Precision Strike

[Zakhodit]

How does one "Control" RNG?

You can do all in your power to keep the AC/20 from shooting you in the head. But that 15% to hit can still hit. Can still hit the head. Can clean out a mech that was fresh.

Then what? I mean, that's Battletech. That's the way this game has been played on the table for years. Box cars on 2D6 happens. If we remove the precision strike, that's more in line with the table top rules.

But that means that a single lucky roll can end a match with the snap of a finger. No hope for a come back. Precision strike doesn't change the grim odds of the scenario I outlined above. But it gives the player who is now an entire mech down some hope. There is still some drama in the match. Not a forgone conclusion.

That makes matches more interesting. And the hope here is the more interesting the match is, the more people will play.

 

[Dezimus]

But if we have a close intense fight, all shots on 85% hits, all AC20s on 15% misses, both players makes good moves and deserve to win. What will happen then?

Today, one of them will suddenly use a Precision Strike and blow up an OpFor's flagman with no hope for a comeback! Just because he could accumulate fury one turn faster.
Yes, in this case there will be a lot of drama, but...

This is why we should be carefull with skills. They can be more unfair than rng.

 

[23rdCypher]

But if we have a close intense fight, all shots on 85% hits, all AC20s on 15% misses, both players makes good moves and deserve to win. What will happen then?

Today, one of them will suddenly use a Precision Strike and blow up an OpFor's flagman with no hope for a comeback! Just because he could accumulate fury one turn faster.
Yes, in this case there will be a lot of drama, but...

This is why we should be carefull with skills. They can be more unfair than rng.

In your theoretical example, both players would also have to have picked the same lances and the same pilots for the fight to be equal. This is unlikely to happen as there is always some form of force imbalance in the game by design, it's part of what makes it interesting.

I've lost about 1/3 of the multiplayer games I've played in BT, so about 20 matches. Of those I would say about 5 were down to a massive swing caused by a Precision Strike. I've probably saved 5 or six games with one myself.

I'm not saying that it can't unfairly swing a match, but the same thing can happen with a long ranged AC/20 headshot to your most powerful mech in the first turn it gets fired on. After that the game is pretty much gone.

I've lost at least 6 games down to headshot decaps that have massively swung a match. I wouldn't want them to be taken out of the game, though.

 

[Dezimus]

So this is 16 disputable critical points (in total) instead of 6, if a Precision strike were not used.
I repeat once again that I do not mind the fair comeback mechanic. I think we need more skills, each of which has less influence on the game than a Precision Strike.

 

[Zakhodit]

I think examples of game play will help us solidify the debate.

I offer this match: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/277272290

You can watch the whole match. If short on time, you can skip to 00:40:24. With the last two mechs on the table, each side uses a called shot.

It may be easier to discuss merit or flaws of called shots vs what would have happened without them when an actual battle is used for reference.

 

[23rdCypher]

So this is 16 disputable critical points (in total) instead of 6, if a Precision strike were not used.
I repeat once again that I do not mind the fair comeback mechanic. I think we need more skills, each of which has less influence on the game than a Precision Strike.

I agree with you in that respect

EDIT: My point being that I wouldn't want the mechanic removed without something else being put back in its place.

 

[23rdCypher]

One thing that I think would be a really big improvement to Fury was that if it was only gained when you sustained pilot injuries, lost limbs or weapon systems, or had mechs destroyed.

I don't think you should gain 10 per round the way that you currently do.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

One thing that I think would be a really big improvement to Fury was that if it was only gained when you sustained pilot injuries, lost limbs or weapon systems, or had mechs destroyed.

I don't think you should gain 10 per round the way that you currently do.

Good point. Anything that fosters Combat rather than running off somewhere until the "Autofill" on the Fury-o-Meter is full and only then reengaging in combat, should IMO be given serious consideration.

 

[Evilsmirk]

There is currently a mechanic bug with PS. If a 'Mech moves and then is hit with PS during the same INT phase, the 'Mech will be able to move again when the round changes to the next phase. It seems the game sees it at that INT level and ignores that it has moved that round already.

 

[OathOfFealty]

Actually I disagree

Well, partially. It’s poorly explained for sure. And I’m still not sure if some things are bugs or not.

What I disagree with is that it’s unnecessary. In Battletech, once you are a mech down, it is very hard to get back in the game.

One lucky punch or AC/20 and a full armored mech is out of the match. If the players are evenly matched, the game is over.

The called shot gives you a chance to get back in the game.

It needs work but without it, first blood wins.

It's just that I won multiple matches being outnumbered ... admittedly, those were matches that were not fought with "meta lances".

If there is a lucky punch or something similar, which happens plenty of times, then it was counterbalanced with some luck for me at a later stage. I hardly saw games that were completely one-sided.

Fury never EVER enabled me a to "come back".

If anything fury unbalanced the match - it basically has become that "lucky punch" that you can recon with.

I've found it to be a "clock" that's ticking - in "whole lance" matches but even more so in 1mechVS1mech ... whoever gets there first ...

 

[Prussian Havoc]

I've been down two Mechs to four and come back thanks in part (though an important part) due to the timely use of Fury.

So yes, by way of at least this personal testimonial, "Fury" in Multi-player is indeed working as intented.


There is a lot of potential for the Multi-player "Fury" System.

"Fury" in Multi-player could even be a System that helps compensate for a BATTLETECH Matchmaker that was not able to match "Near-Peer" [opponents of equal or nearly equal (<5% Delta) ranking]. Let's say if the Ranking Difference is between 5 and 10%, the disadvantaged player receives an appropriate/partial fill to his "Fury" meter. Between 10-20%, moderately more starting "Fury" would be given. <20% would see a Fury meter filled or al but filled.

Another idea is that any Multi-player Rankings should look at the use, or not, of "Fury." With Players who don't use Fury being accorded some measure of value in future rankings.

I like the "Fury" System because even when I lose that Hunchback-4G or Firestarter to an early Headshot, the match is not over. I'll be compensated in "Fury" and depending on my tactics and skill in its use...


...be able to realize a battlefield advantage, or not. :bow:

And yes, opinions differ. :bow:

As ever, good luck and good gaming! : )