|
Strobe posted:For most of the setting they were terrible and on fire well off-screen. The FWL got face time in the FASA days when: Hey now, under Wizkids the FWL got 4 whole books, plus minor roles in 2 other novels. Out of a 30 novel line, that's about 12-15% screen time. In a universe with 5+ major factions, I'd say that was the best the FWL had ever done until Catalyst now.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:Hey now, under Wizkids the FWL got 4 whole books, plus minor roles in 2 other novels. Out of a 30 novel line, that's about 12-15% screen time. In a universe with 5+ major factions, I'd say that was the best the FWL had ever done until Catalyst now. All things the FWL only got after the Clix game died, though, so I'd give the credit to CGL.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
The start of the modern FWL Renaissance was TRO 3145: Free Worlds League, which postdated those novels but was full of genuinely superb designs for basically the first time in the FWL's fiction existence. That crop has only gotten richer in the Rec Guides, it's fantastic
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:All things the FWL only got after the Clix game died, though, so I'd give the credit to CGL. The FWL books were published in 2006, the Clix game was still getting new expansions and set that year. The game continued late until 2007 with limited tourney support. And that whole time Wizkids was still the main company. The switch to Catalyst didn't happen until those novels were already out. I should know, I'm still playing the game. From the Wikipedia page on the Dark Age Novels: Wikipedia posted:In June 2008, Catalyst Game Labs announced that they had acquired the right to publish novels set in the BattleTech universe, including both new material for both Classic-era BattleTech, as well as MechWarrior. The first Catalyst published MechWarrior novel will be A Bonfire of Worlds by Steven Mohan, Jr, and was originally to be released in November 2008. On November 8, it was announced that the book would delayed to early 2009 to allow for optimal retail positioning.[4] On March 31, 2009, Catalyst again revised the release date of the new novels to be Fall 2009, and also announced that MechWarrior: Dark Age is being renamed to BattleTech: Dark Age to unify the brand under the BattleTech name. Furthermore, Catalyst announced that A Bonfire of Worlds would become available, at no additional cost, to BattleCorps.com subscribers at a rate of one chapter every two weeks.[5] On November 26, 2009, Catalyst officially added A Bonfire of Worlds to its 'Projected First Quarter 2010 Releases', effectively pushing the release back for the 3rd time. Catalyst also released a 'sell sheet' for the novel which includes full details.[6] The release of the sell sheet is the first time full publication details for the novel have become available, and mark a new milestone towards publication of the novel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MechWarrior:_Dark_Age_(novels) Crazy Joe Wilson fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Oct 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 00:43
|
|
|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:The FWL books were published in 2006, the Clix game was still getting new expansions and set that year. The FWL books started with Pandora's Gambit in August 2007, when the Clix game was bleeding out in the alleyway. You can tell how much WK cared about the FWL because they released seventy million versions of Clan Wolf but never got around to the League.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 01:21
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:The FWL books started with Pandora's Gambit in August 2007, when the Clix game was bleeding out in the alleyway. You can tell how much WK cared about the FWL because they released seventy million versions of Clan Wolf but never got around to the League. And yet it was still published under Wizkids, so you were wrong. And Wizkids said they were going to do FWL on their own forums, but that the faction first had "to get its act together in the story" before they would. Had the game continued, Purple Eagles would've been introduced. That was one of things I liked about clix, they tried to make the game reflect the story. When the Fortress Republic Wall went up, the Republic disappeared for an entire expansion or two, and then Ares mechs appeared. Your inability to give any slack to the clix game reminds me of all the grognards who chased me away from trying to switch to CBT when Clix officially went down. Chill out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 01:32
|
|
|
Personally, I like that the game doesn’t make me read these novels. Everyone just complains about the novels. I like to enjoy reading, and I like to enjoy the games I play. I prefer not to be forced into caring about clan wolf or whatever else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 01:37
|
|
|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:And yet it was still published under Wizkids, so you were wrong. And Wizkids said they were going to do FWL on their own forums, but that the faction first had "to get its act together in the story" before they would. Had the game continued, Purple Eagles would've been introduced. That was one of things I liked about clix, they tried to make the game reflect the story. When the Fortress Republic Wall went up, the Republic disappeared for an entire expansion or two, and then Ares mechs appeared. That's a ridiculous excuse. They could have them do whatever they wanted. They aren't recounting actual events, they can just say "the FWL is doing something" and boom, they're in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 01:45
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:That's a ridiculous excuse. They could have them do whatever they wanted. They aren't recounting actual events, they can just say "the FWL is doing something" and boom, they're in. It wasn't an excuse, it's what they wanted to do. They wanted the game to reflect the story. It was a conscious decision, and it started with Jordan Weisman (Who founded the F*cking game) wanting the game to reflect the return to low-scale conflict by just doing pirate factions, at first, while slowing bringing everyone back in. You can disagree with the design decision, but it wasn't an excuse, it was a DESIGN DECISION.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 02:39
|
|
|
But the story is whatever they make up. Like you said, they were returning to low-level conflict, so the FWL doesn't need to be able to muster 100 regiments, they just need to stick whatever random crap they have laying around in a Union and hit someone. All they needed to do was decide "the League has decided to punch a face." Saying that they can't do something because the story somehow won't "let" them is an excuse.
Defiance Industries fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Oct 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 02:42
|
|
|
Finished painting five more things today
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
Chainclaw posted:Finished painting five more things today Nice! I finished up my merc company for an Alpha Strike event I may get to go to next month. Think I might call the company Canned Sunshine? Command/support:  Lance 1:  Lance 2:  If I did it right, these are all mechs available to a merc company right on the cusp of the Clan invasion. None of this is required (aside from a basic attempt at painting), it just nets some extra judges’ points that’ll go into the final score. The one rule I’m butting up against is on mech chassis, you can bring 2 of a single chassis (both hunchbacks) but they have to be different variants (4G vs 5M in my case). First lance is wayyy darker than the second one, it just isn’t showing up so well via pics. The Stalker’s middle-line might also be a little weird, but I promise it’s there. Half of it looks like the one lance (black/red trim), half looks like the other (silver/red trim). Gold cockpits and rockets on both sets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
Not sure if this was intended but those are almost exactly Wolfs Dragoons Black Widow Company parade scheme. And they look pretty drat good! My only recommendation would be some edge highlighting, it's very simple and quick and like 80% of Battletech players I've met forget to do it even though it really elevates the look. If you decide to edge highlight those just make sure not to use white. Since they're mostly black you want a grey at most (and like a pink on red panels, like the Axeman shoulder).
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 13:58
|
|
|
The Fang from GW is pretty good for highlighting black
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
Marx Headroom posted:Not sure if this was intended but those are almost exactly Wolfs Dragoons Black Widow Company parade scheme. And they look pretty drat good! My only recommendation would be some edge highlighting, it's very simple and quick and like 80% of Battletech players I've met forget to do it even though it really elevates the look. Thanks, but no edge highlighting for me. I’m already crosseyed as it is painting these 😂 Scheme also wasn’t intentional, I’m just a sucker for red/black. Should’ve figured it was used somewhere already, but I’ll do it again all the same  Speaking of painting, just finished a  Probably would’ve been a touch more menacing with red trim on the skull bits, but red/green makes me think of Christmas…so that just wasn’t going to work 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2022 00:38
|
|
|
GD_American posted:It wouldn’t hurt for the setting to have an equivalent of Armageddon in 40k- basically a planet where over a certain span of time you’ll see practically every faction putting their troops on the field at least once. MechCommander 2 tried this with Carver V / Liberty but it wasn't particularly exciting. The games on Solaris VII are a much better example and the world even has setting books written for it already.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2022 05:45
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:MechCommander 2 tried this with Carver V / Liberty but it wasn't particularly exciting. The clix game did this too with a planet but it was short term; basically a Marauder II factory got uncovered near Marik space and every faction ran over there to fight over it. They wrote a short sourcebook on the conflict.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
There's a new rec guide out. It's got some tanks in it as well this time, which I like. Most importantly, Quikscell has a factory on Broken Wheel. Is there any pairing more perfect?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2022 21:10
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:There's a new rec guide out. It's got some tanks in it as well this time, which I like. Quiksell rep in over the top cowboy outfit with a giant QS beltbuckle when?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
In an attempt to avoid painting my 30k stuff, I finally got around to picking up a BT lance set - not the Command one I initially wanted, but the Support lance with the Spider, Dragon, Thug, and Cyclops. I've played the game somewhat via Megamek, but not in person, and I'm not much of an expert on lance building. Local community seems to very much like 3025 through the Clan Invasion; I'm primarily thinking 3020s into early 3030s to get going. I know I'm not exactly spoiled for choice here compared to some other mechs with tons of variants, but what an I probably looking at for a "solid" starting lance with an unclear BV target? Currently thinking something like: * SDR-5V * THG-10E (by dint of being the only one to really exist at that time) * DRG-1G * CP-10-Q which comes in at just a hair over 5k BV by my math. Thug and Dragon do their mid range thing, Spider pokes holes, Cyclops stands back and gives fire support. But I'm known to be a fool so maybe I'm going about this wrong? Either way I have to get the drat things painted first, and a color scheme may be even more difficult to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 02:18
|
|
|
As always, I must stress that the miniatures you own have nothing to do with the units you can field. If someone tries to hold you to WSIWYG, point them to the proxying rules in Total Warfare and then stop playing with them because that is a massive red flag. If you wanted the mechs in the other pack instead, print THOSE record sheets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
Defiance Industries posted:As always, I must stress that the miniatures you own have nothing to do with the units you can field. If someone tries to hold you to WSIWYG, point them to the proxying rules in Total Warfare and then stop playing with them because that is a massive red flag. If you wanted the mechs in the other pack instead, print THOSE record sheets. I get that. I would also like to field the mechs that I'm going to be painting anyway. It's easier for me to remember, it's easier for my opponent to remember, and I like 3 out of the 4 anyway (the Cyclops is whatever). Just don't want to stumble into traps since I'm well aware some variants of mechs just suck for no good reason other than to suck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
You might come around on the Cyclops. It's a particularly fun mini to paint. If I could only ever paint one more BattleTech mini I'd probably pick a Cyclops.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 05:30
|
|
|
Banshee for me. Good enough for Ludwig Steiner, good enough for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 06:03
|
|
|
SkyeAuroline posted:In an attempt to avoid painting my 30k stuff, I finally got around to picking up a BT lance set - not the Command one I initially wanted, but the Support lance with the Spider, Dragon, Thug, and Cyclops. I've played the game somewhat via Megamek, but not in person, and I'm not much of an expert on lance building. Local community seems to very much like 3025 through the Clan Invasion; I'm primarily thinking 3020s into early 3030s to get going. I know I'm not exactly spoiled for choice here compared to some other mechs with tons of variants, but what an I probably looking at for a "solid" starting lance with an unclear BV target? Currently thinking something like: This seems fine for the era. You can't go wrong with Sword of Light for the scheme. Solid red is not incredibly difficult to paint and it's distinctive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 06:08
|
|
|
So is the BT community the opposite of the historicals community? In your average historical facebook group, showing minis and saying "I know these are not 100% historically accurately painted, but this is how I like to do it" means you'll get a bunch of people disregarding that completely and posting long posts about what are indeed the correct colour of the inside of a T-34 commander's hatch. Meanwhile, in BT, I posted "I know that you can paint your mechs however you want, but IF you want to do these formations according to lore, how would you do them", and I got a dozen posts on how I should just do what I want and disregard lore. :P Anyway I'm asking here too. I'm seeing so much contradicting stuff on the FRR, both on sarna and on the uniform pages. Some says some formations ONLY have a specific weight class of mechs. So 1st Tyr would ONLY have heavies and assaults. Gunzberg's Eagles would ONLY have assault mechs. Which doesn't make any sense at all, either in universe or as a hobbyist. have a nice time walking into ambushes all day, every day, while not knowing where the enemy is. Also all lances are sold as at least somewhat mixed. And most times I find any ToE they tend to at least have a scout lance or something supporting the heavies, but then I can't find any ToE for any FRR so... I guess my question is if the stuff on sarna is sometimes just bullshit? Or is it the actual lore composition that sometimes doesn't make sense, and you have to choose whether to adhere to it or just ignore those specific parts? I'm currently thinking of just assuming that those heavier formations would indeed have at least a handful of lighter mechs available to do some scouting and support. lilljonas fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Oct 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 09:27
|
|
|
The stuff from sarna is (usually) from published sources. A lot of the stuff as well is for prestige units, where they have others do the scouting while they do the stuff that looks heroic (or be a parade ground unit most of the time). Usually if they're deployed, they'll havescout company detached from whatever other unit they're serving with
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 09:54
|
|
|
I think the answer is that there’s always exceptions to the extent where you can explain just about anything in a lore-friendly way. Like for example the Panther is a classic Kurita mech, they fielded tons of them. However, that doesn’t mean any other faction wouldn’t have a Panther or two or several dozen - through salvage and opportune trade deals etc. any force might end up with anything. If your ”exclusively heavies/assaults” force is down a mech, replacements are far away and you have the chance to grab a Wolverine or whatever, that’s what you’ll get. Or perhaps you need that Locust to scout some poo poo from time to time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 10:06
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Meanwhile, in BT, I posted "I know that you can paint your mechs however you want, but IF you want to do these formations according to lore, how would you do them", and I got a dozen posts on how I should just do what I want and disregard lore. :P It's mostly that: what is 'right' for a unit can change over time; and a lot of the canon schemes are parade schemes with the unit in question switching to camo where appropriate. Plus, there's always the risk that your mostly green-painted unit has wound up garrisoning a planet with a very different sun; where all the locals have become red/green colorblind and the only thing they have that approximates the same value as your unit's green is a specific shade of pink paint. To the locals your 'Mechs would look the same (and that's really who you're there to impress), but to everyone else you'd clash obnoxiously. That said, if you're wanting to paint a unit as accurately as possible, camospecs is the site to check for each unit's official parade scheme/pattern; and Sarna's the best place to see what (if any) restrictions they place on what they field. But if you really want to sneak an Atlas or even an entire heavy lance into your 1st Amphigean Light Assault company, nobody's really going to question it. Edit: Really, it boils down to the different mindsets of various games. BattleTech players are just excited by the prospect of having someone new to roll dice with, so they don't want to scare you away by telling you that the 1st Sword of Light don't usually paint their 'Mechs canary yellow with purple hazard stripes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 12:47
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:
I can totally understand that and it's usually a healthy attitude to have as a community. But as a primarily historical wargamer, there's a whole appeal for me to do a force that is "historically correct". Right now I'm leaning towards a mainly 1st Tyr force, maybe with a smattering of other FRR regiments to swap in as support, and for me that's just a more personally rewarding hobby project than to paint up a few mechs in a random camo, even though I can completely understand why that is a more appealing option for most normal people. So I'm planning to start to paint up the medium and heavies as Tyr, maybe a few lights too, and at some point I might paint up an assault lance of Gunzburg Eagles. If I end up liking light and medium mechs a lot, I might end up painting up a lance or two from a lighter regiment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
Canonically I think most forces are supposed to be lights and mediums, with a smattering of heavier elements. At least in 3025-3050. I would love more force packs like the Striker(?) Lance, with the Blackjack, Wolfhound, Jenner, and Panther - nothing over 50 tons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
Stuff from sarna is only from a published source if it has a reference. They're generally pretty good about having those, but the text on sarna may be exaggerated based on that contributor's interpretation of it. There are very, very few formations in the setting that are all the same class. Wolf's Dragoons Zeta Battalion is famous for being all Assaults, and is generally treated as unusual to the point of being unique for it. I would not expect any FRR formation bigger than a company to be exclusively Assault mechs, even if they're said to have a large number of Assaults. Even ~30 Assaults across an entire Regiment would be notable to the point of outlier at that time in the setting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 18:42
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Stuff from sarna is only from a published source if it has a reference. They're generally pretty good about having those, but the text on sarna may be exaggerated based on that contributor's interpretation of it. First Tyr is canonically, as of 3062, of battalion strength and comprised entirely of assault 'Mechs (FM:C*, p. 74 and 142). 20-Year Update describes the Gunzburg Eagles as an "assault BattleMech regiment" (p. 48). While that does not necessarily mean every unit is an Assault 'Mech, it implies a high percentage of Assaults.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
Carbolic posted:First Tyr is canonically, as of 3062, of battalion strength and comprised entirely of assault 'Mechs (FM:C*, p. 74 and 142). Yes, there is a difference between "[weight class] regiment" and "a regiment made entirely of [weight class]" and if caring about that is your thing, it's important to tell the difference. BT generally prefers descriptive rather than proscriptive build descriptions, so units that are "only X weight" are extremely unusual and generally have a story behind them. For instance, the 1st Tyr is just assaults because the regiment was originally a present from Katrina Steiner and she wanted to make a big point of her support. The 22nd Skye Rangers are all lights and mediums besides a recent addition of five lances of heavies and two Hauptmann assaults because they're the remnants of forces that were on the run from the Jade Falcons. That kinda thing. Absent some kind of very specific explanation for why they are the way that they are, it's safe to assume it's a descriptor of average weight. I do gotta say, though, if you are coming at things from the historical wargamer standpoint of wanting to be "accurate," there's not many worse choices than the Kungsarme. They were created to die, so most of their units (like the Gunzberg Eagles) were given a cursory writeup in 20-Year Update and then sent to slaughter. Only the handful of units (3rd Drakons, 2nd Hussars, 3rd Freeman, 4th Kavalleri, 1st Tyr) that survive have much of anything written about them. Not really a faction they built to last, that one. Defiance Industries fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Oct 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
Rare exceptions would be stuff like Barber's Marauder IIs, Cochraine's Goliaths, and the aforementioned Zeta Battallion. Even groups like the Davion Heavy/Assault Guards aren't entirely one weight class.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
BattleTech is weird about weight class and 'Mech availability, primarily because the line developers have, with rare exceptions (Barber's Marauder IIs), never defined which 'Mechs are in which regiments at any given time. If you're lucky the unit you want to make may list a commander and if you're exceptionally lucky it may even say what that commander rides around in but otherwise it's a blank slate for you to create your own story with. So as long as you get the commander right? You get an A+ for historical accuracy. That's why my Vau Galaxy Falcons have a Hellbringer, because that was Star Colonel Kristen Redmond's ride of choice. A lack of definite "this unit has four Atlases and thirteen Archers" is only half of the reason. The other half is that there have been monumental shifts in what constitutes a "lightweight unit" over the history of the Inner Sphere. During the 1st succession war a "lightweight unit" might be just a 'Mech regiment without any armor regiments or supporting infantry; and by 3025 a "lightweight unit" might be a normal 'Mech regiment with a two normal battalions and a third made up entirely of Wasps and Stingers. Prior to 3048 (most of) the Inner Sphere used light 'Mechs as scouts and raiders; mediums as front-line troops; heavies were primarily cavalry and fire support; and assaults were the spearhead unit for frontal assaults. The Dracs were an outlier with their trooper lights but as a general rule everyone operated pretty much the same way. There're a few exceptions, and some are truly exceptional 'Mechs like the Guillotine and Thunderbolt which I'd call heavy troopers, a few are notoriously bad like the Cicada and Charger, and most just aren't "better enough" to replace the 'Mechs that conform to the paradigm like the Longbow when compared to the Archer. Then the Clans showed up, and their paradigm was wildly different: light 'Mechs were trainers, support units, or 'headhunter' assassination units; mediums were scouts, raiders, and the tip of the proverbial spear; heavies were line troops; and assaults were fire support. There're a few 'Mechs that break the mold here too (like the Mad Dog, which is ultimately just a lighter Archer IIC), but 'Mechs like the Summoner and Hellbringer make a lot more sense once you realize that the Summoner is the Clan version of the Wolverine/Griffin and the Hellbringer is not so much a small Warhammer as it is secretly the front-line Clan version of the Shadow Hawk. So after 3050 the Inner Sphere swerved hard. They didn't understand the Clan paradigm but accepted doctrine became "if you don't outweigh your Clan opponent by at least 15 tons you're going to lose;" so the states that are front-line with the Clans hard-shift into a Trooper Assault paradigm which pretty much makes their neighbors (the Capellans and Free Worlders) Very Concerned (tm) that everyone else is cramming as many heavy and assault 'Mechs into their militaries as they can. Eventually they scale back to something similar to the Clan paradigm as they figure out what works for them and what doesn't, but the Free Worlders never really get the memo despite their best efforts (Albatross lol) and the Capellans eventually say "gently caress this, we're making our own paradigm rather than trying to keep up with the rest of you idiots." This is all compounded even more in Rasalhague because they barely had time to establish any doctrines at all before the Clans smashed them and by 3150 they just use the Ghost Bear doctrines (heavy and assault troopers with light assassins and medium scouts) almost 1:1 On the plus side? By 3150, every successor state and Inner Sphere Clan have their own unique doctrinal twists which help give their forces a lot more personality: like the Draconis Combine's shift to a Light + Heavy trooper combo or the Capellan light fire support units and headhunter assassins and their choice to eschew troopers almost entirely in favor of heavy raiders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 20:44
|
|
|
As an aside coming from kings of war, conquest and other war games it is kind of novel for me to see games where there are no doctrine or faction bonuses used much in Battletech. It doesn't seem to diminish my enjoyment but it is something that took a bit getting used to when watching YouTube battle reports.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
Many units will get special rules that they can use in the various Field Manuals, like having access to off-board movement when normally they wouldn't or certain initiative rules that activate in certain conditions.PoptartsNinja posted:BattleTech is weird about weight class and 'Mech availability, primarily because the line developers have, with rare exceptions (Barber's Marauder IIs), never defined which 'Mechs are in which regiments at any given time. Which made the Clan Wolf and Falcon books so abnormal with the entire touman breakdown.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
Strobe posted:This seems fine for the era. You can't go wrong with Sword of Light for the scheme. Solid red is not incredibly difficult to paint and it's distinctive. Planned on going with homebrew mercs, dark teal/sea green with either red or purple accent. Steiner through and through in spirit - can't just go play Dracs. Got started on the models but having enough issues with my hands today that I didn't get much done besides metal joints and the Dragon and Spider's armor basecoat. At least it's just four models to work through, I'll get there eventually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
Taerkar posted:Many units will get special rules that they can use in the various Field Manuals, like having access to off-board movement when normally they wouldn't or certain initiative rules that activate in certain conditions. They actually weren't abnormal for the time, but they seem to have marked the end of that practice. From the beginning of the game, the sourcebooks all had full TO&Es for the units they were profiling. For the first few years these were all company-size units (Tales of the Black Widow, Fox's Teeth, Snord's Irregulars, etc.). Then the Mercenary's Handbook (1987) had full TO&Es for the Eridani Light Horse (3 regiments) and Waco Rangers (1 regiment); The Kell Hounds sourcebook (1988) had a TO&E for that regiment. The Wolf's Dragoons Sourcebook (1989) had the TO&E for all five regiments plus independent units. I'm pretty sure the last sourcebook to do this for a unit above company size was the Jade Falcon sourcebook from 1992. After that the writers seem to have realized that it was better to leave these things flexible. Annointed posted:As an aside coming from kings of war, conquest and other war games it is kind of novel for me to see games where there are no doctrine or faction bonuses used much in Battletech. It doesn't seem to diminish my enjoyment but it is something that took a bit getting used to when watching YouTube battle reports. It's something I wish Battletech had leaned into. Not just regiment-specific stuff like "the 7th Draconis Hussars have a +1 bonus to initiative on wooded terrain" but actual faction-wide flavour to make them play differently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 22:14
|
|