• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Then again, I'm still trying to wrap my head around how anyone designed the infantry-unit creation rules to be... y'know... worth the headache without battle armor...
I think that one of the guiding principles there was that they're not supposed to be a major threat to 'Mechs (especially not in an open battlefield). In city fighting, they serve a purpose to force the enemy to take a more cautious approach, effectively slowing the advance of the enemy until 'Mechs can come deal with the threat.

Basically the same as a minefield or a pre-battle artillery advance, infantry is only meant to soften the enemy up and deny them tactical options.

I mean, it is a game about 'Mechs first and foremost; can't have 'Mechs be "kings of the battlefield" if every G.I. Joe with a shoulder-mounted SRM could take one out.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I mean, it is a game about 'Mechs first and foremost; can't have 'Mechs be "kings of the battlefield" if every G.I. Joe with a shoulder-mounted SRM could take one out.

... these are the same "kings of the battlefield" which can trip, fall, and explode without ever taking enemy fire due to spectacularly bad dice?

See, I don't have a problem with infantry being "weak", I have a problem with them being literally too much trouble to figure out and having math which means having to work for a couple hours for something which isn't useful. (Not even against vehicles.) As it is, they're not a hazard to anyone, not even in the same feel as a minefield, because if it's not battle armor it's too much trouble to make them in large enough numbers to actually achieve that feel. And battle armors wind up being a legitimate speed-bump at worst, and game-breaking at best. While still potentially taking a lot of time to figure out how they work on a battlefield.

Now, I'd have not thought of all this if I hadn't been discussing CBT over the last couple weeks and the topic having turned to "how many rules which are meant to simulate battle really are useful and not just adding more time?" Which eventually turned into noticing about 50% of the Total Warfare book content isn't going to see use, and about 70% of the special equipment listed turns into "why?" more than "how does this work?".

(And that conversation started as someone expressed the concern I was lying outright about finishing a game of 16 units v 16 units of comparable 'weight class' in under four hours.)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
... these are the same "kings of the battlefield" which can trip, fall, and explode without ever taking enemy fire due to spectacularly bad dice?

Mouse Gunner on YouTube had a story like this. I may get some details wrong because I hadn't heard the story in a while, but it goes something like this...

He convinced his friend to play BT TT. His friend entered water and failed his piloting check. The mech fell into the water an they rolled for damage from the fall. The damage rolled to the head causing it to lose all it's armor and suffer internal damage (meaning the head was filling with water). He then failed the piloting check to see if the MechWarrior was conscious. So, the MechWarrior essentially drowned.

In a nutshell, the mech (just by entering water)... Fell, cracked it's head and drowned the pilot all before a shot was even fired. That is some rough RNG.
 
Mouse Gunner on YouTube had a story like this. I may get some details wrong because I hadn't heard the story in a while, but it goes something like this...

He convinced his friend to play BT TT. His friend entered water and failed his piloting check. The mech fell into the water an they rolled for damage from the fall. The damage rolled to the head causing it to lose all it's armor and suffer internal damage (meaning the head was filling with water). He then failed the piloting check to see if the MechWarrior was conscious. So, the MechWarrior essentially drowned.

In a nutshell, the mech (just by entering water)... Fell, cracked it's head and drowned the pilot all before a shot was even fired. That is some rough RNG.

It's like those D&D stories where someone dies to a cat scratch.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
... these are the same "kings of the battlefield" which can trip, fall, and explode without ever taking enemy fire due to spectacularly bad dice?
Well, yes:

3-e1369753130733.jpg


That's an Israeli tank flipped over during a training accident. It's easy to find more on the subject if you're keen - any vehicle is only as good as its driver/pilot/operator. And yes, you do have to fail a piloting roll to "trip, fall, and explode".

See, I don't have a problem with infantry being "weak", I have a problem with them being literally too much trouble to figure out and having math which means having to work for a couple hours for something which isn't useful. (Not even against vehicles.) As it is, they're not a hazard to anyone, not even in the same feel as a minefield, because if it's not battle armor it's too much trouble to make them in large enough numbers to actually achieve that feel. And battle armors wind up being a legitimate speed-bump at worst, and game-breaking at best. While still potentially taking a lot of time to figure out how they work on a battlefield.
I don't know what we do/did differently, but I never found them to be much of a hassle; just stipulate you have one platoon of laser infantry, one of SRM infantry, and a couple of bastards with flamers hiding in yonder basement and you're good to go. Sure, it's a bit more book-keeping due to there being more units on the field, but if you can do 16v16 in four hours, you should be able to do 4v4 + infantry just as easily.

Now, I'd have not thought of all this if I hadn't been discussing CBT over the last couple weeks and the topic having turned to "how many rules which are meant to simulate battle really are useful and not just adding more time?" Which eventually turned into noticing about 50% of the Total Warfare book content isn't going to see use, and about 70% of the special equipment listed turns into "why?" more than "how does this work?".
If that works for you, more power to you. Most of the rules of the game are meant to be used if you feel like they're worth it. If not, just skip them - same as with any RPG rule-set or any other game with "advanced" or "optional" rules.

I mean, I actually like spending time working out exactly how long it takes to repair battle damage for my own solo-play or in campaigns with like-minded crazies, but when I'm with friends and we're just playing a couple of quick matches I absolutely don't bother with that. The 'Mechs are just magically combat-ready for the next battle.

It's like those D&D stories where someone dies to a cat scratch.
Ah ha ha, you played right into my trap!

new1.jpg

(credit: Murphy's Rules, by Steve Jackson Games)

;)
 
I mean, I actually like spending time working out exactly how long it takes to repair battle damage for my own solo-play or in campaigns with like-minded crazies,

My brother and I determined early on having some continuity actually lent us the thoughts of "wait, if I put my units into that mission, they won't be able for this..." and currently what's got him figuratively pacing when we're figuring out our next round:

"There's a battalion of Lyrans able to drop multiple companies of 'Mechs into my base if I send units out for missions, but if I don't they just keep knocking down whatever logistics support I have... and I don't want to go head-on again..."

Add in I commented this batch is willing to play dirty, through not necessarily sending everyone from the same direction? (Or by deciding not to play 'punching bag', instead of... y'know, hitting his base when he goes all-in on theirs...) It's been fun to watch his internal debate happen.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
shironeko-happy-cat-11.jpg
 
  • 3Love
Reactions:
Y'know, getting started back with writing again, I look at the tallest tower building I had put on the table. I measured out roughly how many "levels" it would be in the terrain... eight levels. Then I did the math: "So this tower is only seventeen or eighteen stories tall. That's barely an office building... gah sometimes this gets so frustrating."
 
"So this tower is only seventeen or eighteen stories tall. That's barely an office building..."
If you want a handy reference, the copper part of the Statue of Liberty (i.e. the actual statue, not the plinth it's stood on) is almost exactly eight elevation levels ;)
 
If you want a handy reference, the copper part of the Statue of Liberty (i.e. the actual statue, not the plinth it's stood on) is almost exactly eight elevation levels ;)

This frame of reference does not mean anything to me, as I've never been to NYC. For note, the taller skyscrapers where I grew up were 40, 45, and 52 stories tall in comparison. But I'm gonna have to roll with it because that's what I've got :)
 
Y'know, getting started back with writing again, I look at the tallest tower building I had put on the table. I measured out roughly how many "levels" it would be in the terrain... eight levels. Then I did the math: "So this tower is only seventeen or eighteen stories tall. That's barely an office building... gah sometimes this gets so frustrating."
Not entirely sure where you live, but uhhh office buildings can definitely be fewer than 17 or 18 storeys tall. There are several in my area that barely would count as having two.
 
Not entirely sure where you live, but uhhh office buildings can definitely be fewer than 17 or 18 storeys tall. There are several in my area that barely would count as having two.
Pfft. That's not a real office building; a real office building is twenty stories minimum! </crocodileDundeeThat'sNotAKnife>

But yeah, I live in an old city (founded in the mid-13th century) with very few buildings over 10 stories. We do have a couple of 19-story office buildings downtown, but they were quite controversial when they were built back in the late 50's/early 60's. From the same era are the eight 14-story residential blocks across the street from where I live. Across the entire city we only have about 20 buildings between 20 and 40 floors, and none above 40 floors.
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure where you live

Then the plan is working.

but uhhh office buildings can definitely be fewer than 17 or 18 storeys tall. There are several in my area that barely would count as having two.

I've lived a few places, but most downtown areas in the cities I've been in - which could be cited as "major cities" usually have taller buildings. Heck, even the college where I went had two towers on it which were over 20...
 
I've lived a few places, but most downtown areas in the cities I've been in - which could be cited as "major cities" usually have taller buildings. Heck, even the college where I went had two towers on it which were over 20...
The tallest building in the largest city (160k+ pop) near me is only 22 storeys. All other buildings are less than that. most office buildings are not even 10.
 
I live in the Los Angeles area and the tallest building in the city is 73 stories. I’ve worked in office buildings with roughly 50 stories. They’re not all that uncommon around here.

The tallest building in the USA is the One World Trade Center, which is 94 stories.

Burj Kalifa in the UAE is the tallest building in the world at 163 stories.
 
I live in the Los Angeles area and the tallest building in the city is 73 stories. I’ve worked in office buildings with roughly 50 stories. They’re not all that uncommon around here.

The tallest building in the USA is the One World Trade Center, which is 94 stories.

Burj Kalifa in the UAE is the tallest building in the world at 163 stories.

I know some of this for unrelated reasons, mind, but for me I grew up with a lot of major office buildings being in rather tall buildings. (Not necessarily tower/skyscrapers.)
 
It's been a while, I was laid off for 10 weeks due to COVID and that really turned time into a meaningless void! All the time in the world to pursue everything I wanted to do and do everything that needed to be done and break some bad habits. When work started up again, I just continued with my studies and adjusting my lifestyle to where everything would fit again.
Time is still meaningless, I have lost all concept of what it means and the many fardels it brings to this mortal coil, but at least I'm getting lots done?
hatchy sig.png