|
Cyrano4747 posted:Nah, that just further exacerbates the problem of there being no real difference between "normal heat" and "oh gently caress shut down I'm screwed." Yea, like just over the OH line for the 1dmg it seems to do now and maybe 3x dmg right near shutdown. Would have to watch out for MW with lots/none of guts getting a huge gap between OH and SH and racking up tons of dmg like how Angel of Death really punishes JJ heat for those extended jumps.
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 06:04 |
|
|
WOO!   I just beat the Light Assault team on Alpine Peaks with 4 Locusts and no losses, first attempt. I feel like that mechcommander in the MC1 intro after he has taken down that Timber Wolf. I figured I would need a map like Alpine Peaks to isolate the enemies. The Kintaro and Hunchback came first and actually did an OK job of staying together. I used sensor lock and the one LRM Locust to pester them down and got a few good rear shots on the Kintaro before the Hunch really got to the engagement. Then I lead them up my hill and isolated them, finishing both with rear shots. One enemy Urbire didn't bother crossing the river and my LRM Locust was empty, but fresh. So I regrouped as one urbie crossed the river which was quickly isolated and destroyed. The last one was on a plateau overlooking their side of the river chasm. Sprinted my damaged Locusts to the other side and used my fresh ones to engage and close. Sweet buttmeat was mine and the match was done. If anyone is getting used to the AI and feels it is too easy, do this challenge. I was very lucky and not a single AC/20 connected, but I don't think it fired more than once or twice. One hit was all it would have needed. I would break LOS with the hunch and then reserve my whole team until it moved. I would run in, do what I could and then sprint out on the next round. If it went evasive I would just sensor lock it, if not, that Locust got to shoot. Isildur, thank you and the HBS team. This is the kind of Battletech game I have been waiting for. I think I read on the forum or somewhere that the all locust vs Light Assault was some kind of internal challenge, is that true? Where ever I read that is how I got the idea to try this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
I could also see the King Crab being a great fit for Multi-targeting. But then again, the thing is a great fit for anything except Sensor Lock.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:In terms of how the it performs in the Beta? I just ran two test matches so I could write down the results in the end of game survey. The Awesome is trash right now, and it shouldn't be. Big Lock Enemy: Atlas - Evasive Move Pilot Awesome - Gun/Tactics Pilot (water everywhere, don't need guts) Jenner - Tactics Pilot Locust - Master Tac. Pilot My Teams: 2x Awesomes - Gun/Tactics Pilots Catapult - Master Tac. Pilot Commando - Sensor Lock Pilot 2x Victor 9B - Precise Shot Pilots Trebuchet - Master Tac. Pilot Commando - Sensor Lock Pilot Tactics was the same for both matches so it would favor the PPCs range advantage. Run to the left, lights forward, but behind rocks and put the AWS/VTR in open water but at far range. Get sensor contacts, lock and fire from beyond enemy visual range, fall back and repeat. Results: Awesome Lance: Loss - Commando Damages: Both Awesomes exposed fronts and one missing a torso The base plan was solid and worked as planned, but the Awesomes couldn't kill the lights before they got close enough to provide indirect fire against my Commando. This also forced my Awesomes to move back to stay out of minimum range. The extra rounds spent cleaning up the lights and re-positioning my Sensor Lock and LRM support let the Atlas and Awesome move forward. The Atlas used LRM20s on whoever the lights could spot. I couldn't open up the Awesome quickly either and had to flank it. The Atlas was the same problem, it just took a lot of time to kill. Victor Lance: Loss - NONE Damages - Commando and one Victor both took light internal damage, no loss of limbs The base plan worked flawlessly. The sensor lock provided easy AC/20 shots that wrecked each of the lights in a turn. Then came the Awesome who took some rounds to kill, but its PPCs did little damage. The Atlas didn't even need to be flanked, I just rushed it with the Victors, DFA'd it once and hammered away with the AC/20s. Trebuchet and Commando provided supporting fire until it lost its right torso and eventually died after being declawed. I kept slightly backing up/jumping so it couldn't reach melee once the AC/20 was gone. The Commando took one good LRM20 to the front at the end, got a little over zealous trying for a killing blow while it was knocked down. Even with a map and plan that favored long range PPCs, the Victor team using a lighter fire support mech and the Victors lower armor, the decreased lethality of the PPC led to the loss of the Commando and a much higher repair bill for the Awesome Lance. I did this as I wanted to compare the "worst" assault to compare PPCs to. If I had taken the LRM Awesomes (done swap tests like this with them already, LRM AWS is better) I would have been knocking over and killing pilots left and right.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:Victor is growing on me as a Great Robot, though I am still favoring the Orion over an assault so I can take more awesome Mediums. Mediums are amazing in this game. The Victor definitely has its place in BT, its place isn't "everywhere" like the Orion or Atlas but it makes a great "Stomper" to throw in against 15mil light games. Shows up, knocks you down and jumps away. The Awesome has a place for sure, but long range direct fire in general is weakened in BT vs TT due to the fog of war restrictions and the very hilly/mesa-ish maps we have make the lackluster damage of the PPC not a smart choice. Maybe we will see things change once we can fight each other, as both teams will be more cautious and hang back before the brawl starts. However, I see LRMs beating just about everything else in that situation.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Q_res posted:It doesn't help the PPC that they've essentially turned the AC/10 into a no-minimum-range Gauss Rifle. Reading that made me realize that the AC/10 is exactly what the Gauss Rifles BT damage value would be. That's why it's so drat good.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
Why not just drop the AC/10 dmg down instead of trying all these crazy things? Drop it to 60 and if you want raise the PPC to match and/or add negative effects to being hit by one. I kind of like the idea of the PPC impact adding to-hit or sensor detection penalties, as it would give the early moving Panther a great role similar to a sensor locker, but with weapons instead of a pilot skill. Mechs like the Awesome, who move last wouldn't really be able to exploit the shock effects unless they shoot a mech that hasn't moved yet as the next new round will reset the effect.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:They buffed AC/2 from 10 to 25 (on the 5x scale), the AC/5 from 25 to 50, which made the AC/10 at 60 look like a shorter range, heavier piece of crap. Right now the AC/10 has less than canon ammo (8 instead of 10) per ton, which I think might be the best way to bring it in line. Ah yea, good point. But I wonder what will become of the actual Gauss Rifle? If it does 75dmg, is massive to mount and explosive, then why not take a much more available AC/10? If they raise the dmg to near 100 it becomes a god weapon even with the minimum range. Tin Foil Hat Thinking - The AC/10 in beta is a cover to test how a gauss rilfe effects player choice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:Because they're so fat the diabeetus has degraded their vision. This. Where in the files are the chassis sensor ranges? Is it class based or does each chassis/variant have a custom sensor range?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
I actually Mechashiva'd The Hunchback moved in for a Melee and took the same space as the Battlemaster to form the HUNCHMASTER. The Melee attack missed, the Orion fell over from pure fear. Guess I have to send a bug report.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 10:26
|
|
|
Skoll posted:PGI would ban you for this. Niko would ban me for posting that screenshot "for cheating" in a completely different Battletech game.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
I got an old laptop HDD with a lot of old WoL art and files. I'll dig my external adapter out this weekend and see what I can scrape up before the drive kills itself for good. Found some of the old unit logos and signature materials already in my imgur history. http://imgur.com/a/u0kiy Amechwarrior fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Jun 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
I found an old goon logos.rar and updated it with some other things I had from the wiki folder. It even had the old fonts.rar inside for making more text. Sadly, I didn't save a lot of the non-logo artwork and posters. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwuV7aRut36TZ2tIWkIzWTlKdXM/view Contains stuff for: Bropoc KDR Squad Hard Corg - early concept Eurosquad - joke concept Black Baza Corsair's Own - The Old Guard Other general crap and ideas.  Enjoy
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:That gif is so good. I know, it was like the one thing I saved not part of my logo making. Anyone know who made it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
Neopie posted:What's the unedited gif from? Like, what was it edited out of? I didn't make this one, sadly I don't know. The "all tabs to SQUAWK!" frames at the end remind me of Evangelion, but the UI isn't right at all. I'd bet some other mecha anime, but I can't place it. EDIT: Iserlohn posted:It's from Gunbuster. drat, knew it felt like Eva, same director. I've seen and even own Gunbuster and it didn't click, guess it's time for a viewing. Amechwarrior fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Jun 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
Found the goon pilot while playing with the debug cam (CRTL+SHIFT+i) and I'm glad friendly fire is off. The Centurion made up for it by headcapping the Atlas in the next round. It's finally my turn to deliver AC/10s to the face.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2017 09:28
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Isn't Ferro just becoming a thing in 3025? Could be a late game toy, and there are lostech robots with endo... DCMS doesn't reacquire FF until the 3040s. As always, their's a SL cache with lostech somewhere... You know, if you found a lostech mech with FF armor, and no spare plate... How do you repair it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
So we had an idea in the goon BT discord: Take a Hunchback 4P - The one with lasers. Replace all mediums with smalls and max armor with remaining 4 tons. Use mech to punch and then unleash 9 SML every round as you are heat neutral. PUNCHBACK
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
Found a "broken" team: 2x Trebuchets 1x Jaggermech 1x Orion Setup on a hill and have the Orion on point and with Sensor Lock. Once an enemy is in range, Lock and then have each Treb fire 1 LRM 15. The first will unsteady, the 2nd will knockdown, then the Jaggermech(with an 8 gunner) uses called shots to the head. If you don't need Sensor Lock, the Orion can help with the LRM/SRM combo and maybe lasers, no need for the AC/10. Why bruise the meat? Each enemy died within 2 combat rounds, no flanking or side focusing. My own Orion pulled back as needed, the others didn't move after getting perched.  
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 04:18
|
|
|
Asimov posted:I'm not really a battletech follower and have only seen this game in gif form. If they could make one improvement to the game, I think it would be to change the melee animation so it goes: I've made suggestions like that in the post-match surveys. I think the problem comes down to time/money/people spent on making sure such animations work across a wide range of mech shapes, differences in attacker/defender hight, forms of physical attacks, hit locations, weapon locations and then to top it all off - player mech customization. This is a team that is porting over assets from another game to save time and money. In a thread on pilot ejecting on the official forums, a dev broke down how such requests end up eating up a ton of resources, even without changing the way the game calculates things. As awesome as such things would be, it takes a ton of work in a game like Battletech.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
So I tuned the "Knockdown, Headshot" team down to a 15mil drop that can still salvage 3/4 of the standard Heavy Assault Lance. The COM-2D and TBT-9N provide unsteady and knockdowns, then the UM-R60 and HBK-4G followup with called shots to the head. If they miss the head, hey it's still a ton of damage to the enemy team that really out guns you. I was going in just trying to live and shoot for CT kills, but it really is faster and safer to just shoot for the head and see if you get lucky. Compared to the 25mil team, the enemy and I took far more damage and thus less expected salvage, but I could have outright bought new Hunchbacks and Trebuchets with the money saved. 
Amechwarrior fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 09:30
|
|
|
Sky Shadowing posted:HBS did say that in the full release piloting skill will influence how fast a Mechs becomes unsteady so even if they don't tweak the numbers it will change. I expect this setup to not work on release. However, if the basics of the knockdown mechanic and called shots to the head don't change significantly, the method can work with Mech1: Melee to unsteady, Mech 2: Melee to knockdown, Mech 3: Melee to Knockdown if needed/called shots 1, Mech 4: Awesome 3x PPC Called shots to Head. That or whatever becomes the cheese-knocker meta. I don't think the strategy will be as lethal and safe as it is now (killing a fresh mech from the front in 1 focused round) but it some form it will be the way to salvage stuff in the campaign. In the 25mil kit, my Trebs are only firing 1/2 the LRMs at a time so if knockdowns are toned down and piloting factored in, I can easily double the knockdown power by firing both LRMs. On protracted single player missions, this might have to be saved for big enemies, but in skirmish/multiplayer it would be worth it to immediately kill 1/2 the team and then use the Trebs as distraction punchers. Rygar201 posted:I love having Hunchbacks or Orions moving a phase ahead personally. I take Arclight a lot for that reason I setup the enemy with a 2x HBK-4G and 2x AWS-8Q and gave my single assault, the Atlas, the Master Tactician. This is just unfair to the Awesomes. You rarely get to have one Assault used called shots on another without reserving your lighter units in some way. The Atlas moving in the heavy phase let me cripple/kill the Awesomes before they could get back on their feet. I love how the Kintaro/Hunchies become light hunters and Orion to medium hunting with Master Tac.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Good luck knocking down those Shreks is all I can say to people expecting to cheese the campaign with knockdown strats. That's what off-board artillery is for! With cash saved from salvaging mechs, I can pay other people to deal with tanks. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
I found the rules for manipulating the Initiative turn order. This will apply to single and multiplayer equally. https://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/8711/comments/160726
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Yep. The game wants to take alternating turns and you can screw with it to your advantage as long as you have a unit that isn't taking its Turn in Phase 1.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:There are posts appearing on the official forums that the AI is much better in this version. I thought the backer update was saying the multiplayer patch was when the AI was to be improved? I played two Random 25mil. matches and a Locust Challenge vs. 4 Urbanmechs on Death Valley and didn't lose a single bugger. It still Braces when it shouldn't, sprints in to my formation isolated and moves to present its rear to my team for a long shot at a wounded light mech. All the old staples were still there in those 3 matches. Anyone here feel AI changed? My favorite UI change so far is the red pricing on Mechs you can't afford during selection.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
School Nickname posted:I've no idea how people manage the Locust challenge. It's a lot of running away. Then, reserving down until the entire enemy team has moved and striking to run away again. It can go from tedious to exhilarating and back. If anyone wants a challenge from the AI, I have some drops. Either fight with matching cash tier but without sensor lock or reserve. Or drop down a cash tier and use everything you got. River Crossing works best for the AI. 15 Million UM-R60 - ArcLight UM-R60 - Apex HBK-4G - Sumo CN9-A - Paradise 20 Million TBT-5N - Buckshot HBK-4G - Apex CN9-A - Paradise HBK-4G - ArcLight 25 Million HBK-4G - ArcLight ON1-K - Paradise HBK-4G - Apex ON1-K - Buckshot The 20Mil. team vs any 15Mil. on River Crossing has been my hardest one to beat. These seem to be best against my own playstyle. If you found them easy, let me know what you did. Post your own AI Lances that give you the most trouble!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Anta posted:Trip report: I tried the 20 million team vs the first default 15 million team (Light Assault(?)) on River Crossing. I beat them fairly handily with no losses and only a few armor breaches, doing what I usually do against the AI. Yea, the Light Assault Lance was what I settled on using to beat it the first few times. Nice work getting them to split chase! I could never get them to split chase me and somehow the CN9-A was always doing AC/10+LRMs. With just LRMs you could easily not concern yourself with it until it's last. I think my problem was trying to find a way to beat them in an upfront fight. After a few Locust Challenges and some scenarios the "Run away, get LOS to only 1 unit, repeat" got boring like others have been posting here. All of those Lances were purposefully setup for similar movement profiles for exactly the reasons you noted. My latest thing is editing the Atlas cost to 0 and setting up the AI with 4x Atlas' Death Valley (Apex, Sumo, Buckshot, Paradise) and using a 25mil team, forced charge up the middle, no big mesa to hide behind. Closest thing to "Final Destination, no items" style I can make up. No water, minimal terrain and no way out reserve the AI. I got 3/4 mechs to live and I'm sure no losses is possible, even without the hit-and-fade tactic I'm sure will be the standard of the SP campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
I remember a dev post on the HBS forums stating if the internal component was red, that was destroyed, yellow was damaged, but fixable and black locations were destroyed. What bugged me is if I cut a right torso off a Victor, the corresponding arm (and AC/20 inside) are just as red and dead as if I had blasted it to bits in the post game report. I hope we get to see more of the salvage and merc aspects as they mature. I ended up with a lot of the same kind of ideas you guys had, with a general "spare parts" value to recovered bits- it could break down the legs, heads and arms you salvaged from a normal torso blowout in to generic "spare parts" to upkeep your own limbs without needing to hunt down that special HBK-4P laser hunch to repair your own 4P. This also makes selling spares easy as you just program how many spare part units a limb is worth instead of tracking how many Locust legs you got on the Argo. That and "scrap-to-cash" as a "this is the poo poo you recovered that is total trash, here is a little money for the raw materials" and suddenly you have a very streamlined buy/sale + repair/rearm system for mech hardware that isn't guns, ammo and armor. Might end up more like  in that you have to constantly be selling your spares you won't need to keep afloat and make room for stuff you do.They might also make "totally destroyed mech" no-so-final by just simply attaching an exuberant cost (in money & time) to recover any mech from anything. So you could get in to situations where you could "take a loan" and put it to recovering that completely dead Atlas you just killed and won't get to use until months later. Will it pay off or be a lark? Their could be some fun in that side of the management process, but we just don't know if that kind of thing is even in scope.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:'Your honor, my client would like to put forward that DESTROID MUDERMAN 4000, exhibit 7-C, is not visually distinct from the KAI ALLARD LAIO's personally modified CENTURION-A YEN LO WANG, exhibit 9-D'  Exhibit 9-D is clearly one and the same as the Warhammer 9-D. It isn't visually similar to exhibit 9-D but we own everything about the concept of robot warriors. In addition the 9-D is clearly derivative to the original WHM-6R of 2515, but adds updated internals and most importantly a Targeting Computer. If anything this model is MORE ACCURATE than the original artwork, thus more infringing to the source material we validly, allegedly own. I rest my case, do not refuse my batchall. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
MP Beta Access got posted accidentally: Steam game properties, betas, enter code DEATHFROMABOVE and select the mpbeta in the drop down above the code entry field. I asked the forum poster who was the only guy to catch the misfire two questions and was able to brute force the answer. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
isildur posted:We played some really awful internal builds before we got here. I'm pretty happy with it but there were a *lot* of dead ends. Still, having the ability to say 'no, this sucks, let's start over on this part' was fantastic. The new movement/evasive system and the stability overhauls feel great. Both of them moved from an almost all or nothing system to a granular one that players can act on to raise and enemies can react to degrade. I only wish we had more Breaching Shot pilots with the 5 Bulwark mechwarriors always in rotation. Keep saying "No" because it's working toward a more engaging flow.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
I find Bulwark Atlas or Awesome something to be wary of. However with our budget cap, putting the bulk of your Lance's armor on one machine that moves last is asking for a bad time. It will take a lot of focused fire/get knocked down as their isn't another tank to soak damage with. Spreading your armor across your Lance lets you cycle units. Even if one is destroyed, the others still have respectable protection. I kind of wonder what the most highly, but evenly armored Lance composition is for 25m. It's probably 4x Kintaro.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
isildur posted:the best part of the bug is when MGs can shoot at PPC ranges. That bug needs to be a cheat code, just the MGs for hilarity. That and Big Head mode. On our Goon BT discord we've found the same thing with reserve. I've made one opponent mad with my usage of reserve, to the point where he said "How did you move two units before me?" forgetting that Light and Medium mechs go before his two remaining Heavies. He just got used to me reserving all the time that a normal turn was strange. If I may ask, at what point does the divergence from "This is fun for us, the developers, to play." to "Some players aren't liking this." become an issue that needs to be addressed? I've found the push and pull between what a player community says the want in a game and what the developer has envisioned an interesting situation. The recent trends of early access and long open betas bring in a lot of time for player feedback to affect the final release. This doesn't have to be about BT or HBS specifically, but you guys seem to have your heads screwed tightly on your shoulders.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2017 09:28
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:My biggest fear with this kind of conflict would be the time taken. I am already seeing players in the multiplayer camp out and just bulwark + reserve at the edge of sensor range so that they get the best first engagement. Those games take ages I want to see if the player-base evolves on this naturally. This timidly throwing missiles at each other might work itself out in time. I think a tutorial would need to stress the importance decisive action and the benefits of pushing the assault.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:Tried to fit in a game over my lunch break and ended up against another 'run away and only engage with lrms' player. It took 40 minutes before we actually engaged properly. I had to quit because I ran out of time and had to go back to work. Having him refuse to fight made me very frustrated. He was going to win the game anyway, so well done him, but it was the most boring experience. I see the match timer as the obvious choice. I can avoid timer-less rooms like I did No Heat/Unlimited Ammo [NH/UA] rooms in MW4. While "Regular rules" was the niche option, it made for a more enjoyable game and let those who want something else stay there. If their is a match timer, how should the game determine the winner? If anyone else is having the same issues with opponents wasting your time, we're posting about them here on the official forums. Add your stories and suggestions!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Needs to be called "SQUAWK" when used with Tetatae pilots. Also, Phrosphor put in some good effort posting that works as a newbie MP guide. Could throw that in the OP so people have some guidance. https://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/9377 Also: https://gfycat.com/LateMerryBrahmancow
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
Psion posted:I want this to be turned into a feature The newest vid from Gamescom showcased and even better, faster one, but not as hilarious. https://i.imgur.com/4xcE8mx.gifv You can do what I did by opening the folder: X:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\BattleTech - Private Beta\BattleTech_Data\StreamingAssets\data\weapon Locate and edit: Weapon_AC20.json Change line: "ProjectilesPerShot": 20, to "ProjectilesPerShot": 200, Save and enjoy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
Q_res posted:The more I play with the new Evasion system and the more used to it I get, the less I like it. It feels like Sensor Lock is even more vital now than it was before. Plus, it's essentially worthless to Sensor Lock a Mech that moves after your Locking Mech. So you end up in a cycle of reserves that feels kind of... degenerative? I think it's an improvement that makes over engined units like the QKD viable. As for the Sensor Lock thing, the obvious option is could also cap your future movement mods by two in addition to removing two current Pips. This still lets you lock a unit before it moves without losing effectiveness, as currently if you Lock a Light with yours and it simply jumps for max Evasion and fires, it's like why even Lock? Like you noted, it leads to reserve wars and a rush to Phase 1. With that change, it won't be any different to units who get locked after movement, but provide a 4 Pip maximum available to the target yet to move. For most heavier units, this won't change much as they won't get to 5 or 6 unless they are running Evasive Move and are already speedy/jumpy builds. The change might make Lights too vulnerable, but also would give you a greater reason to move the mediums ASAP to rebuild their Pips lost from the previous round before the big guys fire. They're now free to move and shoot their Light Locker's target knowing any future Locks against them will degrade them all the same. They would have less reason to reserve and that push to apply immediate damage to the target might start being a good idea earlier in the game compared to where it is now. Of course, this still doesn't completely negate regaining Pips by moving at the right moment, but encouraging movement with minimal reserving is what will help fight reserve wars. I don't know if capping the Locked units Pips is the right answer, but it's the most obvious. Maybe it comes out to just that reserving doesn't have enough downsides if the engagement isn't in full heat?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 06:04 |
|
|
Here are both parts of what I think is the best Red City play-through from PDXcon. Mitch clearly had been doing this multiple times before these two and does a much better job of explaining the various mechanics. The interviewer controlling the game is also a TT nerd and already gets the basics. The pure excitement he shows while playing is great. They run about an hour total. I think this interview should be one of the first things to show people who might be interested, but don't know anything about the franchise. Would make a great addition to the OP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft1mzn0FyJ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OncJWeODv2M A PCgaming article with Jordan also goes in to what they are trying to shoot for when talking about "The spirit of the game" they're trying to capture. https://www.pcgamesn.com/battletech/battletech-rules quote:“We set our goal as to reproduce the same tactical considerations and the same unit identification. If you're talking about a particular mech, that mech should feel the same in our game as it did on the tabletop. We wanted to recreate the tactical considerations, the strategic considerations, the lore, and the feeling of it, but not be concerned with reproducing the exact mechanics.”
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 00:39
|
|