Operations" game universe so they are cheaper, and some of the non-cav vehicles were produced in two scales, with the larger ones being the most expensive. Also, minor correction about CAV1 price. I just ordered a second set of the 3 CAV1 rulebooks from T&T, and it cost me $7.55 Shipped! I've said it before, but every mech fan should get a set at that price.

Definitely agree about Mech Attack, it's a favorite of mine. Has all the elements of BT (variable weapons, heat tracking, damage grids) in a much more streamlined product. It does top out at about 8 units per side, but if you want bigger games, there's always Alpha Strike.

Hmm I read through CAV and wasn't hugely thrilled. It seemed like a normal skirmish game but with Mechs instead of Marines Nothing much on locational damage, heat, big stompy movement, etc. I also didn't think the degrading performance of stats was done very elegantly as I can imagine some games end up with two feeble, damaged robots missing each other. Sort of like Firestorm Armada games that drag out haha.

Definitely agree on Mech Attack. I'm glad someone could make use of the Renegade Legion damage track mechanism. Now a dedicated fan just needs to convert every single Battletech TRO.

 bosky wrote:
Hmm I read through CAV and wasn't hugely thrilled. It seemed like a normal skirmish game but with Mechs instead of Marines Nothing much on locational damage, heat, big stompy movement, etc. I also didn't think the degrading performance of stats was done very elegantly as I can imagine some games end up with two feeble, damaged robots missing each other. Sort of like Firestorm Armada games that drag out haha.

CAV is a different beast. Folks who have played it (not me) have reported that plays significantly faster than CBT. The degrading stats is something common to most Reaper games. As for locational damage, you won't find it because like Mech Attack it's more abstracted than CBT, though mech attack's damage grid almost makes it seem like there is locational damage, even though the colum that takes hits has no relation to a part of the mech. As for the endgame of 1v1 messed up robots, I think CAV is more based around groups of mechs, and if a proper scenario is used, you should never end up with that conclusion.

Of course some folks like that kind of thing...

I can imagine it's faster since everything is an 8-ish hitpoint infantry guy who happens to look like a Mech

Oh is the degrading performance part of the R.A.G.E. system? Seems like it'd fit well in a fantasy game but seems out of place here. But I guess my gripe about universal rule systems cludged into different genres can wait for another day.

Some of the prices for CAVs are odd, but some can be explained in that the "Robot Supply" CAVs are no longer part of the new "CAV Strike Operations" game universe so they are cheaper, and some of the non-cav vehicles were produced in two scales, with the larger ones being the most expensive. Also, minor correction about CAV1 price. I just ordered a second set of the 3 CAV1 rulebooks from T&T, and it cost me $7.55 Shipped! I've said it before, but every mech fan should get a set at that price.

I totally understand the vehicle scale issue, as I was around when it first started up. Though, it doesn't explain why several of the mechs are literally twice the price of all the others, when they are neither any bigger nor contain any more pieces than the ones that are under ten dollars. I'm actually thinking of combining the best of both worlds and using the CAV mechs, Infantry and ground vehicles with the ruleset from Mech Attack. I think it'd be the perfect ruleset to play with my wife (who will play games just fine, but isn't big into complicated rules) that uses really cool miniatures for me to paint.

The diminishing effectiveness of the characteristics in CAV is a feature of the RAGE ruleset. I actually don't mind it, as it's a perfectly abstract way of tracking how the mechs become less combat effective as they take damage. But I have to say I do like the Mech Attack damage tracking system better.

Some of the difference in the way different rulesets handle mecha is a difference in the size of the mechs presented. Batthemechs are huge. Up to 100 tons (Although for reference, an Abrahms tank is 60+ tons) and generally 9+ meters tall. They're walking battleships and may have large numbers of weapons.

Gears from Heavy Gear are generally in the 3-5 meter range. Much lighter, and generally armed with a single hand-held 'rifle' weapon, a shoulder-mount support weapon, and one or two auxiliary weapons (grenades, melee weapons, etc.). They're lightweight pack hunters. (Gears generally don't try to take on tanks one-on-one, unless they're brave or stupid.)

I'm not super familiar with CAV, but they look like something of a mid-point.

Each setting is very different and the rules really reflect that. Ideally, I guess you need to pick the experience that interests you the most.

(Keep in mind, 'Mech' at least used to be a FASA trademark. CAV, Heavy Gear, etc. are probably best referred to as "mecha' games, but that's being pedantic. Thankfully the trademark has either lapsed or the current owners are not as litigious.)

 Balance wrote:
Gears from Heavy Gear are generally in the 3-5 meter range. Much lighter, and generally armed with a single hand-held 'rifle' weapon, a shoulder-mount support weapon, and one or two auxiliary weapons (grenades, melee weapons, etc.). They're lightweight pack hunters. (Gears generally don't try to take on tanks one-on-one, unless they're brave or stupid.)

Yeah I was thinking Heavy Gear makes the most sense in the mechs-as-infantry approach due to their smaller size and basically being fancy powered armor. CAV always seemed to be similar size to BTech but I haven't read much of their universe. I'm used to that approach of massive vehicles with independent systems and big ablative sheets of armor.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
. I'm actually thinking of combining the best of both worlds and using the CAV mechs, Infantry and ground vehicles with the ruleset from Mech Attack. I think it'd be the perfect ruleset to play with my wife (who will play games just fine, but isn't big into complicated rules) that uses really cool miniatures for me to paint...

... I have to say I do like the Mech Attack damage tracking system better.

That sounds like an awesome game! I'm currently playing Mech Attack with rebased mechwarrior figures which are about the same scale (N or 10mm) as CAV's, but tend to be bigger overall. When the CAVs in Bones are finally released (possibly as part of this fall's Reaper KS part 2) I'll definitely be picking them up . They should make fine small or medium mechs alongside my Mechwarrior figs.

I also prefer the Mech Attack damage system. When I first read it, I was skeptical as it's just a random D10 damage grid, but when playing it really gets tense as you wait to see where the shot blew through your armor. I think some of the best streamlined rulesets work that way, abstracting enough to make play fast while keeping a certain "feel".

 bosky wrote:
Yeah I was thinking Heavy Gear makes the most sense in the mechs-as-infantry approach due to their smaller size and basically being fancy powered armor. CAV always seemed to be similar size to BTech but I haven't read much of their universe. I'm used to that approach of massive vehicles with independent systems and big ablative sheets of armor.

The good/bad is, I believe, that smaller, lighter mecha avoid a lot of the 'physics problems' with mecha: They don't have to worry about recoil 20-30 feet off the ground on a relatively thin 'tower'; they have less (but certainly not no) ground pressure issues; the humanoid movement works in built-up areas where it would be useful to be able to take cover. However, it's not problem free, as there's still problems. Power Armor in general has realism issues as armoring between legs is going to be a problem unless bow-legged pilots are found; articulated limbs are much more complex than simple wheels and turrets, and there's a lot of walker balance issues that you don't have on a platform that doesn't really 'fall over' like a tank.

But, in the end, mecha are cool so each setting has to deal with these issues as it chooses.

 Balance wrote:


But, in the end, mecha are cool

Really that's all that has to be said. I've never seen mecha taller than 15 feet presented in a way that doesn't stretch the bounds of credulity, and every argument for such mecha has always seemed -IMHO- to be full of holes. However that's never the point. The real point can be summed up in a simple equation:

Robots are cool + Bigger is better = Giant Stompy Robots are Awesome!