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 want to hear opinons of what to start next, both look awsome

battle tech seems easyer on how to play and has alot of cool modles. but finding the books and models are hard and finding people to play is even harder, or where to even start ( otehr then the 2 player starting box )


heavy gear blitz is long long long long long long long long long long long long long list of rules but have equaly cool models, finding where to go and what to get is easyer , and finding people to play with is equaly as hard to find as battle tech

so witch one is better to go for, in your opinons

( also witch one is cheaper )

Battletech has cool models? O.o

I've gotten demos of both, and out of the two of them, I would much rather play Heavy Gear Blitz. The weird movement die thing was an interesting mechanic, and it forced me to think about my movement a little more, but I'd rather have a freedom of movement like you might see in other skirmish level games (skirmish being small model count)..

Battle Tech on the other hand felt clunky, slow moving, and definitely shows it's age. The models that I played with were terribly sculpted, and again look like they came from the 80s (which they probably did).

Combat felt better in Heavy Gear, and I enjoyed the fluff more..

Honestly, I'm looking at Mecha Front to fill my Mech based wargaming itch...

Also, looking at your sig... "yins"? Are you from PIttsburgh?

yes, yes i am

o.o almost scary how you got that right


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also yes i like the concept of the models, some of them look garbige but others look epic and awsome ( timber wolf for example )

also im considering the price range of the games , so.. witch is cheaper XD

I believe the Battletech technically is cheaper because you can get pretty much everything you need for 60 bucks, but they're imo, crappy plastic sculpts. Heavy Gear has a 2 player starter for 60 as well I believe.

And I only know the yins thing because I'm from Cleveland (so cleveland/pittsburgh football rivalry), and I went to school with some people from pittsburgh.

great so its again half an half..

i would play both to see witch is better... but then again no one plays it and i would be the first and im not ritch to try both XD

If you're deciding between the two of them... Go for Heavy Gear, if nothing else, they have a faction/army called the The 08th WFPA "Drop Bears" Airborne Regiment...

You read that right.... Drop bears, fething koalas...

i have no idea what any of that means.. unless you mean its litearly droping bears

 jbsnv wrote:
i have no idea what any of that means.. unless you mean its litearly droping bears

Drop Bears are Australian slang for Koala bears... because they will literally drop out of trees...




There is a bunch of fluff on them, but I can't find it atm :-\

thats histerical XD

so i guess ill look into heavy gear blitz more, but still wanting more opinons

 jbsnv wrote:
thats histerical XD

so i guess ill look into heavy gear blitz more, but still wanting more opinons

Like I said earlier, you could always wait for Mecha Front to come out
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/509439.page

It looks like it's going to scratch all of my mech based gaming itches...

great now another game to add to the list -_-

I'm biased (I'm DP9's web guy) but they're both good games with different 'feels.' Battletech is not to my personal taste, but it's meant to be a few titans striding around obliterating everything. Heavy Gear is much more squad-ish, with the Gears as giant 'infantry' that still have to work to take down tanks or other hard targets.

Both games seem to work better if they're played for objectives over straight 'destruction' missions.

well i just want a big mech game with big machines blowing everything up, so that's why i like these 2 games

but if someone can give me like a sample game of the 2 like a battle report or something that might help

 jbsnv wrote:
well i just want a big mech game with big machines blowing everything up, so that's why i like these 2 games

but if someone can give me like a sample game of the 2 like a battle report or something that might help

My problem with Battletech is that I didn't feel like I had large mechs blowing things up... I mean it was the scale of the game... but it just didn't feel epic.

It was played on a grid, so terrain didn't matter (everything had level numbers to them), movement was slow because of the hex grid it was on. Turning cost movement, so if you were slow you had to spend some of your movement to turn. I'm sure you can find a Battletech battle report on YouTube.

Also I'm sure the same could be said for Heavy Gear Blitz.

i cant find any battle reports for battle tech on youtube
didnt try looking on the forms yet though

Heavy Gear is a bit freer with movement, especially for Gears... As they whole reason for them is they're very maneuverable, they move kind of like 'skirmishers' in most wargames when in Walker movement mode. They do have the option to go to Ground mode (the wheels/treads on the feet) and gain speed but have to follow some more involved turning rules, the same as other wheeled vehicles. A big part of the Blitz rules is that each model's datacard has a grid that cross-references the current movement mode and speed with attack/defense modifiers for the model's current movement. Speeds are split into three bands (Stationary, Combat, and Top) and most models are about 'break even' in combat mode, or at a slight overall bonus. Staying stationary adds to attack, but lowers defense. Top speed is generally a bonus to defense, a minus to attack.

ok that helps out alot, thanks :3

 jbsnv wrote:

battle tech seems easyer on how to play and has alot of cool modles. but finding the books and models are hard and finding people to play is even harder, or where to even start ( otehr then the 2 player starting box )

Battletech has a much simplier mechanic but you end up spending a long time adding in the modifiers and taking off the damages one by one. A lance vs lance especially in the early era can easily take more than 2 hours even in experienced hands. Battletech used to be my favorite game but the tedious calculation/bookkeeping and the amount of time involved is so long that I finally give it up for HGB.

heavy gear blitz is long long long long long long long long long long long long long list of rules but have equaly cool models, finding where to go and what to get is easyer , and finding people to play with is equaly as hard to find as battle tech
( also witch one is cheaper )

Have you download the free Field Manual yet? The rules are not long at all but there is a steep learning curve to understand how they interact. Basically, in Battletech, you position your mech into the best firing position and defense and try to roll the best dice. You win the game by killing off your opponent's forces. That is it. In HGB, you coordinate all the figures in a group to stack up the modifiers for you or against the detected figure you are trying to shoot with possibility of a re-roll from a Command Point, which, in turn, may be jammed by ECM if the commander is detected, but can also be counter-meausred by ECCM. The goal is to score Victory Points by meeting the objectives. Yes, you can win the battle but lose the game.

HGB plays much faster. If your figure got caught in the open, it may got blown apart in one shot. This is same for those that fail to hide properly and ended up being FO as in open by coordinated Indirect Fire. Also, you can have reactive fire even when you opponent is moving. Usually, the game lasts for 4 turns.

You simply do not get that happen that often in Battletech except for a luck head shot. It is much less dynamic and in comparison, boring. The game can last forever except for a pre-determined set time.

In terms of miniatures, HGB looks way better than those of BT. You can have different weapon options. Often, modeller use magnets to change the weapons according to what is needed. Finally, take advantages of the often come up sales, like the March Madness right now.

Get the picture?

yes i do now, so winner is hgb then thanks for the help guys

doesnt help that no one supported battle tech at all

 jbsnv wrote:
yes i do now, so winner is hgb then thanks for the help guys

doesnt help that no one supported battle tech at all

plenty of people have supported battletech over the years , it's just a clunky game that's showing it's age.

MECHA FRONT!!!!!!

mech front is not out yet

but still i dont think its that clunky

A lot of people are still playing Battletech on Megamek or MW tactics.

I wouldn't call BT clunky, I think it miss represents what it is intended to be, a nuts and bolts game.

It scratches that itch for the style of game for big robots slugging it out.

Where as HGB, though fun, the style and speed of play is already offered in multiple games I already play.

If you are looking for something different and rugged robots, I'd go with BT.

If you want a more familiar feel with a few unique rules and mechs that are more sleek, I'd go with hgb.

 Piston Honda wrote:


Where as HGB, though fun, the style and speed of play is already offered in multiple games I already play.

I wonder what games you were preferring to?

I don't think Piston Honda is keeping that statement exclusively to mech games.

k i read the starting pdf, and i got lost, under stand how basic shooting works that i have to get at least a positive on 2d6 pick the highest, but indirect fire confuses me so much

 Alfndrate wrote:
I don't think Piston Honda is keeping that statement exclusively to mech games.

Correct.

As far as mech games go, HGB is unique.

BT scratches that itch for once in a while nuts and bolts game. I do like the feel of big sluggish robots pounding it out (rock'em sock'em robots style).

If I were looking for a mech game to be my frequent go to game, I would got with HGB. Battle Tech is just a side game.

 jbsnv wrote:
k i read the starting pdf, and i got lost, under stand how basic shooting works that i have to get at least a positive on 2d6 pick the highest, but indirect fire confuses me so much

Basically, with the Silhouette-derived games you're looking at picking the highest die of your die pool (2d6 is standard, but there are upgrades to get skills up to 3, 4, or 5d6). The 'catch' is multiple 6s add a +1 to the total, so rolling 6,6 is a 7... Skill level five can theoretically toll 6,6,6,6,6 for a total of 6+4.... But that's not common.

Indirect fire is a bit more complex. I'd recommend looking at the flow chart on page 14 of the Field Manual. Basically, you don't 'attack' with your action, you go for 'Active Lock' (back on page 10).

To get Active Lock, the model rolls it's EW skill (often only 1) plus the sensor bonus (Model specific, average +0, higher on 'Scout' types) against the opposition's Concealment rating.

Concealment is basically built from 0 based on the intervening terrain. Light terrain is +1 per 4 inches, medium +1 per 2 inches, heavy +1 per inch. Solid terrain blocks completely, but another model that can see the target can Forward Observe. (So you can have a scout go in from the side and FO a target, then let the heavy support Gears let fly. Active lock has a couple other sources of modifiers: Units take a -1 for Combat speed, a -2 for Top, and a -1 if it used range weapons this turn.

So getting active lock may be very easy... On a target that fired, moved, in the open the modifier is going to be negative. On the other hand, if a unit is hiding in a couple inches of wrecked building (+1 per inch of building), stationary, there's 4 inches of jungle (light terrain, +1 per 4 inches) between the attacker and target) and hasn't taken a shot yet, the Concealment could be 3.

If the Active Lock roll fails, it's a wasted action. Only plus is the weapons haven't fired, so you might be able to try again with a Command Point. On the other hand, fi ti success, you get to make an attack as a 'free' action.

IF attacks are made against a threshhold of 4, Effectively, roll the attack skill (usually 2d6 as above) and take the highest with the usual attack modifiers added (movement modifiers, weapon accuracy). If it's a 5+ the indirect Fire attack is on-target. Otherwise the attack deviates. Deviation is 1d6 inches plus the Margin of Failure. So if you rolled a 2 on your attack, the attack deviates 1d6+(Threshold - Attack Roll) in a random direction.

If the attack hits anything, the defenders must roll their Defense skill (again, usually 2d6) but (important!) they roll against the 'raw' attack roll, I.E. what is shown on the dice not counting any modifiers, etc. After this, the process is the same as normal attacks: If the Attack Roll beats the Defense Roll, defender takes damage.

So, let's assume Tyburr (A Northern support artillery tank) is Stationary with a clear shot at a cadre of Jaegers (Southern standard general-purpose Trooper Gears) that for are moving at Combat Speed through a narrow pass formed by 2 inches of 'heavy' terrain (big rocks, etc.). It selects one Jaeger to get Active Lock on and rolls it's EW (1d6) plus Sensors (0) against the Jaeger's concealment of 2 (1 inch for each inch of terrain). It rolls a 4. Success! The Tyburr has used it's sensor systems to lock on to the approaching Gears. It's got one good shot, because a Tyburr is a light tank chassis and 5 Jaegers can pretty reliably take it down. It gets a 'free' action to shoot on the target it just locked, and does so with the Light Field Gun that is this vehicle's primary armament. It rolls 2d6 to see if the shot hits and rolls a great shot: 4,6. This is a raw 6! The 6 would be modified by the Movement modifiers (Stationary Attacks get a +1 for that model, so it's effectively rolled a 7. If it had been moving at top speed, it would have been a -1.) and anything else relevant.

Tyburr needed a 4 to place the shot 'on target' and did so easily with a 7. The Light FIeld Gun has AE1 , so it gets Area Effect with a 1 inch radius from the target. So if the enemy Jaeger Squad was bunched up, as was mentioned (they were cutting through a gap in heavy terrain) the Light FIeld Gun might hit more than one of them. Let's assume it hits three: The Southern Player was not expecting this, and made a foolhardy decision to bunch up going through the pass.

Each Jaeger hit by the blast rolls it's Defense against the 'raw' attack roll. This is 6. Consider that using the 'raw' roll removes both penalties for attacking at high speed as well as bonuses for being stationary. Basically, it's how powerful the Light Field Gun's round is. First Jaeger rolls 4,5 and is hit! Damage is based off 6-5, or 1 times the weapon's damage (x22). This is enough to cause a box of damage to a Jaeger (Armor 15). The second Jaeger rolls 2,3, so takes 3 (Attack 6 - Defense 3) x22 damage... That's over the 60 Overkill for a Jaeger, so it's toast. The third rolls 6,2. THis one is unharmed: Technically hit, but for no damage.

AE weapons do have a secondary bonus in that they apply Stun Counters to models hit (unless they have high armor)... So these three (2, as one is outright killed) also get a Stun Counter and are easier to hit with further attacks. The poor Tyburr made a great shot, but is probably in trouble unless it's got support: it outright killed one Jaeger of the cadre attacking it, damaged 1, and stunned another... It's still got the rest of the Cadre coming through the pass. The Tyburr is pretty much a sitting duck at this point, as it's only other weapon is a Heavy Machine Gun that's nearly useless against armored vehicles like Gears...

Realistically, the Tybur should've kept moving. It's a tank with three actions, and if moving could've used some of those for evasive manuevers to give it a chance. It's armored better than the Jaegers, but they only need one good hit. The Northern tank crew is in a bad spot.

ok thank you
so much
that helped out alot with the senero you made, because the entire first bit made no sense to me at all XD
and is that how powerful all indirect fires are o.o also im still learning the dodge and + and - modifiers so im still confused on a few things


Automatically Appended Next Post:
1 last thing, what are each factions sort of quirks, say in 40 k space marines have super buff infantry that are hard to kill but expensive and come in few numbers, or say another example in 40k orks witch die like flies but swarm in the numbers of bazillion and cost a dime a dozen

or in warmachine where khador are the super buff robot users that are ballz expensive but hideously tough to kill and have horrid synergy( in my opinon )

I quoted this from one of the posts in the official forum:

...every faction can do most of the big archetypes reasonably well, some do better than others in a particular field.

Their claim to "fame" as things currently are in my opinion:

North: easy and plentiful access to Anti-Gear Missiles, plenty of Medium Bazookas, Cheapest and cost effective Recon/EW/Sat Uplinks in the game, Heavy Guided Mortars and Linked MRPs. Biggest main gun on their MBT. Pain in the rear to hit with ranged weapons Scout that works like an elite gear, caution it dies with the slightest sneeze in melee.

South: Paratrooper Guns out of paratrooper squads (Under Barrel grenade launchers, fun times.), cheap and effective Light Bazookas, Flamers, Gatling Guns, Lasers and Particle Cannons a plenty, Heavier armor than most other factions comparable units as soon as you aren't talking about Troopers. Somewhat lacking leadership in most squads.

NuCoal: Fast and furious. Linked MRPs, feel the pain. Best APC in the game outright and it's cheap too. Not much on the advanced weapon side unless you are looking at Tanks and Spec Ops. Expert Mountains advanced Troopers. En Koreshi, when infantry stats start looking like Gears...

P.A.K.: Technically part of NuCoal, but some major differences even more access to GRELs (Supersoldiers) and Hover Tanks. Fast and Furious indeed. Best Anti-Infantry option in the form of linked Frag Cannons (Shotguns) available on Light Hover Tanks that will get in the opponent back line by turn 2 or 3 (depending on table size and terrains placement.), if someone went and made the mistake to oppose you with a primarily Infantry List, this will likely end badly for the foot sluggers.

Peace River: MACs and MRPs. They have good amounts of Field Mortars as well and excellent (comparatively) heavy weapons infantry teams. Their current list need a revision as it's full of traps right now.

CEF: Fast and Furious, Lasers everywhere with just a touch of Missiles and Particle Cannons. More GRELs than you can shake your fist at. Capability of taking Colonial troops along.

Caprice: The rougher the terrain, the better. The Caprician Mounts will go anywhere, no question asked. Only those underwater are safe from them scaling it and using the environment to their advantage. Somewhat expensive, both TV and $ wise.

Utopia: Drones. And Stealth. Your entire army will only have a handful of humans in it. And you don't even need to be Racist against GRELs to say so.

EDEN: Strictly an ally force. Powered Armors. Mini gears if you will.

Black Talons: Can allies with the Colonials or Terra Novans. Get the shiniest and most costly toys around. Stealth everywhere and will often massacre or work at a major disadvantage depending on what the opponent's list contain. More so than anyone else I mean.

I generally recommend every new comers to start on NuCoal or South. Their army books are the most recent updated.