OBT Forum

The various Chaos Campaign tracks (in several different sourcebooks) have many great examples of missions that do not revolve around "kill the other side." If you're doing a campaign versus pick-up games, this should be your focus anyway. But those particular scenarios are strong examples of how different the game is when your objectives are to scan enemy forces or buildings and then simply survive long enough to escape. (Fill in any other example you can think of, right here.) I actually think getting entirely away from any sort of reward for killing the enemy makes the game a great deal stronger. I'll probably have some more thoughts on this as my Armored Monsters campaign goes on, but from my prior experience with campaigns (which is most of my game time in BT), it presents the setting in a very different light.

VTOLs and hovercraft come alive as recon and skirmish units. Infantry shine brightly in particular roles. And armor? Oh, the loveliness of armor. This encourages the kind of combined arms game that keeps BT interesting. I think pure 'Mech formations are a huge mistake from a story-telling perspective. 'Mechs lose their uniqueness when they are only fighting other 'Mechs. They become interesting and awesome avatars of war with individual quirks and foibles when they are working with and against combined arms formations. It is probably the absolutely core error that was made in the implementation of the Clans. It took one of their strongest points of individual identity away by simply spamming the battlefield with pure 'Mech forces. More thoughts later.

Thanks for the thoughts guys, it helps illuminate my less than ideal knowledge levels of the table top.

Quote from: Cestusrex on July 18, 2012, 06:59:40 PM

How else do you fit a lance on lance fight into a one hour window?

Interestingly (and I'm not saying this is the norm, just my experience), 3025 lance dances were always our longest games, generally even longer than our 3067 combined arms battlation versus 3067 combined arms battalion. Volume of fire and lower survival in more recent designs (due to the greater possibility of mission kills through increased headcappers and more XL engines) have always made our larger games go much faster.

I've been preaching that for years.  If bigger, more modern tech games are taking longer, it's either because the players aren't as familiar with the rules, or they are taking a real long time to decide on each unit's actions.

How else do you fit a lance on lance fight into a one hour window?

Side note: If this is the amount of time you are allowing for Battletech...you might be looking at the wrong game. Unless you are playing on postage stamp map setups (which is one of the biggest problems with skewing the entire perception of the game) or nothing but slow assaults, I don't even see many two 'Mech duels ending this quickly. BT is and has been (for many editions now) a game of maneuver and tactical movement and firing, regardless of the era. For many years (at least locally) there was a huge push to force map sizes down to 1x1, 1x2, or 2x2 (this can be an okay size, but it's still questionable). Honestly, even two 'Mech lances are severely restricted in these set ups. It gives a very skewed perception of the game, and it doesn't come close to matching the fluff of the setting.

All that being said, I understand why it is done (due to everybody's busy schedule). But much like the difference between the Star League era and now...BT is really a completely different game at this point. 2x3 or 3x3 maps is really where this game comes alive, regardless of the actual unit sizes in play. BT has never been a short, quick resolution game. One of the greatest suggestions I could offer to tabletop players is don't be afraid to put a game on hold. If you have an interesting match, and you are out of time...pick up again next week (or next month). I realize this probably isn't ideal for the Demo Agents, but cutting short the length of your game (especially by artificially restricting playing area) really changes BT a great deal.

the Forced Withdraw rules I find alleviate the perceived cost in a victory, turning Pyrric wins into solid wins based on the lives not lost and machines able to be repaired.