NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/games/mecha/702

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-24 | 6.9 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!soda.berkeley.edu!coganman
From: [e-mail] (Andrei Cogan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Vehicle rules and munchkinism (was Re: high-speed hovertanks REDUX!)
Date: 24 Dec 1992 08:53:43 GMT
Organization: None whatsoever...
Lines: 119
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jesse Taylor) writes:
>Yesterday (well, that's the time that the post arrived here), someone
>posted a message about FASA's new rule that 'mechs now move AFTER all
>vehicles.
>
>Bummer. I liked the Amputator, too. Sigh. That new rule cancels every
>cannon fodder MG vehicle, and most of the non-MG ones, except for in
>cities, where you can back 'mechs into corners 'n such.
>
>However, FASA's rule said that 'mechs move after vehicles b'cuz of the
>neurohelmets, which make the mechwarrior able to move like his 'mech.

    <sigh> This new rules seems to be another attempt by FA$A to
munchinize the game. Prior to the coming of the clans, mek design was a
great deal more complex than merely "max speed the speed, max the armour,
and load up on MPL's and targeting computers." Back when all we had was 3025
tek, I played mixed-unit battles, and realized that although vehicles had a
lot of value as fire-support and recon, the main battling went to the meks
(although don't tell that to the Shreck PPC carrier drivers...)

    With the arrival of clan tek, vehicles suddenly gained a great deal
more value, basically as extensions of the two main IS anti-clan tactics
(paste 'em at short range or run-run-run). Vehicles were more useful, as
they had a LOT more speed than meks, and could also stack on obscene amounts
of armor relative to meks their weight. Unfortunately, this has also led to
much greater use of vehicles than in pre-Clan days (at least in my
experience).

    This new rule, however, makes vehicles much more useless. The
arrival of Clan mek designs has led to a 'bigger is better' approach towards
IS mek design. Vehicle tactics remained basically the same as before, other
than the fact that its use has become more common. Now, under the new rules,
vehicle design is doomed to follow the same top-heavy path of its mecha
cousins. I understand that this game is called BattleTECH, and not Tank
Wars. However, this rule is doomed to lead to even greater munchinization of
the game.

    Mixed-unit tactics are suddenly going to become much different, at
least on the small scale. In using small (lance-on-lance) battles, vehicles
of ANY kind other than the heavily-armored behemoths are going to become
largely useless. I've fought Clan star-vs.-1 heavy mek lance and two medium
cavalry vehicle lance combats, and three times out of 4, I could (as IS)
take out the Clans. Under the new rules, any battles involving small numbers
of vehicles are bound to lead to the death of the vehicles -- their
maneuverability advantage is nullified, as suddenly that great feint that
drew two of the five omnis off is pointless when the omnis can choose to
respond or ignore it at will now -- the only benefit that the vehicles now
have is the +3 movement bonus, which is in any case nullified thru the use
of MPL's and LPL's.

die-rolling, and very little use of tactics.

>Hmmm...
>
>WHAT IF (aiii! not the dreaded whatif!!) you mounted something in a
>vehicle similar to the Rigger Controls in ShadowRun, or perhaps a Virtual
>Reality control suit for the pilot. It is technologically feasible for the
>IS (the can build 100-ton stomping battle machines. and you're telling me
>they can't build VR?!) and the system needn't be as complex as the
>neurohelmet, since it doesn't have to do the stuff with the myomers. It
>would give the pilots every bit as good a reaction as the 'warriors.
>
>Of course, it would be more expensive, and possible (probably) more
>massive than the current controls, meaning that the current style of
>suicide vehicles wouldn't work in a cost-based system, and tonnage-based
>vehicles would be less kick-rear.
>
    FA$A's rationale, that meks gain the TREMENDOUS movement advantage
due to their use of neurohelmets is a load of crock! Look thru any of the
TR's -- MechWarrior, 1st Ed. mentions the use of neurohelmets in speeders,
TR 3025 uses them in Swift Wind scout car, the Warrior Attack chopper in TR
3026 mentions the use of something similar, and, in fact, the speeder
helmets are said to be direct substitutes for mek neurohelmets at times!
    The VR systems available to the IS are fairly primitive, true (the
only real use of them is holotables and Anastasius Focht's little setup on
Tukayid (sp?). The one mentioned in Outbound is a special case, but
basically, what it boils down to is that vehicles CAN and SHOULD have the
same response times as meks.

    The only way vehicles can survive under the new system so have
super-Demolishers and super-Shrecks -- which leads to a great deal of
munchin, large-scale, die-rolling extravaganzas.

    This is perhaps my biggest gripe of the new regime, as evidenced in
(a) the new tech and (b) the new rules -- good tactical decisions are
increasingly being replaced by indiscriminate die rolling (no more use of
terrain for much cover, as they can get you at 20 hexes with a -3
modifier...) Now, mind you, I LIKE and USE the clans fairly frequently, and
they have forced me to change tactics to incorporate more vehicles.
    This leads me to one of two alternatives: (1) Play under all the new
rules, and lose a LOT more meks and a LOT more vehicles, or (2) ignore the
new vehicle rules and make mixed-unit combat more interesting and enjoyable.
This is something that I as a fairly experienced player can do, but I worry
for new players who come in and realize that their only real hope in
relatively flat terrain is to load up on those 80+ ton tank and mech
behemoths, and for myself in case I ever come up against a tournament
situation, although in 7 years of playing, I have yet to attend one :(

>JT
>
>--
>   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
>     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
>        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
>           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

    -Andrei

Tai-i Pendo Matsuura of Ghost-ni
Private Blantleff of the 21st Centauri Lancers on the MUSE


   Andrei Cogan ([e-mail])   |||    When in doubt, panic.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you think it will take,       |
|   even if you take into account Hofstadter's Law.                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                "Be kind to your brain cells, I say" - Joe B.                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+