| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 08-Mar-2003 18:14 Post subject: Damage and munchkinism |
  |
|
Why is it that having weapons that do relatively large amounts of damage is looked upon with such disdain in the Battletech community? Such wepaons would be more realistic, speed up game time, allow for greater force sizes in games, and would not be terribley unbalancing. Every time a weapon is proposed by a player that does a lot of damage the player is called "munchy," and when such weapons show up in the game they are overcome with defects or lousy rules that make them almost useless (ex. HvyGauss or RAC5). Maybe its time Btech had a little more firepower in it.
What do you all think?
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2003-03-08 18:15 ]
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Horhiro
Draconis Combine
Samurai
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1625
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 08-Mar-2003 20:42 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
I don't mind "munchy" weapons as long as they have a drawback. I absolutely feared the firepower of Chihawk's RAC Rifleman in my New Avalon scenerio at TotalCon, but after he jammed one of the 2 RACs he became a lot less fearsome. Esp knowing he had to spend a round not firing anything to try to unjam it.
The Heavy Gauss is nasty, but it takes up so much space and is so easily crited, which causes a catastophic explosion and severly hampers the mech.
The PPC is a heat pig, I wish they never got rid of the min range on the ERPPC.
I think that the BFG weapons have been properly adjusted with drawbacks (low ammo being another) so that they don't upset the game balance too much.
Do love that ER Medium laser though!!!!!
_________________
"I have lived my life trying to be a virtuous man. The Dragon admires tenacity, and the code of the samurai upholds it as well." -Minobu Tetsuhara
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Nightmare
Lyran Alliance
Kommandant-General
Joined: 03-May-2002 00:00
Posts: 2214
|
| Posted: 08-Mar-2003 21:53 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Nothing wrong with a big gun, as long as it doesn't make all the others worthless.
_________________
A tree fall in the forest, and no one is around, and it hits a mime. Does anyone care?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 08-Mar-2003 21:58 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
What if all direct fire weapons had their damage increased by, say, 20% to 25%?
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5629
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 09-Mar-2003 14:20 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
the reason big guns are frown upone is because there head cappers.
now if it was standard ruling the all mechs used torso cockpits instead of head mounted, they'd be less feared and frowned upone.
the bt system was designed to handle level 1 play with ut-most perfection. each weapon had its place and tactic. they all balanced out to an enjoyable game of tactical chess.
the introduction of suitable, yet forced, weapons that fall into level 2 has put a strain on that perfection. the present system was never designed to handle what there adding and its killing the heart of the game, tactics.
it could use an up date, but that proposition could further destroy the game we love.
so in the end, BFG, just dosen't fit, because it was never ment to.
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sir Henry
Team Bansai
Senior Tech Specialist
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4899
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 10-Mar-2003 09:38 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Or they could add just a little more head armor..... say 16 points.....
_________________
Sir Henry
A Dragon in the disguise of a bunny, is still a Dragon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8052
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 10-Mar-2003 15:16 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Moved from "Design submissions" to "General Discussion"
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Horhiro
Draconis Combine
Samurai
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1625
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 10-Mar-2003 20:20 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Isn't there a "cowl" in level 3 rules to add more head armor?
_________________
"I have lived my life trying to be a virtuous man. The Dragon admires tenacity, and the code of the samurai upholds it as well." -Minobu Tetsuhara
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 912
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 11-Mar-2003 05:33 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Well, because Battletech, as originally conceived is a setting in wich arms and armor have reached a precarious stalemate.
If you introduce better weapons, that would spark an arms race that would eventually make the Battlemech obsolete and superceded by a new weapon system (gravity tanks, maybe?)
Me thinks you are in the wrong game for your tastes, pal. However, I have a treat for you, you wanted BFGs? Then read this article
http://www.schlockmercenary.com/chalain-vasimr.html
and come up with stats for a Plasma Cannon for Battletech. I suggest you publish the results of your research in the ComStar (or WoB) Journal of Science 
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611
|
| Posted: 13-Mar-2003 03:45 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
It's not just new generations of BFGs with lots of range. It is the combination of that and the size of the map. Most of the games we play are about 2 mapsheets to 4 mapsheets worth of space. It is rare indeed to play in a game where the map is so large that the lances of a company can spread out and be out of firing range of the other lances. The sort of game where you want some arty or arrow missiles hanging at the rear because you really do need some support fire elements on your side are rare.
Most every time I've done a pickup game it has been lance on lance with 2 (mostly) to 4 mapsheets. And since we don't want to fire and fire and fire and miss a lot, we give ourselves some decent shots to work with don't we? Decent enough that a long range weapon can actually have a chance to hit at long range.
With such a limited space available, it takes not long at all to get within range, often you can shoot at something on the very first turn. And since every mech in the lance is within BFG range to concentrate on just one target, that is what we usually do.
There are no pauses to duck behind a hill, to attempt to rearrage your troops to better positions farther back or to one side, you haven't got the space on the map for those manouvers. Instead movement is used mainly to up the to-hit numbers to as high as we can get them while everybody lines up and slugs away since the battlefield is not large enough to allow for real flanking movement. And how many times have we seen a very fast mech or vehicle max move with a +4 to hit the thing and yet it is still at short range to the same target as last turn and pounding away? Every turn, the fast stuff does a fast doughnut and returns to its position, we've all done it.
That was what the old heat problems were for, to prevent the standard slugging match at medium range from happening too much. The same for the old weapons. But now with all the new stuff, the range at which you can expect to really hit stuff has gotten longer while the size of the map is unchanged.
The use of tactics has diminished in the average Btech game, because the new weapons shoot farther, the mapsheets are no larger, and your kitchen table is no larger either.
Which is the main reason I keep hoping somebody will finally create something non-multiplayer with a decent AI that I can sit down and create battles and maps and tinker with. To fight the huge, widespread battles that I have never been able to do on a tabletop. The kind of game where I can send my heavy lance off to where I think the other side is... and be wrong, leaving my light lance to skirmish with the enemy heavy lance while I struggle to get there in time to save them with my own heavies, etc. The kind of game where movement (distancewise) and tactics really can play the pivotal role in most battles.
[ This Message was edited by: Gunslinger Patch on 2003-03-13 03:49 ]
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 13-Mar-2003 15:24 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2003-03-11 05:33, Vampire wrote:
Well, because Battletech, as originally conceived is a setting in which arms and armor have reached a precarious stalemate.
|
|
Yeah. Is this idea really important to most players? I think it is, but I also think it hurts the game a little bit.
Quote:
|
If you introduce better weapons, that would spark an arms race that would eventually make the Battlemech obsolete and superceded by a new weapon system (gravity tanks, maybe?)
|
|
I am not trying to turn Btech into Renegade Legion, nor am I proposing that BFG sci-fi weapons be introduced.
Quote:
|
Me thinks you are in the wrong game for your tastes, pal.
|
|
That's probably right. I haven't actually played Btech in months, not since I played against Talen. I don't try to get my friends into it because I know they will not be interested. I also find myself getting bored of games that last over a few hours. But hey, I still love the old fiction.
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 13-Mar-2003 15:30 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
I agree with what you say, but I hate to see weak, short ranged weapons as the solution.
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sir Henry
Team Bansai
Senior Tech Specialist
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4899
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 13-Mar-2003 20:00 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Would you want weak long-ranged weapons, as the solution???? THen the AC2 is for you... 
_________________
Sir Henry
A Dragon in the disguise of a bunny, is still a Dragon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5629
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 13-Mar-2003 20:09 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
dunno.... at 6 tons its just to heavy to be much use IMHO, every once in awhile you can pull some cool moves out of it but more then not its not worth its weight.
maybe the ac 2 should be 4ton as standard instead of 6. and the ac 5 reduced a ton or 2 also.
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611
|
| Posted: 14-Mar-2003 00:00 Post subject: RE: Damage and munchkinism |
|
|
Less weight for those autocannon would indeed make them more interesting to me. I never touch AC/2 as it is and hardly ever use AC/5 either, too much weight for too little bang.
Now if the Canon should come to include such a 4 ton AC/2 and say an LBX-5 that is say 6 tons weight, I could find a reason to use them on something.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
