/btg/ BattleTech General

>>51533782
From left to right:

– Elizabeth Grosvenor (Stinger)
– Sun-Lao Ling (Rifleman)
– Marie Coriveau (Hatchetman)
– Cera Kuroda (Atlas)
– Garadun Morr (Spartan)
– Baroness Alexandra Grosvenor (Thunder Hawk)
– Jimmy Han (Chief Tech)
– Edward Ian Davion (Cestus)
– Sayuki Anzai-Davion (Excalibur)
– Laura Bauer (Griffin)
– Erik Thorvald (Orion)
– Isabelle Pearl (Locust)

RE: all the people recently asking why we don't like CGL:

http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/on-shadow-catalyst-part-i.html
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/on-shadow-catalyst-part-ii.html
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/on-shadow-catalyst-part-iiI.html

>>51533948
That letter from Randall was disgusting. "A series of terrible terrible mistakes"? Fuck you, Randall. It was a fucking crime and Coleman should spend time in prison for it. Just disgusting.

>>51534174
Yep. Instead their little gang will hold onto the licenses until after they're dead, no matter how many times they have to change company names.

>>51534174

But it was just "improperly co-mingled finances."

I mean, anyone could accidentally a three quarters of a million dollars, right guys?

Right?

If I tried that shit where I worked I'd be fired, have it handed over to the cops, and be forever blacklisted.

>>51534479
$850,000 that we know about. But who knows? It could be more. According to the figure mentioned there they were pulling in 2.2 million a year before the whole debacle.

Has anyone tried to burn down the porch?

Reading the SR reviews for 5th Ed a lot of that sounds like the complaints I'd make about TW and AToW. I know they got hit a lot worse than we did, but still.

>>51532144
Ugh, these stat sheets are too interesting. Dangit NEA, first you talk about BT warship stuff a while back and I got interested in that, and now you're showing B5: Wars, stop taunting me! I have no local game group to play any of these games with!

>>51531794

You seem to be selectively ignoring my point, so I'll restate a different point to get you off this broken record:

If that level of detail doesn't matter, why not just give aerotech the alpha strike treatment? Everybody hitting each other for single digit points of damage and no criticals? I mean, the fidelity doesn't matter and dead is dead, right? It's not like there's anything fun about descriptive combat. The goal is to fill those SI boxes!

Shouldn't need models, since facing is just a pointless thing that complicates the road to stuff dying. Just use some scraps of paper to denote units.

We could just use the same unit stats for all the ships. Sure, there are fluffy differences like the power distance between a Fox and a Leviathan II, but who cares? In the grand scheme of things, we're just trying to see who wins!

Fuck it, why do we even need a game? Let's just roll dice, high roller wins.

.

>>51534803
Someone's having a meltdown

>>51535112
Different guy here.

Remember folks, if you ever get mildly upset or frustrated by someone's failure to understand your point of view, you're having a meltdown! :DDD

>>51534803

You don't seem to understand how any of it actually plays out, but are super mad that it doesn't work whatever way you think it should.

I'll try explaining it again. Thresholds *do* matter and you can get some extremely decisive crits thanks to them. However, due to the shitty design of most WarShips and CGL/FASA's stubborn refusal to retcon them, what happens in practice unless you're using the biggest, baddest WarShips is that they're eggshells with sledgehammers attacking each other.

Someone's gonna get squished. And fast.

There is a sweet zone where threshold crits would matter, but most ships just don't have the armour for that to be practical.

And in a narrative sense, since you seem to be all up in that, once you're through the armour and into the SI of a ship you've flayed all the armour and other protection from that part of the sip and are venting it into space. Get good enough shots on that and thanks to the massive destructive firepower of BT ships you break their keel, expose all the innards to vacuum, and generally completely wreck the thing to the point that repairing it is slightly faster and easier than building a new one from scratch, if it is salvageable at all. Most of the time, it won't be.

I've played with ASF a few times and it always felt like winning and losing was about 80% based on the initiative roll. Don't really enjoy it much.

>>51535211

With small numbers of units and the importance of getting into their aft arcs, yeah, that's what generally happens. Win init, light their ass up, repeat.

With larger numbers of units or individual unit initiative it becomes a lot more tactical.

Same thing happens on blank BT maps really. Terrain is the factor that offsets initiative if you're clever, but space tends not to offer too many places to hide.

>>51535177

>And in a narrative sense, since you seem to be all up in that, once you're through the armour and into the SI of a ship you've flayed all the armour and other protection from that part of the sip and are venting it into space. Get good enough shots on that and thanks to the massive destructive firepower of BT ships you break their keel, expose all the innards to vacuum, and generally completely wreck the thing to the point that repairing it is slightly faster and easier than building a new one from scratch, if it is salvageable at all. Most of the time, it won't be.

That's a great narrative! There's a problem with it. It happens the vast majority of the time, even with the heavier units you say lead to longer battles. So we've invested lots of rolls and crunch into a game that that delivers the same narrative over and over and over and over...

Now I haven't played as much Aerotech as you, I'll grant you that. But I know shit game design when I see it.

It's like they wanted to take the gameplay aesthetic of ground combat into space, but decided to take ground vehicle rules instead of 'Mech rules, and Warships inherited the same boring-ass gameplay as tanks.

>>51535273
>>51534803
Different person than who you've been talking with, but I think I get what you're saying. So would I be correct in saying that you'd prefer it if the system were different and perhaps had different core ship sections each with their own SI numbers, like B5: Wars and how 'mechs do in ground combat? With varying effects based on what sections are lost and how those loses influence how you use the ship as the game goes on, and how those changed decisions may lead to that ship ending up ultimately destroyed (or saved)? Possibly with crits being reworked so more of them are relevant in one-off games?

For what it's worth I think you've been pretty reasonable so far and this (these?) anon has been pretty aggressive over this, without reason.

File: Bishamon.png (266KB, 1384x838px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1384x838px

Is this one of the better things that the Combine has made?

>>51535392
No it's fucking spider, kill it right the fuck now. That's why it got difficult to maintain.

>>51535364
>For what it's worth I think you've been pretty reasonable so far and this (these?) anon has been pretty aggressive over this, without reason.

Thanks for the thought, friend. I do think I opened up the can of snark, though. Kind of feel bad about being the first one to do it this early in a /btg/.

>Different person than who you've been talking with, but I think I get what you're saying. So would I be correct in saying that you'd prefer it if the system were different and perhaps had different core ship sections each with their own SI numbers, like B5: Wars and how 'mechs do in ground combat? With varying effects based on what sections are lost and how those loses influence how you use the ship as the game goes on, and how those changed decisions may lead to that ship ending up ultimately destroyed (or saved)? Possibly with crits being reworked so more of them are relevant in one-off games?

Yeah, those ideas might help it out a lot. I'm no game designer. I've also toyed with the idea of relatively little armor but a lot of SI in multiple locations, and an easier time scoring criticals.

>>51535392
No, not really. It's a pretty bad mech, and while there's definitely some DC fans who will say that they never get anything good (and to be fair historically they've gotten the short end of the stick a lot), they do have much better mechs than the Bishamon.

>>51533948
The third link isn't working for me. Is it working for anybody else?

>>51533948
>>51535735

http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/on-shadow-catalyst-part-iii.html

Looks like it was case-sensitive.

>>51535823
Fantastic. Thank you.

>>51535364

He's talking out of his ass. The problem is not with the game design itself, but the units. If MLs had the same range and damage profiles as Gauss Rifles, how fascinating would Stinger v Stiner match-ups be? Would that be an issue with BT's rules, or with the unit design?

And yeah, I'm getting shitty. The entire ass end of last thread was Munnin pissing all over AT when he hasn't played it enough to understand it, and this thread has started the same way.

The arguments being made are as wrong as they are ill-informed. But the people who haven't played aero games and don't understand how it shakes out in practice deserve to be heard over those who do have expertise in that area, because reasons.

>>51533803
>Everyone looks like Walking Pleb characters
>Not enough 80's 'fashion'

Dropped.

>>51535956
Aight cunty mcgee, I'm tired of you restructuring arguments to meet your internally preferable dialogue, so fuck you.

Let's start with the ass end of your post.

>The arguments being made are as wrong as they are ill-informed. But the people who haven't played aero games and don't understand how it shakes out in practice deserve to be heard over those who do have expertise in that area, because reasons.

Now I didn't follow what muninn was saying, but I made it pretty fucking clear that I've played AT. I also made it clear that I've played it several times and found it to be a shit boardgame in comparison to BT. I'd rehash why I feel that way for a fourth fucking time, but I can only write it out for you, I can't help you understand it.

Stop trying to refactor my experience to nil to fit your narrative. I've made it clear multiple times that you probably have more experience than me. If you had a shred of integrity, you'd argue from that standpoint and be okay.

>He's talking out of his ass. The problem is not with the game design itself, but the units. If MLs had the same range and damage profiles as Gauss Rifles, how fascinating would Stinger v Stiner match-ups be? Would that be an issue with BT's rules, or with the unit design?

While this has little to do with what I note as problematic with AT, it does inform me as to your level of analytical thought. If a ML had the same damage/range profile as a Gauss, *the problem would lie with BT rules you insufferable cunt*. In what world would that NOT be broken as fuck? Oh but sure, let's go ahead and make sure those Stingers swap their MGs and ammo for modular armor, that'll fix the problem.

All this talk about faggots and cocksucking has gotten me horny. Who's up for a furpile?

>>51535956
>And yeah, I'm getting shitty. The entire ass end of last thread was Munnin pissing all over AT when he hasn't played it enough to understand it, and this thread has started the same way.
This has been going on since last thread, so it's less that it's started this way and more that it's continued.

>He's talking out of his ass. The problem is not with the game design itself, but the units. If MLs had the same range and damage profiles as Gauss Rifles, how fascinating would Stinger v Stiner match-ups be? Would that be an issue with BT's rules, or with the unit design?
That would absolutely be an issue with BT's rules, the stats of weapons are part of the game's rules. If you changed medium lasers that drastically it would change a lot of things and cause a lot of issues, regardless of whether the units using them were designed well or not.

>The arguments being made are as wrong as they are ill-informed.
But they're not. So far, this other guy's only been stating his preference and what aspects of AT disappoint him and how he believes they should be different. You can't say that his personal thoughts on the matter are wrong. You can disagree with him, fine. But you (if it is you who's been arguing with him so far) cannot tell him he is wrong and ill-informed for his preference in this kind of thing. Especially when you still seem unable to grasp the core of his argument about why he feels that warship destruction isn't as interesting or varied as battlemechs.

Now before you go on about how you've said already how in reality, when not playing with the vast majority of canon ships and limiting yourself to the few that have armor worth a damn, you get plenty of critical effects, let's actually look at the critical effects and see which ones end up mattering and which can actually cause real, crippling issues.

(Cont)

>>51535956
Muninn wasn't saying AT is a bad game or anything, just saying he thought vector was required for it to be truly a "space game"

QQ more you fucking bitch
Go play with your Lev III waifu

>>51536272

>Now I didn't follow what muninn was saying, but I made it pretty fucking clear that I've played AT. I also made it clear that I've played it several times and found it to be a shit boardgame in comparison to BT. I'd rehash why I feel that way for a fourth fucking time, but I can only write it out for you, I can't help you understand it.

Have you played it under the most recent revision with bracketing, ECHO, Bearings-Only Launches and Capital ECM? Because yes, AT2 was as boring as fuck. Two ships with NAC batteries would sit at medium range and see who could roll the highest.

That shit doesn't fly any more though.

>If a ML had the same damage/range profile as a Gauss, *the problem would lie with BT rules you insufferable cunt*.

It's what we call an analogy, anon. Light 'Mechs simply can;t take that kind of pounding. And yes, there is a construction system that feeds into that, but for the purposes of the example the point was that the units involved simply aren't tough enough to do what the fluff states they can because nobody has ever given enough of a fuck to go back and make the system cohesive.

The base rule set is actually quite robust. It's just that the majority of the designs are shit, and there's three successive waves of designs competing against each other- SLN designs and retconned vessels that are by and large crap, 3050s era ships that fit more or less into the same paradigm, and then the Avalon, Conqueror, Mjolnir and especially Leviathan II and III that just shit all over the established balance by going balls to the wall with guns and armour.

The solution isn't to throw the rules out and declare them shit. The solution is instead to redesign the ships so they make some god damn sense, but CGL will never do that because TR 3057 has always sold for shit and only a small section of the audience even cares about it.

>>51536417
For stuff that doesn't matter in game, you have: Grav Deck destroyed, K-F drive integrity damage, Cargo, Docking Collar, Door (technically matters if you're starting the game with fighters inside and launching them, but still seems not like a huge thing),

Stuff that matters: Avionics, CiC, Control, Crew, Engine, FCS, Fuel, Life Support, Sensors, Trusters and Weapons. (Dunno if crew works the same for large craft as ASFs, seems weird that it would since dropships and warships have dozens or hundreds of crewmembers so having them all make consciousness checks just seems weird)

That's 5 things that don't matter to 11 that do. Now granted, that's a sizable difference. On the other hand, it looks like the most common result is Weapons, and generally losing a single bay isn't a huge deal. It's not like Battlemechs where you might have a unit like a Hunchback where losing its main weapon makes it almost entirely de-fanged, or even units with several primary weapons where losing one still is a sizable detraction of firepower- Warships have dozens of weapons and many different weapon bays.

Then there's the fact that most of these crit effects don't dirrectly cause the unit to be crippled or destroyed- sure, taking a bunch of FCS or Sensors crits means you can't shoot back as effectively, or at all. Taking too much CiC or Avionics damage can make it difficult or impossible to pass control rolls. But neither of those are going to outright kill the ship. The onyl crit that seems like it can do that is Fuel, which can only happen on a 2 result in the Aft arc. Meanwhile, your mech can be destroyed by: Sustaining 3 total engine hits through any locations, and pilot death.

>>51536424
On top of those 3 ways of being destroyed, each way has at least 2 ways they can occur. You can lose your cockpit to a lucky TAC to the head, or through the destruction of the location. Ammunition explosions or repeated head hits can outright kill the pilot. You could lose an IS XL engine'd mech because a side torso is destroyed, or is the CT is cored out, or through various crits over the course of the game spread throughout torsos, or from an ammunition explosion.

Meanwhile with warships, you either lose the ship from SI loss or a fuel crit. The crits that you sustain up to that point do impact the warship, but they don't directly lead to those things. Degrading return fire from destroyed weapon bays or worsening fire control may make the ship less effective, but don't outright destroy it. Likewise getting mobility crits may make it easy to get into and remain in a damaged arc, but in the end it'll be destruction of SI that makes the ship count as killed, or a lucky crit to the rear that hits the fuel.

So yeah, it seems like the vast majority of the time ships will die to SI destruction. I'm sure you can continue to hem and haw about muh Mjolnirs and ships with more than a hundred or so armor per facing, but I really can't see even having 500 would let you end up with ships not end up destroyed from SI loss rather than fuel crits more often than not. You can keep saying "It don't be like that tho!" but at this point I think I'd rather have some evidence rather than you just blindly claiming things.

>>51536424
>Have you played it under the most recent revision with bracketing, ECHO, Bearings-Only Launches and Capital ECM? Because yes, AT2 was as boring as fuck. Two ships with NAC batteries would sit at medium range and see who could roll the highest.
Not that guy, but literally none of those things have anything to do with what he finds displeasing about Aerotech. You still display an inability to grasp the core of his argument. Keep it up, anon.

>>51536431

Cargo hits can cause the destruction of carried units, which is quite significant if you generate hits on bays that haven't launched their fighters yet.

Crew hits represent the vessel losing large chunks of its complement to compartment damage and the like. Get the result enough times and you've vented enough into space to render the vessel inoperable.

Both are like totally uncinematic and narratively uninteresting, very much the sort of thing you'd never see in a movie. Oh wait.

Further, losing a Weapons bay can be a very significant result. Many ships will only have 2-3 per arc, which gives you an opening you can exploit by staying in the right arcs. It can very much be the kind of result that gimps a Hunchback, and you can get it from a single Barracuda.

For the rest of what you're saying, what you fail to grasp is that 'Mechs are singularly effective at tanking through location damage. Always have been. The amount of damage ships can take to their SI and keep slugging is actually quite impressive.

If what you're arguing amounts to whether DnD hitpoints represent actual damage taken and fighters go at it until one lands a sudden fatal blow out of nowhere or that they represent using up luck, stamina, parrying etc then yeah, there's no way we're ever going to have a useful conversation because things don't work the way you want them to.

>>51536458

And yet most crits to a 'Mech will either fail or not prove fatal, allowing it to fight on without much hindrance until it either withdraws or is killed by headcap or coring, which is great. But this is bad game design space-side, because reasons.

>>51536424
>It's what we call an analogy, anon. Light 'Mechs simply can;t take that kind of pounding.

Alright homie. You're still not getting what my argument is.

Let's take that analogy of Stingers whacking each other with Gauss slugs. In BT, there's a lot of variance as to what that looks like. A Stinger could have a leg sheared off by a slug. It could take a slug straight to the center torso. It could take one to a side torso and send an arm flying. It could take one to the head.
And all of that is on top of the more pedestrian ways it could die. It could get kicked in the torso and pop an ammo rack. The pilot could be punched out via physicals. It could be charged off a cliff, or DFA'd into lava. There's a thousand death stories that could be told without spending too many words on strategies, and that shit is why a lot of people like Battletech. Maybe not you, but certainly a lot of people, and absolutely the people I play with.

The death stories of Aerotech are substantially more limited, no matter the relative power of weapons or armor. A Leviathan still dies from a rather rare critical or a far more common loss of SI in a single unified location. You're saying that it's not the fault of poor rules but rather poor canon designs. Leaving aside the customs argument because that breaks BT too(although not to the same degree), I think it's rather a fault of both.

In terms of complexity behind what happens to a unit that's interesting, AT is simpler than BT in the same way tanks are simpler than 'Mechs. The goal at the end of the day is to get the other guy to fill in a unified location with boxes. But this goal is achieved through a system that has at least as much crunch as BT. All to achieve a goal I could attain by playing Star Wars Armada in a fraction of the time.

>>51536424
>The solution isn't to throw the rules out and declare them shit.

At what point did that anon ever, even once, say anything approaching this? I've been following this since last thread, and all I've seen is that anon saying he didn't like how it seemed like ships only die from the destruction of all structural integrity. I don't think he's ever said the rules were shit and should be thrown out.

You're really good at putting words into other people's mouths though, have you considered politics? Why not go over to /pol/, I'm sure they can help! :D

>>51536727
I did infer that a reimagining of aerotech would be interesting.

>>51536713

>The death stories of Aerotech are substantially more limited, no matter the relative power of weapons or armor.

Which is also going to happen to vees, or Battle Armour. "Got shot by HPPC, melted. Got hit by Infernos, burned to death." There's no granularity there either.

'Mechs are unique in that regard, because the setting is literally designed around them from the ground up.

Seriously, how many vehicles do you kill through crits before getting a kill by taking out the armour and IS of a given location?

Yet this still has narrative weight, and you can hear the dice clattering a lot of the time in BT fiction when vees get involved.

If WSes weren't so poorly designed due to getting stats before there was a construction system or even real combat system it would be much less of an issue. The current rules set with all advanced rules in play has a lot of moving parts and interesting aspects, but can't be taken advantage of with existing designs thanks to CGL's policy on retcons.

>>51536680
And yet there's still far more cases where a mech will die directly from crits than cases where a warship will be destroyed as the direct result of a crit.

>>51536568
And yet none of those things will singularly kill a warship in and of themselves. A crit to the cockpit will kill a mech. A triple engine TAC will kill a mech. Repeated TACs will kill a mech. A single, powerful head hit will kill a mech. An ammunition crit will kill a mech. And because of how internal space works for mechs, depending on how you build a mech it might be more or less susceptible to one or more of these things. Warships are all going to have the exact same chance of a Fuel crit, from the same location, and losing SI is basically the same as getting their CT cored out. That's 2 ways. Oh, right, crew damage, 3 ways. Did you know that a crew hit only occurs on a shot impacting the Nose arc on an 11? Just barely more common than a fuel crit, and of course it takes 6 crew crits to destroy the ship.

>>51536758
Yeah but that's definitely not the same as you saying that you should just throw out the rules. I don't know what this one guy's problem is.

File: Thanatos_battlemech_lines_almost_done.jpg (684KB, 1372x1436px) Image search: [Google]

684KB, 1372x1436px

Almost done with the line work.

Then comes the "fun" part.

>>51536795
Yes, battlemechs are the only BT unit with that kind of staying power and endurance. Because they are what the game is designed around. You're right. And in space, where warships take center stage, why would they not be given similar treatment, similar levels of granularity? They're certainly large enough for it to make sense, and it's great thematically.

Also no, vehicles don't have nearly as much narrative weight when they die because they almost always die to loss of IS to one location. And yet, vees have more granularity than warships, there's more kinds of crits that can kill them than warships do!

Keep on going man, I'm sure if you keep arguing eventually one of us will get too tired and go to bed and you'll get to be the victor by default.

>>51536798

BT's whole system is that 'Mechs are different. They are the stars of the show. Everything else is just there to make them look good.

Which has been BT's stated design goal right from the very beginning.

>>51536826

Because the space unit given that kind of face time is ASFs, not WarShips.

And always have been.

>>51536899
That's nice. We're talking about warships in space right now though, not battlemechs on the ground.

Also, that really doesn't matter given that the argument is whether or not the current rules work for making warships have a decent amount of granularity to their destruction. Whether or not battlemechs are the focus hardly matters, especially since battlemechs don't feature in space combat.

You know, aside from an incredibly tiny number of purpose-built space mech variants that I'm willing to bet actual money have never seen play in an actual game.

You cannot in good faith talk about how mechs are the big different things who are the stars of the show... in a show they don't fucking appear in.

>>51536916
Come on, you can do better than that. ASFs have never been given that kind of fame and focus. When you think giant space battles, do you really think first of the tiny fightercraft? Like, in any setting, much less battletech/aerotech. If there's Warships in a scenario, they take center stage.

>>51537001

>ASFs have never been given that kind of fame and focus.

Yes they have. In terms of the space game, the initial and most important unit type comparable to 'Mechs *is* ASF. Have a look at the old boxed sets or, to demonstrate this more clearly, AeroTech 2. Which includes stats for all then-extant fighters and their variants.

And all of zero WarShips.

>>51537037
In the fluff? I think not. And given that ASF still lack the granularity of mechs, it circles back to the other anon's point: If you're not going to have that granularity, why maintain the very complex rule systems that enable that level of granularity? You cannot win here, Antagonist Anon. Either warships are the focus and should probably have a better level of granularity, or they're not in which case whatever is should have that granularity or the rules should be simplified to something that better accommodates that lack of granularity, and I swear to god if you claim Battlemechs are the stars of space battles I will be very upset with you.

A relative newfag here (only played PC games and a bit of mektek). I wanted to start a MekHQ campaign with a lance of mercenaries who are just scraping up a full lance and starting their operations in 3067. Any suggestions for a medium or hhml lance of dated yet still useful mechs at that time?

>>51536818
>>51536818
>Almost done with the line work.
>
>Then comes the "fun" part.
I'm no artist, but I know I like your work. What do you have left to do?

>>51537094
When you say dated, what do you mean? Like, introtech stuff that's still serviceable or some post-Helm Core upgrades? Or something else?

>>51537085
Not him but until the Clan Invasion, all space fluff stuff was Aerojocks. It's even the opening scene of the very first Battletech novel. Even during the Clan Invasion, was Aerojocks buzzing around Clan fleets.

You don't get warship-focused battle stuff until Serpent. Then there's a smattering of it in the Fedcom Civil War, a boatload of it in the Jihad as they all get destroyed, then back to Aero for the Dark Age minus like two scenes in Falcon books.

You know what doesn't get attention? Dropships. They're operationally the sluggers in most invasions but I can't remember the last time there was a story written about a good dropship fight.

File: Sabre.png (32KB, 320x412px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 320x412px

>>51537085

ASF did have the granularity of 'Mechs, once. This is what the Sabre looked like in the first AeroTech rule set.

Three of those hit locations have since been eliminated because they made the game as slow as fuck to play.

And if you look at the book, you'll see it focuses almost exclusively on ASFs.

TL;DR: What you're looking for has either never been the focus of the space side of things, or has already happened.

>>51537129

I don't really know what Helm Core is (newfag, remember?). I mean mechs that guys who started a lance by saving up from mercenary/military life, salvaging and possibly taking something from their old careers could possibly have (if that's even realistic in BT-verse)

>>51537104
The colouring. Weather effects, camo, personalization decals and such.

>>51536818
How are you doing this? 3D model?

>>51537195
Lol no, just hand drawing, rough perspective and the photoshop line and shape tool.

>>51537173
Much more realistic in the old days where even a state soldier could lay claim to salvage.

By the days of 3067, you're in full blown state army mode with most personally-owned machines sorely outdated and numerically reduced through attrition. State soldiers don't get salvage, no more killing a mech as an infantryman and becoming a mechwarrior knight.

No more serving twenty years on the front lines and being gifted your state machine if it was expendable and common but you managed to keep it alive.

The one thing that still carries over from the old days is a particularly valorous action on the battlefield may still result in the mechwarrior being awarded his state machine.

Best way to get decent equipment to start in the 3060's sort of era is to be a small state unit that goes rogue and becomes pirates or mercenaries. You could easily do that with a Fedcom unit that ran away from the war in that timeframe. There's precedent for it too.

There's also still a few societies of traditional mechwarrior knight families that have banded together to martial their influence. The Davions in particular have one of those that reisists the new sort of army.

>>51537276
Looks VERY sharp. keep up the good work.

>>51537173
Ah, sorry. Didn't grasp quite how newfag.

Good news though, that is absolutely realistic in BT! Some people who are former military who retired or got drummed out of their unit are very common as mercenaries, and there's plenty other ways folks get into it. Aside from owning a mech as part of a family inheritance, there's all sorts of ways your guys might get them, be it buying, salvaging or stealing, among others.

For a HHML lance, I would suggest:
-Archer, as Archers are fairly common heavy 'mechs are are good for long-range support fire roles.
-Grasshopper as those are sturdy as hell, match the movement profile of the Archer and is a good brawler.
-Crab, for some good durability and decent firepower.
-Firestarter for good mobility and the ability to deal with any infantry that might show up, and maybe messing with enemy's heat values.

For each of these, I would recommend either the base version, or depending on taste, the following variants. The Archer and Crab use "Tournament legal" level tech, rather than the introductory tech level.

Archer, the -4M
Grasshopper, the -5N
Crab, the -27b
Firestarter, the -K

>>51537155

>DropShips

Eh. They were mainly there for target practice from ASFs. That's where the focus was, after all. The only real significance they had was in campaign play where you might be able to kill off invading forces before they even managed to land.

>>51537276
Hand drawing? Do you have a drawing tablet or something?

>>51537387

Thanks! Decided for an old Javelin instead of Firestarter but apart from that I took all you proposed, thank you once again!

>>51537640
You're very welcome! If you don't mind me asking, did you go with any of the variants or did you just take the base versions? Also, good choice on the Javelin- I didn't realize until you mentioned it, but the lance I gave didn't have much in the way of crit-seeking, which those SRMs the Javelin packs will give you.

If you don't know, crit-seeking is a term for using weapons with low damage but a large number of hits (stuff like SRMs, or a bunch of machine guns) in the hopes that you score a hit on the enemy's exposed Internal Structure. Since any hit to a mech's SI prompts a critical roll, you just need more shots to increase the odds of striking the location rather than those shots to deal high damage.

There's also hole-punching, which goes along with critseeking, and is used to describe using fewer weapons with high damage, which will make it easier to remove the armor from a location. After all, if you hit an enemy with 4 medium lasers or an AC/20, it will take 20 damage total. But the AC/20 deals it all in one chunk, whereas with location rolls, the 4 Mlas shots are likely to be spread around and not breach the enemy's armor.

You generally want your force to have both holepunching and critseeking capabilities.

>>51537462
Yeah, a tablet. Intuos 3.

>>51537433
>Eh. They were mainly there for target practice from ASFs.

Try a squadron of individual 3025 fighters against something meant to fight like an Intruder with a single light aero lance escort. Capital armor is hard to bust through without serious effort.

They're easy as pie to dispatch in low atmosphere though due to control rolls, especially the spheroid ships.

>>51535392
The Bishamon had its time in the spotlight back when you could both hide behind lvl1 terrain and spot for C3.

>>51537387
>Royal Crab
>Realistic
u wot? The specs for it aren't even recovered until 3074.

Actually, all those but the Archer are pretty rare, even in the 3060's.

>>51537804

Combat craft didn't come for a long time after the original Leopard, Union, and Overlord. Those were tough but even the Overlord only has the per-arc firepower of a heavy bird.

All of them are easy enough to get if you zero in on their aft, which isn't that hard given their limited speed compared to ASFs and the way they have to move before ASFs. Time consuming I guess.

The armour values on ships in the TRs is at conventional scale, BTW. The Leopard doesn't have better armour than a Sovetskii Soyuz.

>>51537847

You could always do that, anon. They even bought back being able to spot without LoS to the target in the Manual.

I swear trying to write reasonable fiction about tanks feels even sillier than trying to write it about 'Mechs. The people who made these damn tanks have never seen the inside of a tank.

I want to see in diagram form how they pack 200 missiles plus 4 crew into a 60t Bulldog, or 4 tons of autocannon ammo, 120 missiles and 5 crew into the Rommel. Or 7 infantrymen in "reasonable comfort" in the Goblin's troop compartment.

>>51537918
The description for the Roya Crab is
>A simple upgrade utilized by the SLDF Royals concurrently with the original Crab, the 27b replaces the heat sinks with double-strength models and the large lasers with ER Large Lasers.[9] BV (1.0) = 1,167, BV (2.0) = 1,308[10][11]

Simple upgrade. I figure it's not unreasonable that people would begin refitting them to that. If you wanna tell me people legit didn't figure out how to swap to double heat sinks and switch Large Lasers for ERLLs until 3074, go right ahead.

Also, the vast majority of mechs are pretty rare. But if you only use the "common" mechs you end up with nothing but bugs, Griffins, Archers, Stalkers, Banshees and Chargers.

I assumed that anon wanted to have fun, not play super realistic XOTL 3025 charts. And given how much of a rep Hoppers have for being sturdy as fuck, it seems reasonable that someone having one that survived since ye olde early succession wars is pretty reasonable.

How about you put your money where your post is and suggest a lance for that anon? Or I guess you could just continue to criticize without adding anything of value to the discussion. That seems to be /btg/'s specialty.

>>51537944
>You could always do that, anon. They even bought back being able to spot without LoS to the target in the Manual.
Preeeetty sure recent errata says you must have LoS to target for both the spotter and firer for C3 to work.

>>51538001
You're imagining tank size based on modern tank size/weight. Battletech armor doesn't work that way. It's thinner and lighter. So increase the tank volume respectively. Just look at dropships. Their armor to volums is insane.

Missiles though, ho boy. You'll never get that one sorted. Mostly because they should be small but they make them big for art and mini purposes.

>>51537944
>Waaaa waaa, back in original aerotech box set things were different! Time hasn't passed at all, it's still the early 90s! I don't wanna have to deal with the timeline and product line advancing! Why can't things stay the way they were when I started playing!

QQ more, faggot.

>>51537944
Granted, it flip-flopped between the latest print run of TW and this one, but I know C3 was able to spot through LOS during the 3rd print run and prior.

Personally, I don't think the issue is so much requiring that C3 can spot through cover, so much as needing to dial back the 5% per unit in a network to about 3%. It'll be nice to not have it require my units getting slagged on the first turn by the dozen extra gauss rifles you can afford when compared to the price of a C3 lance network,

I mean, considering that the battlefields were being saturated with ECM and EW systems before there was anything worth countering. Artemis? Narc? Really?

>>51538043
>I figure it's not unreasonable that people would begin refitting them to that.
And they do, once they know it exists after Kurita the Hutt releases the specs in 3075 from the Dallas Core. That's already a retcon from the 3070 material that shows all manufacturers moving away from that kind of refit to brand new variants.

What's unreasonable anyway is the combination of what you suggested. Nobody bats an eye at one uncommon machine in a group. Three out of four is pushing it and you know it. I'm sick of Crabs and Grasshoppers anyway. Want two large lasers on a machine? Try driving an Ostsol for once.

And I would say give the man a Commando, a Warhammer, a Treb, and an Archer. That's all decently easy to get ahold of and fairly common. Plenty of merc market machines too by the 3060's. Vicore in particular sold to everyone.

File: centurion cross section.jpg (234KB, 623x833px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 623x833px

>>51538050
I'm taking the magic armour into consideration, but even if you shave off a few centimetres from the inside, it doesn't increase the volume available that much.

This is a 50-ton Centurion that has been sawn in half. It shows nicely how cramped the bastards are.

>>51537944
>You could always do that
No. 2008-2013 was the no-LOS spotter era. C3 for fifteen years before that was LOS needed.

>>51538064

What the literal fuck is wrong with you? At no stage did I ever say that, just that ASF were always the star of the space game despite the other anon's expectations it be WarShips.

Hell, I even pointed out that things have _already_ changed to be the way he wanted them to be.

>>51538200

>No. 2008-2013 was the no-LOS spotter era. C3 for fifteen years before that was LOS needed.


Well, I meant that you could always spot while hiding behind partial cover. Poorly phrased though.

>>51538050
>Missiles though, ho boy. You'll never get that one sorted. Mostly because they should be small but they make them big for art and mini purposes.
Mathematically isn't an SRM about 20 pounds if they used imperial weights and not metric?

>>51538337
Yep.

File: dragon ATGM.jpg (88KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 600x400px

>>51538337
All others except the SRM6 missiles are exactly 10kg (or a bit above 20lbs) per shot; the 6 is a bit heavier. The problem, however, is that even a 10-kg missile is fairly big. The M47 Dragon missile, for example, weighs 10.7kg (23.5lbs) and it's 85cm long and ~14cm in diameter (that's nearly 3 feet and 5.5 inches respectively). There are supposedly 200 of these in the Bulldog, which masses as much, and is about the same size, as a modern battle tank.

>>51538447
SRM6 missiles aren't heavier, it is simply because you can't load 12.5 salvos per ton and for gameplay we just ignored

>>51538372
Thank you.
>>51538447
Yeah this always baffled me. It started out with trying to figure out how those big SRMs on the back shoulder of a Warhammer could fit through that tiny connector to the torso. (This was before I knew anything about Macross & Robotech.) Then I was curious about where the hell 100 missiles was hiding on a Wasp in the old blueprints. When they had blueprints of the Marauder and Battlemaster, I could never figure out just where all that SRM and AC ammo was really stored. I'm starting to think it's old Transformer SCIENCE! where a cassette player can turn into a giant blue robot with a cool voice.

>>51538464
We just ignore that half salvo***

>>51538473
>it's old Transformer SCIENCE

I've called it a portal into the Missile Dimension, where the missiles wait until they're needed for reloading.

>>51538507
>I've called it a portal into the Missile Dimension, where the missiles wait until they're needed for reloading.
I think the guys on /co/ when they used to have Transformer generals, or maybe the guys on /toy/ would say the TFs missiles, guns and stuff that you don't know what to do with when they are in vehicle mode is "kibble", I think. In those vehicle modes like our missiles they disappear into pocket dimensions and OH WOW WHAT THE HELL HAS SCIENCE WROUGHT?

File: destroid-tomahawk-lineart1.gif (284KB, 1100x816px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1100x816px

>>51538473
>I'm starting to think it's old Transformer SCIENCE!

Transformers tend to have pretty botched transformations.
Comparing them to Macross is a bit of a disservice to the effort put into the original to make sure the transformations looked good and actually worked in real life (and it does, the toys could all perform the very same transformation they would in the show).
What became the SRM pod was a single-shot launcher in Macross.

Battletech, of course, gave about as much of a hoot about realism as a newborn does about manners.
Though a serious animated show done by veterans in the industry had incomparably higher budget to sort out the science behind it than a garage studio like FASA did.

File: Shortpacked20060804atheist.png (73KB, 500x743px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x743px

>>51538473
>I'm starting to think it's old Transformer SCIENCE!

You mean like naturally-occurring pulleys, levers, and gears?

>>51538477
Actually, the SRM 6 ignores an entire viable salvo.

A ton of SRMs is 100 missiles, and 16 salvos of SRM 6 is 96 missiles which would still fit, but all you get is 90 missiles for 15 shots.

>>51539008
lol atheists btfo

File: shortpacked2012-10-29_megatron_bargaining_power.png (135KB, 550x818px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 550x818px

>>51539138
>lol atheists btfo

David Willis is a huge Transformers fan, and he had a lot of fun over the years lampooning the series' lore and mechanics... kinda like we do with Battletech here at /btg/

>>51539008
>You mean like naturally-occurring pulleys, levers, and gears?
I freakin' grew up with those toys, and when I visited /co/ a number of year ago and learned SCIENCE! and all the shipping, I just couldn't bear to see it anymore.

>>51539123
>Actually, the SRM 6 ignores an entire viable salvo.
>
>A ton of SRMs is 100 missiles, and 16 salvos of SRM 6 is 96 missiles which would still fit, but all you get is 90 missiles for 15 shots.
And this drove my OCD up a wall since 1985. Why, FASA, why?

>>51539258
>kinda like we do with Battletech here

Precisely. I take the piss out of it, like with the Missile Dimension, the water raids, the political insanity in the fluff, etc. but in the end I still love this fucking game and have loved it for 23 years.

Also, bugger the tanks for a game of soldiers. I can't write about them in a way I like. I suppose the combined arms tactics Battlecorps anon in the earlier thread mentioned include 'Mech and infantry combined arms. So it's back to the giant robots I go.

File: more_mechs_finished.jpg (123KB, 1200x263px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1200x263px

>>51539431
>combined arms

Well, it has a tank in it. That counts, right?

File: The Crescent Hawk's Inception fold out poster.jpg (473KB, 1142x1156px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 1142x1156px

>>51540055
I want you to compile all your battletech pencil sketches from the last 30 years into a printable mini-zine.

File: Thanatos_lines_done.jpg (700KB, 1444x1416px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 1444x1416px

>>51536818
And lines done. Now I've got 6 days to get it coloured and looking like Alex' concepts for MWO.

After that I think I'll clean up my Hauptmann and Nova Cat concepts as those two seem to have a spark of potential in them.

File: First Andurien Rangers.png (61KB, 500x464px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 500x464px

I mentioned it a couple threads ago, but we got an insignia made for our unit.
The lance we've been playing for the last few months has surprisingly survived:
>Cpt Ivanov (my PC) - Banshee -3S
>A veteran (3/3) formerly of the Free Worlds Legions. Transferred to the Rangers upon hearing of its forming. Loyal to the Duke of Andurien and so backs his support of the Federal authorities.

>MechWarrior Sergeant Maldini - Huron Warrior -R4M
>Was part of the 3rd Sirian Lancers (Vet, 3/4). Picked up his current mech after the fight that left that brigade destroyed. Native of Shiro III happy to see his province allowed a mech force again.

>MechWarrior Corporal Sosabowski - Quickdraw -4G
>An older man for a corporal (4/4). Fought as a kid in last days of the Andurien Secession. Mech is one of a handful of Andurien heirlooms to survive. Tries to be pragmatic.

>MechWarrior Corporal Hytner - Cicada -3F
>Fresh from training but shows skill for his age (4/4). Raised under a generation of pro-League government, he romanticizes the Secession while supporting the League. Sosabowski thinks he's too idealistic.

All our games have been on the Lyran front for a while. Border issues that are a continuation of Brett's intervention on Arcadia during the FCCW.

How are everyone else's campaigns going?

File: achilles_in_action.jpg (872KB, 1280x1282px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 1280x1282px

>>51540425
>I want you to compile all your battletech pencil sketches from the last 30 years into a printable mini-zine.

Sounds like fun! I could probably make a PDF without too much work. Should it include the tech readouts and full-size drawings as well, or are you just interested in the "Marginal Thinking"? What about ink drawings?

Probably everything, huh?

>>51540859
>Probably everything, huh?
You're damn right.

>>51536795
brotherman. I literally said warships are similar to vehicles at least twice, and that they share the same disadvantages that make both boring as fuck to play with/against.

You're making my argument for me here.

>>51536916
>Because the space unit given that kind of face time is ASFs, not WarShips.
ASF focus was dumb to begin with, but you're not wrong. But ASF suffer many of the same problems as warships and vehicles.

>>51540816
*Banshee is a -5S, my mistake

When building a Rasalhagian force pre-Clan Invasion what would be the most common mechs for each weight range?

>>51541306
Literally just a mix of the most common drac and lyran machines

File: avalanche_prefinal_004_by_stephenhuda-d675za6.jpg (1MB, 2550x3300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2550x3300px

>>51540618
Hmm, looks good but I'd say you could get slightly less greeble going on in the design next time you get to doing the line art.

There's a little too much detail without any decent flat surfaces (or what a schooled designer would call places to rest, I guess).
It kind of reminds me of Huda's work, even if a part of it is definitely just the neat lines.

>>51540816
Looks cool.

File: ER3052 - DC and FRR RAT 3048-52.jpg (188KB, 397x1268px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 397x1268px

>>51541306
Yo.

Era Report 3052 is your friend.

>>51541759
I'm surprised there aren't any Zeuses.

>>51541848

They probably have no use for it or it's on their MUL or a salvage list.

>>51541848
CGL fact checking, brah. Easier (read: lazier) to lump them in with the Dracs than their own column.

>>51541622
Well, hopefully some if it will fade away when I colour it and let highlights and lighting take over.

>>51541974

Doesn't make sense since, technically speaking, the bulk of what the FRR has is Combine cast aways and equipment?

They don't exactly have the factories for anything else unless I'm missing something.

>>51542076
Outside of Panthers they didn't produce any faction specific mechs, and I recall it being mentioned in fluff that as a result of FedCom assistance it was as common to find Steiner mechs as Kurita.

>>51542119

>it was as common to find Steiner mechs as Kurita.

Yes, but for all we know they could have simply been giving them Commandos and nothing more.


> FedCom assistance

On the subject of that, it didn't seem like they provided a great deal to the new Republic. In fact, I believe their Lyran half tried to impede it's formation.

File: 20YU FRR mechs.jpg (46KB, 516x192px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 516x192px

>>51542329
>they could have simply been giving them Commandos and nothing more

Nope, see pic attached, from the 20YU. The Lyrans gave them a lot of support, including a regiment armed only with assault 'Mechs in true Steiner stylee, and as for...

>their Lyran half tried to impede it's formation

This was mostly the Kelswas of the Tamar Pact, not the actual LC part of the F-C. They wanted some of their planets back (planets which the Dracs had taken, attached to their Rasalhague District) and did underhanded stuff like hiring mercenaries to enforce their claims. Brush Wars has a great bit on the Ronin Wars.

>>51542686

>They wanted some of their planets back (planets which the Dracs had taken, attached to their Rasalhague District) and did underhanded stuff like hiring mercenaries to enforce their claims.

Not sure I could blame them for that.

It's kind of a bitter pill to expend blood and treasure for something you don't get to retain.

File: concept-roughneck-special.png (1024KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1024KB, 1000x1000px

>>51541622
I dunno man, seems par for the course when it comes to MWO designs.

>>51533948

Still, Catalyst has since recovered from those events hasn't it?

>>51542927
Well, they never went under, and they still have the license, so sort of? At the same time, they can't keep the intro box set in print, and some guys have been occasionally complaining about slow payment again. So I guess they're getting by but not thriving.

File: GKIH3SUB5FXDWQ07D9KYG8I6HS8RTHXT_0.jpg (77KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 512x512px

I honestly don't know what I am doing, but I was led to this website and did this with out buddy's line drawing in seconds.
http://paintschainer.preferred.tech/
Can anybody else make something better with this? I mean the software took over and did this on its own!

File: 515c6d8c7329924fbf0910031d03bc10[1].jpg (21KB, 480x271px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x271px

>>51542847

>>51542979
>they can't keep the intro box set in print

That's never how it's worked. They're just doing it the same way FASA did it before them. Produce a run, wait until it sells out, produce another. It's not a continuous thing. They model it after book print runs.

Usually, they put out a new box about every 2-3 years.

Since the last one was 2014, it's why everyone is in maximum "no box" bitchmode right now. But I bet a hundred bucks they'll have the new one for Gencon.

>>51543174

It's been sold out for a while though, and there's steady complaints about that. I remember the complaints the last time, as well, so I will admit that it's a regular cycle rather than something special this time (it's the level of complaints that seem unusual this time, rather than the practice). Why wait so long though? To clear secondary channels?

>>51542927

Leviathans is still dead, and the talent exodus hasn't been made up yet, so no. They HAD professionals doing work and it wasn't completely dominated by "fans" yet; those events are what led directly to the crowd-sourced factchecking and faction fan writing we see today. If not for those event, for example, we wouldn't see MadCap or Alex Knight doing writing for CGL.

>>51543232
They have to pay for set production runs from the contracted factory and even change factories between them. Even the Wizkids clicktech stuff was done this way. They'll have the new one out soon. I just hope it's full of shimmyseens instead of yet another retool of the 2007 box.

But to give you an idea of Box sets, 4th Ed was 1996 with two print runs I think. Fanpro box was 2002 with one print run. Catalyst 1st box was 2007 with two print runs. 25th Anniversary was 2011 with 1 print run. Current box was 2014 with one print run.

All pretty regular timing historically. People always start the whining at the end of the cycle, usually blaming grogs for buying up cheap sets for army building and fucking over new players.

>>51543378
I miss Herb even if he was a faggot sometimes. Ben was great when he had someone directing him, but I didn't like him as much completely in charge. Almost a Lucas sort of syndrome. Sucks that he quit though.

Now I have no idea what they plan to do.

>>51542764
Lyrans weren't meant to retain them. Their 4th Succession War success was a fluke in their history.

Question: Is there a Record Sheets 3150 yet or is it just the book with no attendant record sheets? I'm specifically looking for the New Tech inclusions.

File: nightgyr green.jpg (6MB, 3905x4697px) Image search: [Google]

6MB, 3905x4697px

>>51542847
>>51541622
better, more resolution on this NigGyr.

>>51543486
There are no record sheets for the NT units from 3150. There aren't RS for the variants only introduced in 3150. You can find everything else in 3145 RSs

Which BT RPG is the best and do they all use the miniatures rules for mechfighting?

>>51543624
I recommend either the 3E (mainly) or the 2E (secondarily). A Time of War is clunky to the max, and there's a shed load of supplements for the 2E and 3E both.

>>51543679
>>51543624
Remember that you can do edge(?) rerolls in lifepath chargen, which strongly mitigates the one-eyed sociopath issue. Anyone got the pdf of the lifepaths?

File: PP3NCFGB6KSPATBLYGHXCFR3J2AAGXEW_0.jpg (64KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 512x512px

>>51543011
I've learned a thing or two from /m/ trying to get the manga-painter to color in their robots.

>>51542847
That's an extreme case, no other mech in MW:O is anywhere near this detailed.

>>51542847
That a Shadow Hawk?

>>51544266
Nah, Roughneck.

PGI wants to continue the Mechwarrior legacy of adding in new mechs to Battletech (as if there weren't too many already) just like MW4 and MW1 had before them.

>>51540618
What are you doing this for? Some kind of bigger project?

File: Mechwarrior 3E Chargen Paths.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51543851
The 3E ones? Here.

File: 12901539_1248904438472405_3322156369376457258_o.jpg (283KB, 1630x2048px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1630x2048px

>>51544247
All of them are pretty busy though.

New sketches and finished art in from Plog. 4 BA in the works. Git hype.

File: ten_terrible_doodles.jpg (926KB, 2000x951px) Image search: [Google]

926KB, 2000x951px

>>51544399
Nah, community run art contest on MWO forums.

File: 23AAA4CDB890DCA4113323CC471F2D23.jpg (999KB, 782x1150px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 782x1150px

>>51544422
Eh, their most prominent filler element is those random lines across armor.

Anon's designs actually incorporate a lot of special details for everything.
Numerous armor plates of different shapes and sizes, variably placed in series and alone.
A lot of different bolts on the legs.

File: Thanatos_clutter_reductionjpg.jpg (903KB, 1645x1695px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 1645x1695px

>>51544581
Here's a version without those bolts, rivets and whatnots. Less clutter.

Better?

>>51540618
That Thanatos is definitely sharp enough for TRO use. Like I said a thread or two ago, if you want to take a crack at doing an original design of similar quality, I'd be willing to pay commission. email me at [email protected] if you're interested.

>>51536795
Vees have way more ways to die than warships though

Fuel hit. Ammo hit. Crew killed. SI of one of the sides destroyed. Turret destroyed. And mobility kills, either through slow buildup of movement crits, or movement destroyed crit, or engine destruction.

>>51542847
What's the deal with that thing, anyways?

>>51544942
Industrialmech chassis militarized into a fat shad

>>51543440
Ben sold his soul to produce Wars of Reaving. Everything else he made was shit.

>>51544979
Yeah but why did they add it? What does it do other mechs don't?

>>51545045
>What does it do other mechs don't?

Empower women, apparently.

>>51544315
>as if there weren't too many already
Are you implying there are? I bet you like Battletech for the fluff too, faggot

>>51545045
I haven't the slightest

>>51544686
I think so, but I'm not everyone.
Just go with what you feel is the best/majority-liked approach.

I'd hate to waste your time with petty nitpicks.

>>51544569
>ten
I count eleven.
I should know, I used to watch Sesame Street and Electric Company.

I wonder if Comstar has little kid shows like that.

>>51545276
>Manny the Manei Domini says "[mangled latin]"

>>51545276
Well bugger me silly, I didn't even acknowledge I put the solitaire in there.

>>51545045
>Yeah but why did they add it?
Both to give Alex aka FlyingDebris his chance of making his first canonical personal design, and to test the waters whether or not PGI's robutt addicted community would accept non-canonical, PGI designed mechs.

>What does it do other mechs don't?
In video game terms, it does nothing new.

In battletech tabletop, it's literally an industrial mech line that got refitted for military use and turned into a 10 tons heavier short range shadow hawk.

>>51545045
Why not?

>>51543378

>MadCap or Alex Knight

What's the issue seen with them exactly?

>>51545080
Well yeah. Women mechwarriors only get paid 79% what men MechWarriors do.

>>51545665
They're both writing for their favorite factions. Also they're both stupid assholes.

>>51544686

The weapon ports on the left arm and torsos appear to be slightly out of perspective from the rest of the mech's positioning.

>>51544569
What are the middle three next to the Night Gyr and Thanatos?

>>51546008

Alex Knight is which faction again?

>>51546069
In order of appearance, from left to right:

Templar, Thanatos, Hellfire, Hauptmann,
Akuma, Verfolger, Sagittaire,
Solitaire, Nova Cat, Turkina, Black Python.

>>51545665

MadCap is a huge Capellan fanboy who now does some freelance writing for CGL. He's known for being very favorable in his portrayal of the Capellan Confederation. While most people are fine with the Confederation moving on from the DEVIOUS INSCRUTABLE SPACE CHINAMEN schtick, people would also like authors to remember that the Capellan Confederation is generally not a pleasant place. He also gets blamed for some of the Capellan Confederation's recent storyline successes because grognards think every freelancer can make major storyline decisions. He's also massively into anime and MLP and is extremely obnoxious about discussing both of those subjects online.

Alex Knight is just an asshole who writes shitty rules and fluff, starts flame wars when people express any sort of criticism of his work, and then runs crying to mods that he's getting harassed when he inevitably starts throwing a temper tantrum after losing the argument he started.

Basically they're both obnoxious and incompetent, but are getting increasingly important as everyone who expects to ever get paid for their work stops writing for CGL.

>>51544533
Gime art plos or I report u

>>51546391
>He also gets blamed for some of the Capellan Confederation's recent storyline successes because grognards think every freelancer can make major storyline decisions.
I don't think I've ever heard him blamed directly, just lots of mentioning him together with coleman in the category of cap-wank writers

>>51546636
>tfw Coelman also wrote the RotS wank and Davions in the DA

It's kinda weird. Also, anybody else find it funny that Daoshen is like an NBA player wearing a giant gold drape? Funny seeing a 6"7" Capellan.

>>51546758

>Davions in the DA

Odd given they were allowed to seize a Capellan commonality world.

>>51546200
clan re-laser

>>51547187
Lol, savage AF

>>51546758
>and Davions in the DA
I mean, that makes sense considering how savagely assblasted they got

What did FASA originally have planned in the post-Jihad era?

>>51548607

MechAssault 3, now with more shields and pilot-jacking.

>>51548607

I don't think they'd got that far.

>>51548607
Never made public, as far as I know.

They might not have even got that far themselves.

>>51545410
>Both to give Alex aka FlyingDebris his chance of making his first canonical personal design
?

He designed mechs for BT proper years ago, like the Omen, Night Wolf, and Gùn. And kinda the Lu Wei Bing, though that's ultimately a gussied up Victor.

>>51549075
Artists are given stats and maybe a faction when they get assignments. Presumably the Industrial is something he came up with the stats of as well.

Are there any Mechs designed and built by the Lyrans, besides the Hauptmann and Commando? Talking about full Mechs and not just variants.

>>51546758
Tall Capellans aren't weird, they're actually pure Han Chinese. Liaos are complete mutts.

>>51550191
Are you counting machines designed and built by lyrans during the fedcom era? Either way, there's a LOT

>>51550290
Just during the Succession Wars right now. Need them for an A Time of War campaign I'm working on.

>>51550346

I hate to be That Guy but check TR: 3039.

The most obvious two are the Hatchetman and Wolfhound in that era.

>>51550191
Ymir, crossbow, and a lot of the Terran hegemony designs are lyran. Hesperus worked closely with the TH in the early mech years.

>>51548607

ilClan.

>>51550346
There's the Zeus, which is practically their mascot mech, the Hatchetman, the Wolfhound, in older days the Ymir and crossbow, and one other I can't remember

>>51550648

>FASA
>ilClan

lolno

>>51550492
If they're Terran Hegemony designs, then they're not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for designs that were made by, designed by and made for the Lyran Commonwealth.

>>51550464
I did check. That got me only a handful of Mechs. Zeus, Commando, Hatchetman and Wolfhound.

I'm trying to get a lock on primarily Rasalhagian designs for things. Not discounting ComStar/2nd Star League help, were the Beowulf, Viking, Ajax, Huscarl and Kobold the only original designs the Rasalhagians ever produced?

>>51550878

>That got me only a handful of Mechs. Zeus, Commando, Hatchetman and Wolfhound.

Sounds about right. Most of the old machines were developed by the Star League and inherited by everyone else.

>>51550958

Axel or Axl or whatever it was too, the ICE knock-off of the Rommel/Patton.

They didn't have many factories and weren't around for very long. And they weren't a high-priority faction either, so getting that many is kind of surprising.

I mean, the mackie itself was made on Hesperus iirc. The hesperus facility is where the battlemech plans are from.

So the lyrans never had a lot of lyran-specific designs because they had the factories for all the old TH and SL stuff.

Emperor, King Crab, Highlander? Those factories are in Lyran space.

The other factions had to make a lot more homegrown designs.

>>51550878
Dervish, originally designed by the Lyrans for defensive use. Only later associated with the Feddies because everyone else's factories were repurposed/blown up.

>>51552455
From the TRO:
"Designed in 2520, the Dervish was one of the first BattleMechs the Great Houses built in quantity. It served as a workhorse of their armies and was later commissioned into the SLDF during the bloody Reunifi cation War. Although given a major update in the twenty-seventh century, numbers have dwindled. Only the Federated Suns continued manufacturing the design during the Succession Wars."

Where can I find info that says it was a Lyran design?

File: MysteryBAteaser.jpg (107KB, 1559x1906px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1559x1906px

>>51546564
Here, have a teaser since you asked so nice.

>>51553893
HULK SWARM!

>>51553864
XTRO Primitives 3 p5

>>51553988
Ah, I don't have any XTROs since they're not used by my FLGS. Only TRO 3039 is legal at the moment until the store's campaign advances into Clan Invasion.

File: no.png (28KB, 95x106px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 95x106px

>>51554070
>Only TRO 3039 is legal
Jerome fucking Blake are you kidding me.

>>51554390
He did say the timeline is advancing, anon. Calm thy sperg.

File: 1SW.jpg (4MB, 2000x2579px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2000x2579px

>>51554070
It's not really relevant for the time period then. The early Dervish was copied by pretty much everybody by the time the Star League was founded, so by 3039 it's one of those background noise 'mechs found in every military, except the Suns, who still build the thing so have more of them.
(Hey Xotl, XTRO Primitives 3 gives the Dervish-1S the Obsolete quirk with the same year the 'mech is designed. Typo or hilarious joke at the Dervish's expense?)

Other 'mechs developed by the Lyrans include the Ymir, Bellerephon, Eisenfaust, and Alfar, all of which were Age of War era designs out of production and considered extinct long before the time period you're looking at.

If all you're worried about is Lyran production in the Late Succession Wars/ War of '39 period, here's your list:
>Archer (including their own local variant, produced at 2-5 factories, depending on when Bowie Industries facilities on Alarion and Wyatt got started, and when Satalice fell to the Dracs)
>Atlas
>Banshee (not actually in production until sometime after the 4th War, but they had lots left over from the old days, including their own variant)
>BattleMaster (including a local variant, produced at 2 facilities)
>Chameleon
>Commando
>Crusader (no production until ~4th War, when they capture Oliver from the FWL and build a factory on Tharkad)
>Firestarter (Skye factory slagged in the 1st War, but Coventry took over production afterwards)
>Flashman (as long as TRO 3039 retcons don't make you REEEE)
>Griffin (with local variant, and bonus production line after Oliver is captured)
>Hatchetman
>Locust (with local variant)
>Longbow
>Marauder
>Phoenix Hawk
>Rifleman (2 factories)
>Sentinel (limited production of the downgrade until 3014, assuming TRO 3039 retcon)
>Stalker
>Stinger
>Thunderbolt
>Vulcan
>Warhammer (possibly at 2 locations, depending on how long StarCorps has been making them on Son Hoa)
>Wasp
>Wolfhound (late 4th War)
>Zeus (2 factories)

>>51554416
Not only there are multiple XTROs set before or during 3039 (like Primitives 3), the story is advancing in such way only TROs 3039 and 3050 are accepted

His FLGS is retarded

>>51554767
>His FLGS is retarded

Definitely.

But it's still anon's FLGS, and sperging out about how they're playing Battletech wrong isn't helpful. Shove the commentary back down your throat and try solving the problem being asked about instead of complaining that the problem which neither you nor anon is in any position to fix should never have been a problem in the first place.

Try making a change in your life and commit to only displaying the amount of naked autism you're fine with seeing in everyone else's posts.

File: f0e21776eb9f167e9e2f22cc3fc06a5c.jpg (64KB, 600x700px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 600x700px

>>51554792
Speaking of toning down the autism...

>>51554767
>XTROs
Most of that shit is rare/extinct. Are you baiting? I mean you can be as mad as you want, I guess, but it makes you look way more retarded than that anon's FLGS. Are you mad that he's in a campaign hosted at a store and having fun? It sounds kinda like it to me. That or a case of badwrongfun, which seems to be a pretty common affliction 'round these parts.

>>51554913
Yeah, no. That guy's not being autistic, he's being tired of random whining. He's not the only one, either.

>>51554919
Given the guy's next post, he's baiting.

>>51554948
>posting the biblical version of "NO, U"
Yeah, probably.

>>51554944
>He's not the only one, either

Then maybe you shouldn't be on the internet. Nobody has to help anybody, and nobody can control what is going to get said. If you have a problem with that, then the problem's with you gramps. GTFO and let the people who matter use the internet.

File: Eris ES-3R.png (57KB, 616x900px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 616x900px

Post custom 'Mechs.

HARD MODE: Use unpopular tonnages/speeds.
NIGHTMARE MODE: Have less than 85% armor coverage and make a viable non-Light 'Mech.

>>51554948
>>51554955

>>51554913 here, I'm not involved except I'm fucking tired myself of >>51554792 being pointlessly dickish. Pretty sure it's the same dude who was flipping the fuck out last thread.

>>51554995
>NIGHTMARE MODE: Have less than 85% armor coverage and make a viable non-Light 'Mech.

I don't get this. It seems to be implying that light mechs can be viable, when that's simply not true.

>>51554955
Yep, between that and the low quality of his last post, I'd guess some pre-teen's up late trying his very first troll posts. Kinda cute, in a flailing baby animal sort of way.

>>51555015
Oh, they can be viable... in 3025, moving no slower than 7/11.

>>51554995
> Have less than 85% armor coverage and make a viable non-Light 'Mech.
That's not that hard if you go the Ost mech route. Put all the important stuff in the torsos and trim armor off of the arms since you're only using them for punching people and stealing their stuff.

File: images.jpg (8KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 225x225px

>>51555018
>i'm going to say things are low quality and see if anyone bites

Still going from last thread, eh?

>>51555010
>except I'm fucking tired myself of >>51554792 being pointlessly dickish

He's NOT, tho. He's telling you to keep the value judgements to yourself and just answer the poor anon's question. Nothing we can do or say is going to change his LGS's stance, whether we think it's stupid or not, and shitposting like you did in >>51554390 isn't helping anybody.

In much the same way as you'd yell at a 5-year old to shut the hell up after they'd been jabbering nonseniscally for a solid hour, anon isn't being dickish, he's just reacting to the tone and level of discourse you yourself set in your first response. Try not calling things you disagree with "fucking retarded" next time.

>>51555028
3025 is a lot more forgiving all-around with slower Light 'Mechs. Speed is still king, but it's not undisputed.

>>51555030
Good point, though you forfeit some flexibility in the exchange, which isn't hard to compensate for with good movement and planning.

File: Assassin ASN-21X.jpg (322KB, 1275x1650px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1275x1650px

>>51554995
I'll see your Hard Mode, and raise you an unpopular chassis. Here's a 3050s merc refit of the Assassin as a full-blown recon mech.

>>51555091
Why the actual fuck this wasn't a thing to begin with I'll never know. The Assassin has always been anemic, so making it into a fat Ostscout makes sense. I'd have also accepted twin SSRM2s and an MPL to make it a "propper" backstabber.

>>51555041
>>51554390 wasn't me

And you sure sound a lot like >>51554792

So we can throw these accusations around all night

>>51553893
As a side now, we're not quite happy with the head for this piece, so if you want to influence /btg/RO art, post you favorite scary-ass looking BA from any franchise. The main requirement is that it be something you really, really wouldn't want to see in a dark alley.

>>51555046
Played an introtech game recently and it was amazing how long my Commando stayed alive.

Designing a Battle Armor suit and I have 5 kg and one crit left, and I've already got an anti-personnel weapon mount. What should I put on there? Is there any actual use for cutting torches, BA spotlights, or laser or shotgun microphones?

Who's up for some MegaMek Saturday or Sunday night? Don't be shy, join the Discord and let's play Battletech!

>>51555746

Most of that stuff only has a point in RPGs.

But since you can only fire one AP gun per turn in BT there's not even any reason to mount a second AP weapon.

I guess you could give it 5kgs of mission equipment and fluff it as a grenade bandolier or something.

>>51555746
Five kilograms of booze and blow for after the mission.

>>51555920
>But since you can only fire one AP gun per turn in BT there's not even any reason to mount a second AP weapon.
Wait, so you can't battle armor alpha strike infantry with multiple AP guns?! What a gyp! How am I supposed to go Serious Sam on a guy?

>>51555920
>>51555746
related question - if I make a swarm attack, does the APWM weapon count towards damage if it's in the arm?

>>51556019
>Damage from a swarm attack equals the attacking unit’s total non-missile, arm-mounted weapon damage potential (not counting anti-personnel weapons).

>>51555992

You can design BA with up to 6 (2 per arm, 2 in the torso IIRC) AP weapons but can only fire one per turn in BT.

This is good because otherwise people would build suits with 6 Mauser IICs (or Federated Barret M42Bs, for the IS) and then strap on a pair of APGRs or MagShots.

It's bad, because there's literally no point to having more than one AP weapon.

I think being able to fire two weapons would be fine, but they've ruled on it.

In the RPG you can make better use of it but may take off-hand penalties and other BS.

>>51556762
Part of this game is of course the mental imagery. Imagining an Archer letting loose with 40 LRMs is pretty neat, so having a battle armor spraying a crowd of soldiers with multiple weapons like that would be kind of dramatic. It sucks the limitations they put on this game at times.

File: Mackie MSK-6S.gif (2KB, 84x72px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 84x72px

BULKY
U
L
K
Y

>>51557022
>It sucks the limitations they put on this game at times.

Well, given that the Colemans want the game to barely limp on and preferably even lose money, that's not surprising. Now that they can't milk Catalyst for free money anymore, it's just a tax writeoff for them. The less it makes, the bigger the writeoff, and the longer it lasts the longer they can keep it going, so it's in the company's best interests to keep it barely on life support for as long as possible, and fucking up the rules is certainly a big part of that.

>>51558709
That would explain why they haven't gone after the 3rd party product producers, but it would not explain the Catalyst employees conducting conversation shaping in /btg/

>>51558862
>the Catalyst employees conducting conversation shaping

Not everybody is with the program, and it's hardly something they're going to advertise. But that's the only way that the management of CGL makes sense: the ownership wants it to be stuck at the edge of success and failure.

>>51558862
Nice budding paranoia. It only stands to reason that more CGI people post here seeing as we have quite a few namefags that are past and present employees.
>>51558899
Occam's Razor states that it is pure lack of business acumen and professionalism.

Why no lawsuits? No money in it and nobody wants to wreck their favorite franchises.

>>51559388

Favorite franchise? Man, Battletech is a <terrible> franchise. I'm just in these threads for the porn.

File: image.jpg (21KB, 469x314px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 469x314px

what happened to the Sparta space station?

pic related?

>>51555920
You could slot a disposable weapon in. I've got a custom PAL somewhere that uses 4 LAWs

>>51559485

Wait, there's Battletech porn (aside from the FWLwaifu and the Clanner in the cockpit)? Since when?

>>51559486
Source?

>>51560021

Well, it's not "porn" outright. It's more a mental thing. I just like it when we're talking 3025-era stuff, because it brings back good memories of watching the Capellan Confederation get fucked.

>>51560021
>Wait, there's Battletech porn (aside from the FWLwaifu and the Clanner in the cockpit)?

There is Battletech pony porn, actually.
I'd not be surprised if you took a dive into the depths of the internet and found some "booty" hidden down there.
Worst comes to worst, you can always look for ancient Dougram doujins.

>>51554390
I had gone to bed after posting, thus missed out on what seems to be a meltdown on this thread.

On March 2nd, the campaign is advancing into the Clan Invasion. This will allow TRO 3050 and TRO 3058. We'll be playing next Thursday, I'll ask the store owner about XTROs. All I know as of right now is TRO 3039 is playable.

The store owner has been playing Battletech since the beginning, as have a few other people in the group. The majority of us, though, started last January when the store got in a shipment of the Introductory Boxes. That's the primary reason of limiting us to TRO 3039. The only non-3039 Mech us new guys own is the Mad Cat.

>>51558023
Mackie Stronk!

>>51560115
I get it. You like vintage, hardcore gay porn

>>51560300
>The store owner has been playing Battletech since the beginning

I feel sorry for you. Good luck trying to have fun, anon

>>51560412
Feel sorry for me? He's been very helpful on getting rules right and learning the game. I haven't played against any of the vets yet, though.

Playing MekHQ right now.

How am I supposed to know if a building is safe to jump jet onto? When I fight in urban settings the AI jumps all over the place, but when I try to move my mechs and jump infantry though the city they tend to take damage and collapse buildings. Are there particular buildings that are weak/strong?

>>51560607
Hover your mouse over the building. If the CF(construction factor) is at/over your "Mech's tonnage then it will hold it.

Fun fact: Shooting standard buildings is easy and reduces their CF by the weapon damage. Use this to collapse buildings under opposing 'Mechs.

>>51560438
Glad to hear you are having fun and your hope and joy are not shattered into ruins. It sounds like a fun campaign your store is running and join I wish you the best.

>>51560728
The store owner is basically easing us into the more advance stuff.

Only thing that annoyed me was the last game I played. My brother got lucky with an AC/20 and shot my Atlas's head off. He still brags about it. He rolled a double 6 but talks about how it was nothing but skill.

>>51559486
It was controlled by a Blakist front and had a KF core, so it could be anywhere by now.

what is the ideal mech:tech ratio?

>>51561432
I always thought it was five techs to one mech. When you start adding up the duties of taking care of a mech, maybe if you need rapid rotation of machines it might be like the anime Patlabor where there's like 20+ on duty for 2-3 machines.

>>51560769
>Only thing that annoyed me was the last game I played. My brother got lucky with an AC/20 and shot my Atlas's head off. He still brags about it. He rolled a double 6 but talks about how it was nothing but skill.
That's like saying you have magic rolling skills at the craps table.

>>51561466
1 tech and 6 astechs per mech

>>51561495
Well I was close. I figured it was a lot of work to get those things repaired and running as fast as possible.

>>51561491
My brother brags every time he beats me or does something that he considers a 'win' over me because I'm the eldest so he feels he must constantly rub in his face whenever he's 'better' at something.

Take video games for instance. We played against each other in Perfect Dark for the N64 all the time. I had a 21 win streak against him. He wins one game, refuses to play against me ever again and still brags about how he's better at the game than I am. That was 17 years ago. I'm 28, he's 27. It's been basically over half our lives ago and he's STILL bragging about that one win. It's just the type of person my brother is.

He'll play something against me until he can get just one win against me, then stops playing just so he can brag about how he beat me. I could have over 100 wins on him and he'll still claim he's better because of that 1 win.

Sure, he got my Atlas but I still won the game with my Hunchback, Zeus and Commando vs his Cyclops, Awesome, Dervish and Vulcan. Yet he focuses on the fact he got my Atlas and claims that is why he 'won' that game. He's still willing to play against me because he hasn't won a complete game against me yet.

File: Griffhopper-1.jpg (454KB, 1700x2200px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1700x2200px

Using 3025 tech only, trying to make a decent 5/8/5 55 tonner two options that I'm looking at are this one:

File: Griffhopper2-1.jpg (458KB, 1700x2200px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1700x2200px

>>51563628

Or this one:

(Yes, I know they're both very fucking boring)

>>51563628
Ironically, that Griffin is real. It's an old Battletechnology variant I think. Except the ML's are all bundled in the old LRM missile mount. They sort of recannonized it as Sparky later with a PPC instead of a large laser.

Also, what does everyone think the most garbage Griffin is? I have to put my vote on the 5K. No idea what those crazy dracs were thinking. All the others are pretty serviceable.

>>51563628
It's literally a lineholder with JJs instead of missiles
>>51563655
This one's at least lind of interesting, but the lack of any actual ranged punch is a bit of an iasue

>>51562393
Yeah sounds like a lot of "family!" and "friends!" threads on /v/ and how some pussies act. They know they can't repeat how they won that last time and mentally shut down while sitting in delusion.

Do you ever play a quick game with him on Megamek?

>>51562393

Just think, if he's that childish and delusional he could run the country someday.

>>51564009
Unless people find out he put classified emails on a private server.

Solution to building a good 3025 55 tonner:

Take the WVR-6M and do nothing to it

Pre-clan invasion, who are the biggest users of Thunderbolts and Marauders? Who uses them the least?

>>51561466
Those techs do more than just repair. They keep the machine running even when it's not in use. And each one will probably specialize in something -- reactors, myomer, weapons, sensors, etc. There are a ton of engineering systems for each 'mech.

>>51564359
Lyrans and FWL use thunderbolts the most, DC the least
Marauders are spread pretty even, with maybe a slight edge to FS

>>51564428
Oh, and I'd say probably capellans use marauders the least, but again only slightly.

>>51564359
The lyrans, FWL and Taurians are the biggest thud users, and the dracs and FS probably use them the least. As for the Marauder, the Suns, league and again the taurians are the biggest users, with the Capellans and dracs probably having the least

If you want to go by xotl's RAT (which is basically canon with him on the MUL team), then the rankings go:

Thunderbolt: Most is Capellans by far, 12.5% of their heavies are t-bolts. That's 3028 numbers, it went down a lot by 3039. FWL and Lyrans are about even, FS and DC is pretty low with DC last.

Marauder: Suns has more than twice as much as the next highest, which are lyrans and mariks. Capellans are at almost nothing, and DC only a little above them.

>>51564559
Misread the capellan RAT, didn't notice the mad-3L entry. That puts the capellans at parity with FWL and Marik.

>>51564696
*LC and Marik

>>51564428
>>51564482
>>51564559
Thanks lads. Out of those guys, who would you consider the most likely to use all-thud or all-MAD lances?

>>51564310
The Wolverine-M is literally the best intro 55 tonner

File: Wolverine-6M-2.gif (2KB, 84x72px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 84x72px

>>51564310
this is truth

>>51565063
Unit spam is incredibly uncommon with mechs, and would pretty much never happen barring themed Mercs and maybe Taurians. And the obligatory Kuritan Dragon lances.

>>51565248
Griffin 1S

>>51565318
I respectfully disagree.

Though upon reviewing the -1S I must say I'm surprised it isn't the Griffin-M. Switching out PPCs for large lasers is more a Marik thing.

>>51565249
>Unit spam is incredibly uncommon with mechs
It's actually pretty common in the fluff, it's just that nobody does it on the table

>>51565063
The FWL and taurians would probably be most likely to do the all-thud lance, though the lyrans might too.
All-marauder lances could turn up anywhere but I'd call the taurians most likely to do it with the capellans second

>>51560663
Works for bridges too. I found out the hard way when someone put LRMs into a bridge that my Talos was standing on. Dropped into depth 2 water and breached a torso. Climbed out of the water with only the SRM6 left.

File: robotech_condar_bushman_ad.jpg (1MB, 1280x1968px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1968px

Found something pretty cool in an old box in the attic...

>>51563988
We only have one computer in the house. Yeah, we live together. Yeah, it is hell. It's my work computer for making the video games I sell at a local store. So we only play the physical tabletop,

>>51564009
I doubt it. He can't even get custody of his daughter because everytime he tries they find drugs in his system. I've been trying to help him but he's making it very difficult by vanishing for days at a time.

>>51565861

Who cares about that? The real question is, does he keep his email on a private server?

>>51565878
>>51564009
>>51564233

Don't start this shit here for the love of Blake.

>>51565916
Enlighten someone who only started a year ago and hasn't gone beyond the 3039 stuff yet, who the heck is Blake?

File: 1467366467762.jpg (101KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 600x600px

>>51565861
>It's my work computer for making the video games I sell at a local store.
Wait, what? Neat. Dish, buddy. I want to know. What kind of games?

>>51565943
He was right.

>>51565943

Battletech is space dark ages. Comstar is the telephone company and also the space catholic church, hoarding all the SCIENCE and keeping it secret from everyone.

Blake is the one who made the phone company start acting all cultish to become the space catholic church. So, kind of the space Saint Peter.

File: Conrad_Toyama_2.jpg (16KB, 384x498px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 384x498px

>>51565999
>Blake is the one who made the phone company start acting all cultish to become the space catholic church. So, kind of the space Saint Peter.
No

>>51566015

Right - Toyama is Space Saint Peter, Blake is Space Jesus.

>>51566015
Is that official art for Conrad or just some guy?

>>51566041
Toyama is a horrid mishmash of Peter and Judas.

>>51565963
RPGs. My current project is going to be my first one I'm going to try and get onto Steam Greenlight. Most of them are Fantasy RPGs, but sometimes I'll do things like Steampunk Western or Science Fiction. A lot are based on the D&D and Pathfinder campaigns I run, all using the setting I created for the campaigns.

>>51565589
The thing with the 1S is that it was originally designed for guarding the Lyran throne room, where having PPCs would be a Bad Idea. So there are two large laser griffins guarding the archon.

File: 1467505525675.jpg (484KB, 1280x1440px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1280x1440px

>>51566147
You have my interest. What programs are you using? Can we get an idea of what your current project is like?

File: Not Awesone, Just Cool.png (21KB, 400x800px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x800px

>>51565963
>>51566230
My pathetic cheap Cool.

File: o2SHyyY.png (1022KB, 991x879px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 991x879px

>>51566230
I use RPG Maker VX Ace. I don't mention using the program often due to the bad rep RPG Maker programs have. Not that RPG Maker doesn't earn the bad rep. About 90% of the games made with it are shit.

I use two different styles, depending on the story I want to tell. More generic stories use a JRPG style, pic related.

>>51566015
I'd fugg him

I'm a girl though

File: awesome_and_warhammer.jpg (962KB, 1280x1259px) Image search: [Google]

962KB, 1280x1259px

>>51566275
I used to mess with RPG Maker... I know the rep. I actually made a really pathetic RPG for an ex-girlfriend years ago.
Are all those white boxes trigger locations?

>>51566165

>headcanon worst canon

They're normal Griffins with PPCs in the books, anon.

They're also not seriously expected to fight, they're mostly there to look cool and intimidate people who are speaking to the Archon. Pilots are trained to fight in close quarters just in case but if the Archon is attacked in the throne room somebody already fucked up.

>>51565943
>>51565999
>>51566015
ComStar/Word of Blake is the best thing about BT lore.

File: GOfS36l.png (277KB, 545x418px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 545x418px

>>51566316
The boxes are events, only a few actually do something. By using events I can essentially get a 'third' layer when the program only supports two layers. It's my way of cheating the program.

Here's what the other style is like, this screenshot is from in game. It won me a contest a few years back.

>>51566267
You know there's an Awesome that's basically that but with 4 un-capped LPPCs too?

File: Awesome_CBTIRp38.png (342KB, 1343x1055px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1343x1055px

>>51566351
Holy crap! You made those sprites in RPG Maker? How did you do that? Color me impressed.

File: MM.jpg (80KB, 570x615px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 570x615px

>>51565631
But that's not true, anon.

(I keep waffling on the lance commander rides. I need something that can keep up with the Wolverines, with jump jets, and as dirt cheap as possible.)

>>51566378
Sorry. New at this.

Continuing the mech-chain.
>>51566431

>>51566390
I purchased them from a company that makes those style of graphical resources for RPG Maker VX Ace and RPG Maker MV. I probably spent at least $300 on getting resources from them. They're pretty cool. I don't make my own music or graphics, but I pay for others to make them.

File: CCG_Unlimited_Awesome_Q.jpg (34KB, 311x390px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 311x390px

>>51566469
Neat. That's an investment. What kind of music genre are you using?

>>51566504
Depends on the mood and theme of the game. Which reminds me, I need to see if I can make a free fan game that takes place in the Battletech universe. I have the means to make tactical RPGs (like Fire Emblem and Tactics Ogre) with RPG Maker VX Ace.

>>51566574
Silly thing might consider. Years ago playing Wizardry 8 I replaced all the music in the game with music from the PS1 game Ace Combat 2. So I was in a fantasy setting with some futuristic stuff, listening to high octane air combat music. Just a silly thought.
And godspeed to your work, man. Looks like you got a plan and are sticking to it. Let us know how it goes.

>>51566064
Official art