OBT Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

AU Developers - Please PM Knightmare or MechRat if you need board or permission changes

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Setting up games Occam's razor style  (Read 525 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JPArbiter

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,725
  • Host of Arbitration. Your last word in Battletech
Setting up games Occam's razor style
« on: November 12, 2012, 03:48:44 PM »
I have been doing this for a while and wanted to know what everyone thought about it.  when it comes to pickup games, we often worry about BV< or Tonnage, some of us use C Bills or the Quick Strike Method.  fine fine all well and good.

I have noticed that for me, and the group I play with, that it is just better, more fun, and actually more interesting to declare games the following way

1) Tech Base?
2) Maximum Number clan Mechs allowed?
3) Agreed upon lance configuration?
4) Roll Random skill level under the Veteran Table

GO![

for example, players agree to an IS tech game, utilizing succession wars era technology, (precluding clan tech) and agree to a lance made up of one Assault mech, one Heavy Mech, and two Medium Mechs.

sure one player may bring an Atlas, Marauder, Griffin, and Scorpion, while the other drops a Zeus, Rifleman, Whitworth, and Clint (extreme examples) but I figure that this method gives the MOST player freedom while keeping this semi competitive.

Keep the comments coming, I plan to share them on the Podcast this weekend!
« Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 03:50:00 PM by JPArbiter »
Logged
BattleTech products aren't Pokemon Cards. You don't have to catch, or collect them all.

WHAT NO ONE EVER TOLD ME THAT!

Dragon Cat

  • KU Player
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,271
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: Setting up games Occam's razor style
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2012, 04:40:02 PM »
used to do that myself with a couple of others we only had the starter Mech pack back then so we just assigned each a number and rolled for them.

With the RATs I think that's the entire point of them just pick an era grab a RAT for it and have fun.

Honestly it can be some of the most fun ever, it's a lottery if you do get a totally one sided fight it's fun sometimes being the underdog OR most importantly let common sense prevail and reroll a Mech or two (second result always stands otherwise 300 rolls later you might just get a game started.)

Me and a friend played like this ages ago 3025 designs only (including unseen) he got an Atlas, Grasshopper, Pheonix Hawk and Spider I got a Victor, Warhammer, Dervish and Wasp

I won but only because I went all out against the Atlas first A DFA from the Wasp was the last thing he ever expected and the last thing that Mech encountered  ;D

Just going random forgetting the tonnage and forgetting BV is an awesome way of having fun fast.
Logged
My stuff, and my AU timeline follow link and enjoy

http://www.ourbattletech.com/forum/dragon-cat-collection/

The original CBT thread
Dragon Cat on CBT

Quote from: ColBosch on March 15, 2015, 05:35:30 PM

Really, as long as there is an unbroken line of people calling themselves "Clan Nova Cat," it doesn't really matter to me if they're still using Iron Wombs or not. They may be dead as a faction, but as a people they still exist. It's not uncommon in the real world, after all.

Knightmare

  • Terran Supremacist
  • Network Gnome
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,459
  • Taking out the Sphere's trash since 3026
    • Our BattleTech
Re: Setting up games Occam's razor style
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2012, 07:06:24 AM »
I don't know if this is helpful, but I back in the day I'd play games based solely on the following:

1. Number of Components (’Mechs, Vehicles, etc.)
2. Era (to determine tech)
3. Unit (Selecting machines specific to unit or nation)
4. Specified or Random Skill Level

I find number three and four provided the most flexibility in creating challenging games because both could either be left to chance or player's choice.

So one game it might be company vs. company, Jihad-era Tech, WoB RATs and pre-determined Veteran Skill. Another game could be demi-company vs. demi-company, Third Succession War-era Tech, Player Selected units for the 2nd Sword of Light/22nd Skye Ranger and random skill rolls.

I thought that setup would bring enough "spice" to the table to make it challenging and exciting. It doesn't work for everyone. Some players would probably cry foul, but I thought it worked.

C-Bills is an interesting choice. Assuming you agree with the cost of individual components, that could be a very neat way of building your games.
Logged
Quote from: Dragon Cat
WORD (of Blake) is good for two things. 1. Leaving inappropriate notes on other people's work. 2. Adding fake words (of Blake) to the dictionary.

JPArbiter

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,725
  • Host of Arbitration. Your last word in Battletech
Re: Setting up games Occam's razor style
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2012, 09:17:19 AM »
I admit this process is best used for p[layers who know each other and do not regularly min max.
Logged
BattleTech products aren't Pokemon Cards. You don't have to catch, or collect them all.

WHAT NO ONE EVER TOLD ME THAT!

Knightmare

  • Terran Supremacist
  • Network Gnome
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,459
  • Taking out the Sphere's trash since 3026
    • Our BattleTech
Re: Setting up games Occam's razor style
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2012, 09:32:54 AM »
Quote from: JPArbiter on November 13, 2012, 09:17:19 AM
I admit this process is best used for p[layers who know each other and do not regularly min max.

Like I said, so players will cry foul. Personally, Min/Max'ing doesn't bother me one bit. I enjoy losing a game as much as I enjoy winning one, and I've used this system gaming against new players. It's all in the attitude...but that's another discussion altogether.

But I understand your point.
Logged
Quote from: Dragon Cat
WORD (of Blake) is good for two things. 1. Leaving inappropriate notes on other people's work. 2. Adding fake words (of Blake) to the dictionary.

JPArbiter

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,725
  • Host of Arbitration. Your last word in Battletech
Re: Setting up games Occam's razor style
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2012, 10:34:09 AM »
Quote from: Knightmare on November 13, 2012, 09:32:54 AM
Quote from: JPArbiter on November 13, 2012, 09:17:19 AM
I admit this process is best used for p[layers who know each other and do not regularly min max.

Like I said, so players will cry foul. Personally, Min/Max'ing doesn't bother me one bit. I enjoy losing a game as much as I enjoy winning one, and I've used this system gaming against new players. It's all in the attitude...but that's another discussion altogether.

But I understand your point.

usually if I want to Min Max I announce my intentions.  for example it is a personal fantasy of mine to take out a star of Hellstars with Veteran Pilots against a BV Balanced force, and see what happens.  most of the time as a player though I intentionally pick under powered or under appreciated designs, like the Jagermech and Watchman, or reliable workhorses like the Enforcer... I may have a Davion Bent.
Logged
BattleTech products aren't Pokemon Cards. You don't have to catch, or collect them all.

WHAT NO ONE EVER TOLD ME THAT!

Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »