OBT Forum

some mechs lend themselves to massed single chassis deployments.  the Dragon II for example can lay down it's own field of wide area saturation cover fire before even bringing the ERPPCs to bear.  it is built from the ground up for the slow steady defense.

I know there not the norm but its the style of TRO that I'm not fond of 'convenient' IMO it takes away the diversity and richness of a design by saying in its most famous battle or most recent battle it played along very nicely with other Mechs if the same design

That I can totally understand. But the previous posts seemed to focus heavily on how the setting had changed to that style. That doesn't really seem to be the case. The TRO's style of presentation is a whole different ball of wax. (And one I'd agree with. I don't find it to be the most appealing style of presentation. I'd also kill to stop mixing the section on who uses a unit, where it is used, and notable deployments. It makes searching for who actually has access to a design very difficult.)

Guess I'm kinda the minority... I've never been a huge fan of 3025.  I liked the fiction of that era probably the most but it was later TROs.  Very much prefer the 3055 on wards, always liked the "high tech" BattleTech instead of the barely held together armies of earlier eras and the DA.

It was one of my motivations for creating an AU - no tech disarmament (even a PR one) - keep the WarShips - continue the fight - feels right to me.

Honestly, the presentation in the new TROs is pretty old school, and is reminiscent of the original TRO 3025 & 2750 everyone loves so much. This is one of the reasons why I find it kinda ironic when players who WORSHIP FASA's original stuff don't like the new/old style TRO 3145. Read the original entry for the Locust, and compare it to a new TRO 3145 entry if you don't believe me. The similarities are right there.

Absolutely. I just kind of hated TRO 3025 and 3026 (both the material and the time period). I came into FASA products prior to 3050, but I didn't come into Battletech until post-Invasion but pre-Bulldog. My entrance point heavily influenced my tastes, and I really didn't find most BT products to really pop until FASA was out the door. So I don't have the attachment to the older style that some do. For example, I find the Star League sourcebook to be a pretty lackluster product.

As for searching, that's why we have the MUL.

And agreed again, mostly. I just find the MUL updating to be a bit too slow for my tastes (I also don't find the interface to be the most effective, but that's more user preference and not really important). I also don't care so much for buying a TRO that doesn't tell me who uses it, when it can be settled in a sentence or two that doesn't break up the narrative flow a great deal.  Especially when some of the entries do have those type of sentences. Either don't do it, or do it. The in-between state feels like reduced value to me. Is it enough to make me dislike the new TROs? No, definitely not. I'm incredibly happy with the focus of these TROs, the units themselves, and the changes being highlighted in 3145 vs. 305X. But it is something that makes me wonder if I'll buy all the TROs, especially those for factions I normally don't favor. At the start of this TRO release, I had no doubts about buying all of them. Now, I'll consider each TRO a bit more before a possible purchase.

That's the beauty of these releases, you don't have to buy them all, just the ones you love.

my problem is that I love the game in general... so mech porn is mech porn...

Someone should use that line in their signature.

I find it kinda ironic when players who WORSHIP FASA's original stuff don't like the new/old style TRO 3145.

I appreciate how TR:3145 improves on Catalyst's previous style, but the book won't be all battles all the time, right? Battle History was only one part of what made TR:3025 good and it wasn't even used in TR:2750. (Nor in TR:3050, though that one was all factories all the time instead.)