The Rule of Skulls (Lance Skulls = Difficulty Skulls)

[stjobe]

I agree. I also like working towards that next class up mech. It's very rewarding.

Don't get me wrong, I like a good Assault-class 'Mech as much as the next 'Mech-head... But this game is way more fun before you get too many of those behemoths. That period where you've got your first good heavy, but still have to drop with a light or two from time to time is my favourite.

Perhaps because that way you get it all; the lumbering big stompy 'Mech feel of the heavy, and the speedy maneuvering of a light, with two solid trooper mediums in between. And you have to employ and adapt some actual tactics to win same-skull missions.

 

[MeiSooHaityu]

Don't get me wrong, I like a good Assault-class 'Mech as much as the next 'Mech-head... But this game is way more fun before you get too many of those behemoths. That period where you've got your first good heavy, but still have to drop with a light or two from time to time is my favourite.

Perhaps because that way you get it all; the lumbering big stompy 'Mech feel of the heavy, and the speedy maneuvering of a light, with two solid trooper mediums in between. And you have to employ and adapt some actual tactics to win same-skull missions.

For sure. That is one of the reasons why I restart often and play many different Career/Campaign runs. I like the journey a bit more than the destination.

 

[44th MAC|Bonsai]

BATTLETECH is at its best (IMO) when I have a Light Lance and I am reaching for that first Medium Mech. And then again when I have a Medium Lance and am reaching for that first Heavy Mech.

In an important way, the Rule of Skulls keeps this excitement and sense of risk alive and well for me.

Yes, this "FINALLY!"-moment is quite nice ;D I remember playing the "joint venture"-flashpoint for the first time, took the second drop-option, just had a complete lance of mediums and ran into an awesome 8T. Scared the **** out of me, but then it was mine, before I even had a single heavy mech. It carried my lance through lots of missions.


Just played a few missions with "rule of skulls", I really enjoy it. It has been less challenging than I expected it to be, but at least I had to think about how to engage, break LoS with damage mechs and overall had to be careful sometimes.
I even took some serious structural damage when my poor little Centurion had to shoot it out with a KGC on its own because I got greedy and sent it for a flank on its own. So, 2 turns of trading shots, I was short an arm and a +10dmg AC5, which kinda sucks, but the KGC lost it's cockpit and is now mine ))

 

[Corraidhin]

I even took some serious structural damage when my poor little Centurion had to shoot it out with a KGC on its own because I got greedy and sent it for a flank on its own. So, 2 turns of trading shots, I was short an arm and a +10dmg AC5, which kinda sucks, but the KGC lost it's cockpit and is now mine ))

I certainly hope you gave the KGC to the Centurion pilot!

 

[44th MAC|Bonsai]

She most certainly deserves it. But I'm not sure if I should take the Centurion away from her, as she is obviously capable of achieving incredible things with it. Stories of this fight might be told in the messhall for quite a while. Killing stuff in the KGC is so... mediocre.

 

[Hobbes__]

If the Contract or FLASHPONT is 3 Skull Difficulty then I can only use a 3-Skull Lance in that Mission.

It's possible for modders to implement that each procedural contract has a tonnage limit. At a certain point I considered this for the new contracts that I added for the Hyades Rim, but I ended up discarding the idea because I didn't think those limitations were attractive to players. But if there's enough interest, I might just revisit this idea.

 

[Jade_Rook]

I think drop limits work better in flashpoints than procedural missions. Self imposed drop limits can be a lot of fun, but sometimes you just want to drop an assault lance and go stomping to make some easy c-bills. Having a mod which adds drop limits to procedural missions wouldn't hurt, but it isn't one I would use.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

It's possible for modders to implement that each procedural contract has a tonnage limit. At a certain point I considered this for the new contracts that I added for the Hyades Rim, but I ended up discarding the idea because I didn't think those limitations were attractive to players. But if there's enough interest, I might just revisit this idea.

I’d be interested in such a Mod. Even more so once BATTLETECH supports Mods. :bow:

 

[Saila]

@Prussian Havoc I so agree with you: Battchal would bring life and sense into using lighter lance. One can not become a star colonel by stomping OpFor with full assault lance. For the mercenaries, on the other hand, operational expenses could do the trick. Want to land 4 assaults? Fine, it will cost 50k for each. I know, it contradicts HBS point of view "let the players have fun with unstoppable stompy might", but if you want to reach a high score of your career, be sure to count every credit. Which reminds me of another self-imposed restriction - extravagant payment only. Always, even after reaching full morale. Economy is too forgiving otherwise.

 

[Hobbes__]

I’d be interested in such a Mod. Even more so once BATTLETECH supports Mods. :bow:

OK, I'll implement it to the vanilla procedural contracts for you to try it out. I just need 3 tonnage limits, one each for light/mixed/heavy difficulty. It could be 180t/250t/320t, or just tell me which values you'd like to try out.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

OK, I'll implement it to the vanilla procedural contracts for you to try it out. I just need 3 tonnage limits, one each for light/mixed/heavy difficulty. It could be 180t/250t/320t, or just tell me which values you'd like to try out.

If your instincts tell you 180t/250t/320t then let’s try that out. :bow:

 

[Hobbes__]

If your instincts tell you 180t/250t/320t then let’s try that out. :bow:

I tossed those values but it might be better if you consider first how much of a challenge you want.

There are three difficulty levels for contracts: light (1-3 skulls), mixed (4-6) and heavy (7-10). The first tonnage limit needs to allow you to at least bring your starting lance, so 160t should be sufficient or 180 for more flexibility. The second limit (250t) allows you to bring at least four 55t 'Mechs, with extra 30t to replace a couple of them with Heavies. And with the last limit you can bring four 75 tonners, with extra 20t for Assaults. The potential issue is if you're running a 10 skull contract might not be enough if 8 Heavy and Assault 'Mechs appear. Or a 6 skull with 8 Mediums and Heavies.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

I tossed those values but it might be better if you consider first how much of a challenge you want.

There are three difficulty levels for contracts: light (1-3 skulls), mixed (4-6) and heavy (7-10). The first tonnage limit needs to allow you to at least bring your starting lance, so 160t should be sufficient or 180 for more flexibility. The second limit (250t) allows you to bring at least four 55t 'Mechs, with extra 30t to replace a couple of them with Heavies. And with the last limit you can bring four 75 tonners, with extra 20t for Assaults. The potential issue is if you're running a 10 skull contract might not be enough if 8 Heavy and Assault 'Mechs appear. Or a 6 skull with 8 Mediums and Heavies.

I have no qualms about moving past Mission Accomplishment and throwing all my effort behind achieving a Good Faith Withdrawal. It will be a test of my BATTLETECH Martial Acumen to know where and when to make that transition, whether it is at a Career Mid-point of the 6 Skull Level or nearer to its Endgame at the 10 Skull Level.

And I really like your rationale for including the “Flex Capacity” of 20t/30t/20t at the various levels. I can’t think of a stronger rationale or better tonnage distribution. My vote is for the 180t/250t/320t. :bow:

 

[Hobbes__]

I have no qualms about moving past Mission Accomplishment and throwing all my effort behind achieving a Good Faith Withdrawal. It will be a test of my BATTLETECH Martial Acumen to know where and when to make that transition, whether it is at a Career Mid-point of the 6 Skull Level or nearer to its Endgame at the 10 Skull Level.

And I really like your rationale for including the “Flex Capacity” of 20t/30t/20t at the various levels. I can’t think of a stronger rationale or better tonnage distribution. My vote is for the 180t/250t/320t. :bow:

I've just uploaded the mod TonnageLimitsForContracts to nexumods. Have fun and let us know about the experience.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

I've just uploaded the mod TonnageLimitsForContracts to nexumods. Have fun and let us know about the experience.

Will this and your Hyades Rim Expansion eventually be compatible with Free Update 1.8’s BATTLETECH Mod Support?

 

[Hobbes__]

Will this and your Hyades Rim Expansion eventually be compatible with Free Update 1.8’s BATTLETECH Mod Support?

Yes. I've been readying the Hyades Rim (HYR) for 1.8 by removing its requirements for other mods (CAB, etc.) and turning those into separate mods (The Unseen).
That way, when 1.8 comes out all that *should* be needed is to adjust HYR to the new loading format, without having to wait for 3rd party mods to be updated to 1.8. The TonnageLimits mod is pretty simple, so it should be easy to update as well.

If you're starting a new career and want to continue it when 1.8 comes out, I'd advise you to only use HYR without the Unseen mod, although with the caveat that there isn't any technical information made available by HBS so far about official mod support, so its changes might imply that any saved games will be incompatible.

 

[ronhatch]

Want a challenge? Those settings plus stock mechs only, no tampering with the armour, though one can replace the weapons with their +/++/+++ versions. Gyros and cockpit equipment is left to your criteria.
Deploying your Lance with Ammo in their CT...

FWIW, the stock game settings have the AI crit chance at 1/5th of the player's (IIRC without looking at the files - it's significantly lower regardless).

Stock mechs with AI crit chance turned up to equal the player's chance would take that difficulty to the next level.

Hmm... I suspect that's one of the settings that could be configured as a player-selectable option in the difficulty settings dialog. I may need to look into that. Or do people think it wouldn't be something they'd have any interest in turning on and off? Just mod it one way and leave it?

 

[ronhatch]

For me, picking the right Mechs tends to revolve around a few stalwart cornerstones of my Mercenary Outfit. My LRM Stalker or my LRM Centurion serve as Fire Support. If I can afford to send my mixed Flamer/MG Grasshopper, I do. And then I fill in the blanks with 5/8 or 4/6 Mediums. The pair of Firestarters are there if needed but I am considering just ignoring anything less than a 3-Skull Contract at the moment, so Firestarter work May be hard to come by soon enough.

From my perspective, a well-kitted out Firestarter is such a good harasser that with the skull rating depending entirely on overall tonnage, I'd go the opposite direction and start with a Firestarter, then see what I have room for after that. With all the CT ammo out there in stock mechs, my preferred build is 1 ML, 2 SLs, and 4MGs... though you could drop some armor for another ML, depending on your play style. I prefer to have enough armor that I can leave him out there occasionally when a tempting target presents itself.

Starting with a light would let you bring a bigger heavy hitter, and I always prefer mixed-weight lances anyway. I have fond memories of one time when my single light mech kept an entire lance of reinforcements chasing it for a bunch of turns while the rest of my lance took care of the original forces.

 

[gh0s7]

FWIW, the stock game settings have the AI crit chance at 1/5th of the player's (IIRC without looking at the files - it's significantly lower regardless).

Stock mechs with AI crit chance turned up to equal the player's chance would take that difficulty to the next level.

Hmm... I suspect that's one of the settings that could be configured as a player-selectable option in the difficulty settings dialog. I may need to look into that. Or do people think it wouldn't be something they'd have any interest in turning on and off? Just mod it one way and leave it?

Even with the lower odds, the one time I did a Career with that sort of settings in Ironman populated the Memorial Wall.
CT Destruction + Pilot Lethality + Stock Mechs = Nope, not taking any mechs with ammo in CT, like the BJ1 or any of the Thunderbolts. Except I don't have any other mechs to fill a lance... Oh.

With all the tales and legends in the lore of units starting with little, fighting against insurmountable odds and so on and managing to pull off the mission, makes one wonder if it's possible to recreate such.
:shrugging emoji:

A mod to further the difficulty options? Change the crit chance? It would be probably safer to leave each as an option, to allow the player trying the mod to set it. But that's just me, and I'm not intending to delve into mods until HBS finishes developing the game, regardless of how tempting it is.

 

[BunglingLummox]

Between my mods, variable difficulty settings and house rules, I just never end up in the assault spam phase to begin with. This is for three reasons:

1. All of my changes make the game harder or slower. I've un-nerfed the AI crit chance, upped salvage requirements per mech, turned on mech destruction and reduced the rate of MechWarrior progression. I have also house ruled that I only make limited changes to a mech's stock configuration (e.g. I would happily swap out the LRMs from a Kintaro but would never create a missile boat from a Centurion - the AC stays). Finally, the big one - no morale abilities. Ever.
2. I regularly wipe my progress and start from scratch. I play ironman and I bring the commander whenever possible. I then make my own guts check any time the commander goes down in combat, because plot armour is for the weak. A failed check is a hard reset.
3. I live for danger and tend to over-reach a little during contract selection. This is intentional, because I'm always impatient to salvage the next big score. It also means I run head first into 2) a lot.