Good game of Btech last night guys, even if it ran kind of long (5 hrs and only kill was 1 tank. On the last turn).
Lessons learned:
No matter what our inital optimistic feelings are, 8 mechs +3 tanks is a long game. Even if they are light and medium mechs. I think it probably went faster with 4 players than it would have with 6 or 8 players, but still, too long for a 'quick' game when we'd like to get to something else also.
Yes, I know there are always anomalies like the 2nd round headshot kill which ends the game after 20 min. we shouldn't plan for that though, IMO. If that should happen, we can either bring in a new mech or start over.
Damon, the hovertanks that you're fond of using are underpriced when used in groups. With their high movement (ensuring max movement defensive bonus when the player wants it), MLas armament, and 10 front armor (usually requiring multiple front shots to kill), the hovertanks are far more threat than their cost (again, in groups).
Consider: with a cruise speed of 13, was it, (similar to walking speed for a mech), they can easily move the 9 required for a +4 defense bonus. If a mech wants to target them, that's at least an 8 to hit. If the mech walked, 9 to hit. Ran, 10 to hit. Jumped, 11 to hit. And that's not counting any terrain or range modifiers.
I know we weren't concentrating on the tanks last night, but they did a huge amount of damage to the mechs and anytime george or lance looked at targetting them, the target defense of the tanks was 2 or 3 higher than the nearest mech.
I'm not saying that I don't like the tanks, but I do think the threat profile of the tanks you were using is greater than the rules say. So if we use them again, you may want to use them in place of a mech.
BTech
-
Lars Porsenna
- Posts: 4783
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:34 pm
- Location: Manta, Ecuador
While I can see where you are coming from Bob, I'd also say the Tanks were very, very lucky. The tank hit table is FAR worse than the mech, with around 4 chances (out of 12) for a debilitating crit, just rolling on the table. The one time a debilitating hit was scored, the tank had no turret so it was moot (they also lost an MP of movement too, but that was less critical).
But lots of people have complained about the Savannah Master tank, so perhaps...
Damon.
But lots of people have complained about the Savannah Master tank, so perhaps...
Damon.
-
EvilGenius
- Posts: 6719
- Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA
I don't want to hammer on the point, but I think the issue is more complex. It's the difficulty to hit due to speed AND the armament AND the fact that you're using multiple tanks.
All together, it's far more effective than it appears on paper.
In Heroclix, this situation occurs fairly often. One of the best examples I can think of is the early Firelord figure. He was very powerful at the beginning of his dial, but dropped off very quickly. So the designers said, 'there, he's balanced'.
But players saw a different pattern. Firelord could easily be carried back to a medic who had an excellent chance of healing him back to full because of his drop off in stats.
It wasn't that Firelord ALONE was overpowering. It was Firelord, being carried by another character, back to a healer who could take advantage of Firelord's damaged defensive numbers, who then healed him back to full.
All together, it's far more effective than it appears on paper.
In Heroclix, this situation occurs fairly often. One of the best examples I can think of is the early Firelord figure. He was very powerful at the beginning of his dial, but dropped off very quickly. So the designers said, 'there, he's balanced'.
But players saw a different pattern. Firelord could easily be carried back to a medic who had an excellent chance of healing him back to full because of his drop off in stats.
It wasn't that Firelord ALONE was overpowering. It was Firelord, being carried by another character, back to a healer who could take advantage of Firelord's damaged defensive numbers, who then healed him back to full.
Seems to me -- Damon's love of tanks aside -- that almost every combat that has involved tanks has ended with some sort of bitch session about tanks afterwards.
I'm inclined to say ... no tanks.
I'm inclined to say ... no tanks.
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
-
Lars Porsenna
- Posts: 4783
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:34 pm
- Location: Manta, Ecuador
No the problem is that no one has developed tactics to combat tanks effectively!
I was using hovertanks on Fri. One of the (Major!) disadvantages to these types of tanks is that they cannot enter wood or rough hexes...period. There was plenty of cover on the maps we used, and if cover was properly used, it would have rendered the tanks ineffective...essentially milling about the clear areas.
Also, as I said again, no one landed a good roll on them. Here's what the hit location table looks like:
2. Armor (critical)
3. Armor (minor critical)
4. Armor (minor critical)
5. Armor (minor critical)
6. Armor
7. Armor
8. Armor
9. Armor
10. Turret
11. Turret (minor critical)
12. Turret (critical)
Here a minor critical is defined as a minor effect (loss of movement, loss of a weapon, etc).
Now lets look at the critical effects table:
1. Crew stunned (no more actions for this turn and the next 2 turns)
2. Main weapon jammed (no firing from this weapom for 1 turn)
3. engine hit (no more movement)
4. Crew killed
5. fuel tank hit (vehicle explodes)
6. Ammo explodes.
So not only is a tank TWICE as likely to suffer a critical, HALF OF ALL CRITICALS IS AN INSTANT KILL.
The fact that the Savannah Masters were generating +4 penalties every turn (or had the potenital to do so) was absolutely neccessary to keep them alive. AND with proper use of tactics they shouldn't be that hard to overcome. Besides that, there were plenty of times when the tanks were sitting there with either no to-hit penalty or very small ones (because I didn't move much), yet everyone was concentrating on taking out the Vindicator (which by that time was a mission-kill anyway...its combat effectiveness was so degraded it was a liability), which is EXACTLY what I was counting on to keep them alive.
Granted, I took some of the best tanks in the game, but saying they're broken because I was playing them smart doesn't make sense either...
There have been other times I used tanks that amounted to nothing...FREX, one game WE played I took a pair of Manticore heavy tanks...which were out of the game in short order.
Damon.
I was using hovertanks on Fri. One of the (Major!) disadvantages to these types of tanks is that they cannot enter wood or rough hexes...period. There was plenty of cover on the maps we used, and if cover was properly used, it would have rendered the tanks ineffective...essentially milling about the clear areas.
Also, as I said again, no one landed a good roll on them. Here's what the hit location table looks like:
2. Armor (critical)
3. Armor (minor critical)
4. Armor (minor critical)
5. Armor (minor critical)
6. Armor
7. Armor
8. Armor
9. Armor
10. Turret
11. Turret (minor critical)
12. Turret (critical)
Here a minor critical is defined as a minor effect (loss of movement, loss of a weapon, etc).
Now lets look at the critical effects table:
1. Crew stunned (no more actions for this turn and the next 2 turns)
2. Main weapon jammed (no firing from this weapom for 1 turn)
3. engine hit (no more movement)
4. Crew killed
5. fuel tank hit (vehicle explodes)
6. Ammo explodes.
So not only is a tank TWICE as likely to suffer a critical, HALF OF ALL CRITICALS IS AN INSTANT KILL.
The fact that the Savannah Masters were generating +4 penalties every turn (or had the potenital to do so) was absolutely neccessary to keep them alive. AND with proper use of tactics they shouldn't be that hard to overcome. Besides that, there were plenty of times when the tanks were sitting there with either no to-hit penalty or very small ones (because I didn't move much), yet everyone was concentrating on taking out the Vindicator (which by that time was a mission-kill anyway...its combat effectiveness was so degraded it was a liability), which is EXACTLY what I was counting on to keep them alive.
Granted, I took some of the best tanks in the game, but saying they're broken because I was playing them smart doesn't make sense either...
There have been other times I used tanks that amounted to nothing...FREX, one game WE played I took a pair of Manticore heavy tanks...which were out of the game in short order.
Damon.
-
Lars Porsenna
- Posts: 4783
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:34 pm
- Location: Manta, Ecuador
-
Lars Porsenna
- Posts: 4783
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:34 pm
- Location: Manta, Ecuador
All I know is that every time we play Battletech with tanks, people bitch about the tanks. So either a) we need to play some more games with them so that people know what they're capable of and how to fight them b) people need to stop complaining about tanks or c) we need to stop playing with tanks.Lars Porsenna wrote:Also to add: Bob's complaint was more to do with the perception that the hovertanks are underpriced for their effectiveness (something I'm not so sure I agree with, but didn't want to belabor the point), then with an inherent dislike of tanks...
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
I don't mind playing with tanks.
I do think that the points for those fast hovertanks may be too cheap. Reason being: even if they are very delicate one-shot kill for a mech, one still has to take a turn targeting them. That's a turn where one isn't damaging an opposing mech. Any turn in Btech where you aren't chewing armor off an opposing mech is usually a poorly played turn.
We've never played a match with tanks on both sides of the fight - only on one. Hence, imbalance - perceived or otherwise.
We need to try a fight with other tanks - the slower, non-hovery ones for instance.
I do think that the points for those fast hovertanks may be too cheap. Reason being: even if they are very delicate one-shot kill for a mech, one still has to take a turn targeting them. That's a turn where one isn't damaging an opposing mech. Any turn in Btech where you aren't chewing armor off an opposing mech is usually a poorly played turn.
We've never played a match with tanks on both sides of the fight - only on one. Hence, imbalance - perceived or otherwise.
We need to try a fight with other tanks - the slower, non-hovery ones for instance.
"This enemy you cannot kill. You can only drive it back damaged into the depths, and teach your children to watch the waves for its return." - Quellcrist Falconer
of course, we could always play this:
* Cthulhutech Role-playing Game
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/ ... ?qsID=1353
* Cthulhutech Role-playing Game
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/ ... ?qsID=1353
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
I am shocked by the fact that you did not get totally schooled again.Lars Porsenna wrote:Ah yes, and I would ALSO add that if I were using some more standard tanks (like Scorpions or Vedettes), which have a move of 4/6, with an AC/5 and a machine gun each, Bob wouldn't be complaining so much...
wasn't nate there?