Hey folks, not sure what happened to the audio here. We recorded in Dan's basement this time, and I did noise reduction to remove any background noise. It is possible that removing the noise of people walking on the floor above us thinned out the sound of our voices quite a bit. I'm sure we'll get it right next time... or maybe the time after that.
"We have enough variants." THANK YOU. We've got enough mechs and variants. It's time to polish the game. This is a big hurdle that BT needs to surmount. I've lived in a few places across the country, and in every place, they use a different system to put games together. Some use tonnage, some use a BV system, some use their own house rules. I appreciate that the game is flexible enough for this, but it's such a basic concept in every other game, and it honestly makes a game that's been around for almost 40 years, and is a lynchpin of tabletop sci-fi gaming feel pretty small-time. Your ideas are pretty good, and I'd love to expound on it more and maybe introduce it to my current group. Do you guys have a discord or something? I'd love to have a place to start pounding out the finer details...
No discord. Honestly didn't think we are popular enough for that. I asked for a section in one of the discord groups a while back but I don't think they like us much.
@@TheMemoryCore that unfortunately doesn’t surprise me. You guys are my favorite BT podcast. I like that you’re passionate about the game and it’s lore, but willing to be critical when it’s called for. A lot of the fandom doesn’t like any criticism of the product, I think. Can I suggest you set up a discord? It might not be the biggest community, but I’d love to have a place to hang out with other like-minded players. If you don’t want to deal with it, I’ll offer to moderate a discord for you.
@LitanyAgainstFear any reply I post with even a hint of a link or email is deleted. I can’t send you PMs on TH-cam because…well…TH-cam. Didn’t see any email listed on your podcast website.
Yea I used to play heroclix competitively and 300 was the standard value to build lists. Being that I'm more of a Battletech fan than a player (I'm currently GMing a campaign for my buddies, but I've never played a regular game of battletech) I had assumed there was an existing standard BV for tournaments. It's surprising that one doesn't exist.
the concept of tournaments is that two players each have a fair chance of winning. most games do this with a points structure. from the beginning, this game has been about the lore and the story. nothing in either has ever been fair or balanced. this is also reflected in the rules. in the mid 90s a CV (combat value) system was introduced. a couple years later (1997) the BV (battle value) system was presented - a cleaner version of CV. however, this is now 14 years into the the games existence. yes, there is a way to calculate the potential for everything in the game. but the original concept prevents a smooth transition. that's why you are having so much difficulty with trying to fit the square shape of points into the triangle shape of the Battletech universe. in theory, you could make it fit, but it's just not right!
@@bruced648 but it's not just about actual tournaments, it's about having a set universal standard of points that is officially supported as such. Just throwing out a number for the sake of example, let's say 6000 is the standard battle value that everyone uses for general purpose. You could have multiple lances, stars, and combined arms units that function within that space and you can just pack them up and bring them along with you without having to worry about not having the right amount of BV for the week or having to come up with a 5000 bv force next week, and then a 4000 bv force the week after. A standard battle value will give you more freedom to travel to different locations without having to learn all their regional rules or standards. If they play 5k in your town, but the next town over plays 6k,and the next town after that plays 7.5k you're just segregating the already small community more than necessary. There's already a handful of things that seperate player groups as is like alpha strike vs classic, or 3025 vs clan invasion etc....
@@ChrisZestyJesty I think you missed my point. the original concept of battletech is its universe. within the universe, the factions have armies and hire mercenaries. the military units are structured in Lance, company, battalion, regiment etc. these military forces have always been in the rules and the lore. I've never read in the lore... "I'm bringing my 5000 pts, what do you have?". it wasn't until the game was nearly 15 years into existence, that a points structure was attempted. players need to get away from the points concept and back to military unit sizes. if you say that you are bringing a company with mixed forces, then I know to anticipate 3 to 5 lances of mechs, armor. infantry and maybe vtol or artillery. THAT is the original idea of this game. not points and balancing forces. war is never about having a fair fight and this game is no exception. if I go to play somewhere, I bring a battalion strength force of combined arms. when my opponent says he has a company of mechs, it's my choice how to oppose this. even if he has just a Lance of mechs, it's still my decision what type of Lance to field. that's how this game was always meant to be played. not by having a designated points allotment, but by having an army! so, where does my fleet of 5 warships, 22 dropships, and 16 squadrons of Aerospace fighters come into play? I intend to use orbital bombardment and land my forces in close proximity so my dropships can provide covering fire while my troops deploy. just a guess, 15 million points?!? you cannot properly fight a battle with your forces fighting with one gun tied behind your back. points are limiting, restrictive and force players to build units outside of the lore. and again, that's why points system is a bad method for this game.
@@bruced648 if you have the time and the group of players willing to commit to a full scale battle from warships to infantry I applaud you, but most people have an evening or two to devote to their hobby, and you're focusing a bit too much on the WAR part of wargame. If you're implying that a Lance or company versus a regiment is OK to play because that's how real war is then you're wasting you're time and your opponents time. It's a warGAME, and any other wargame on the market comes with a designated standard scale of play. Battletech is designed for Lance vs Lance combat. I've ran company vs company and it took three 8 hour sessions. The game breaks down and slows to a crawl after a certain point. At the end of the day battletech is about having fun with some buddies, and if full scale warfare is your jam, go for it. Some people want to enjoy the competition of playing against eachother in a structured environment where they use strategy and tactics to their fullest and see whose the better Lance/force commander.
I once asked what the standard BV for tournament play was, and was surprised to find that, there was no standard. Since you brought this up, I would like to know what would you purpose this standard would be? would 5,000 be sufficient?
That's the 64,000 BV question. I want to say that 5k would be enough, but once you start utilizing better pilots you pay a hefty price. 6K might be more comfortable to work with if you don't want everyone stuck with 4/5 mechwarriors.
trying to set a designated point value without setting a few important factors first, is kinda useless. if we agree to use 5000 pts, sounds great. however, what time period? what TRO's are allowed? can I use my own designs? are we strictly mechs or is this Total Warfare rules and advanced rules? are we permitting artillery and/or Aero? that's a long list of variables to apply to a points system. I didn't even get into certain Clan honor rules, pilot skills or advanced pilot skill options. let's keep it simple. we each get 2500 pts. max TRO is year 3049 (pre-clan). only mechs. now you have a foundation to plan your forces. this game is not designed for balanced play. that doesn't exist in the lore and it doesn't exist in the rules. but, if you are just learning the game, keep things simple. not more than 4-8 pieces on the board for each faction. once you are comfortable with mechs, add some vehicles and infantry. again, not more than 4-8 pieces on the board.
I've been playing B-tech since 1984. I am entertained that you never use c-bills as a method of unit creation. that's the only way we play. the bv system to create "balanced" play doesn't work for our campaign. trying to use tonnage, won't let us take into consideration salvage, repairs, supplies, salaries or transit costs. you say that you want a 'standard method' to build a force. this was never an intention of this game. having units that different factions typically use, is part of the lore. but the idea of balanced play, is not the games focus. your need for game balance is actually the exact opposite of any of the novels or scenario books or even the video games. this has always been a story of the struggles humanity has made for itself to expand within the Galaxy. the wargame is a tool to tell this story. as actual history shows us, nothing is fair! why do you insist that your gaming experience is fair? without the challenge of having odds stacked against you, all your doing is throwing a chance cube or flipping a coin and saying who wins. anyone can place 4 mechs on the table, follow the basic rules, and against a 'balanced' opponent (same bv value), have a basic 50/50 chance to win. this is not the intention of the games creators! unless you are constantly playing in tournaments, you should be playing for the story. if you want balanced play, choose a different game!
Balancing by c-bills and tonnage are an entirely different beast. Those things are best for the RPG centric BattleTech games. We're actually focusing on tournament rules when it comes to using BV to create games. In games where you show up at a store and throw down, random and not run by a GM or Demo Agent, you should be able to play with guidance from some sort of BV standard. BattleTech doesn't 'officially' have that which is why you see newcomers constantly ask how to build forces, what 'mechs are the best, what to use, etc. Also, it's worth noting that there have been tournament rules published before. There is a set on Sarna.net published by Fanpro in 2004.
@@TheMemoryCore I understand the problem. it stems from other game systems that focus on tournaments and these players becoming interested in battletech. Fasa attempted to tackle this with CV and later BV. the inherent problem is complicated. while some factions have preferred mechs/vehicles, there is no exclusivity. even the Total War book doesn't have a good answer. Catalyst games did a fair job listing tables by faction of typical units (pgs 264-271). but it doesn't show methods for grouping certain things together. while other games use a standardized points structure, battletech has too many variables to simply apply points and state that is an balanced match. example: 4000 pts, your force might have 2 to 4 mechs, my force could be all rifle infantry. not sure that would play out fairly! the better method is by force size (Lance, company, battalion). then have limits to weight class (light lance: 3 lt, 1 med)(med lance: 1 lt, 2, med, 1 hvy)(hvy lance: 1 med, 2 hvy, 1 aslt)(assault lance: 2 hvy, 2 aslt). of course, this is a suggested list. players would agree to the forces configuration, timeline and technology available. a match might look like this: 1 med lance v 1 med lance 4th succession war any TRO prior to 3049 (pre-clan) if playing post clan invasion, the battles should be very unbalanced from 3049-3055 (invasion thru tukayyid), but have the clan forces playing with clan honor rules. after 3055, I.S. and clan have a much greater tech balance. again, explaining this to a new player is a challenge. but this game was never intended for simple, throw down armies. that's why the points system looks good and works in theory, but isn't really that good overall. my personal force is an Army consisting of 5 Corp. our games involve planetary system invasions. we pull out a company or battalion for a designated objective. our pre-game Intel simple consists of "company size force". it has nothing to do with points. the Intel doesn't say "15,000 points defending". this is why the original and following sets of rules have large sections that show units from company and up. they show the equipment in those units and some have the pilots Info. from those examples, you set up your own forces... not by points, but thru the lore and playing within the games story line.
Hey folks, not sure what happened to the audio here. We recorded in Dan's basement this time, and I did noise reduction to remove any background noise. It is possible that removing the noise of people walking on the floor above us thinned out the sound of our voices quite a bit. I'm sure we'll get it right next time... or maybe the time after that.
It's Halloween. Totally ghosts.
"We have enough variants."
THANK YOU.
We've got enough mechs and variants. It's time to polish the game.
This is a big hurdle that BT needs to surmount. I've lived in a few places across the country, and in every place, they use a different system to put games together. Some use tonnage, some use a BV system, some use their own house rules. I appreciate that the game is flexible enough for this, but it's such a basic concept in every other game, and it honestly makes a game that's been around for almost 40 years, and is a lynchpin of tabletop sci-fi gaming feel pretty small-time.
Your ideas are pretty good, and I'd love to expound on it more and maybe introduce it to my current group.
Do you guys have a discord or something? I'd love to have a place to start pounding out the finer details...
No discord. Honestly didn't think we are popular enough for that. I asked for a section in one of the discord groups a while back but I don't think they like us much.
@@TheMemoryCore that unfortunately doesn’t surprise me. You guys are my favorite BT podcast. I like that you’re passionate about the game and it’s lore, but willing to be critical when it’s called for. A lot of the fandom doesn’t like any criticism of the product, I think.
Can I suggest you set up a discord? It might not be the biggest community, but I’d love to have a place to hang out with other like-minded players. If you don’t want to deal with it, I’ll offer to moderate a discord for you.
@@joshua2774 Thanks a lot for that. We like to think that we're offering something different. If you want to set up a discord go for it. Link it here.
@@TheMemoryCore It looks like youtube removes comments with discord links.
@LitanyAgainstFear any reply I post with even a hint of a link or email is deleted. I can’t send you PMs on TH-cam because…well…TH-cam. Didn’t see any email listed on your podcast website.
Yea I used to play heroclix competitively and 300 was the standard value to build lists. Being that I'm more of a Battletech fan than a player (I'm currently GMing a campaign for my buddies, but I've never played a regular game of battletech) I had assumed there was an existing standard BV for tournaments. It's surprising that one doesn't exist.
It does feel ridiculous the more you think about it.
the concept of tournaments is that two players each have a fair chance of winning. most games do this with a points structure.
from the beginning, this game has been about the lore and the story. nothing in either has ever been fair or balanced. this is also reflected in the rules. in the mid 90s a CV (combat value) system was introduced. a couple years later (1997) the BV (battle value) system was presented - a cleaner version of CV. however, this is now 14 years into the the games existence.
yes, there is a way to calculate the potential for everything in the game. but the original concept prevents a smooth transition. that's why you are having so much difficulty with trying to fit the square shape of points into the triangle shape of the Battletech universe. in theory, you could make it fit, but it's just not right!
@@bruced648 but it's not just about actual tournaments, it's about having a set universal standard of points that is officially supported as such. Just throwing out a number for the sake of example, let's say 6000 is the standard battle value that everyone uses for general purpose. You could have multiple lances, stars, and combined arms units that function within that space and you can just pack them up and bring them along with you without having to worry about not having the right amount of BV for the week or having to come up with a 5000 bv force next week, and then a 4000 bv force the week after. A standard battle value will give you more freedom to travel to different locations without having to learn all their regional rules or standards. If they play 5k in your town, but the next town over plays 6k,and the next town after that plays 7.5k you're just segregating the already small community more than necessary. There's already a handful of things that seperate player groups as is like alpha strike vs classic, or 3025 vs clan invasion etc....
@@ChrisZestyJesty I think you missed my point. the original concept of battletech is its universe. within the universe, the factions have armies and hire mercenaries. the military units are structured in Lance, company, battalion, regiment etc. these military forces have always been in the rules and the lore. I've never read in the lore... "I'm bringing my 5000 pts, what do you have?". it wasn't until the game was nearly 15 years into existence, that a points structure was attempted.
players need to get away from the points concept and back to military unit sizes. if you say that you are bringing a company with mixed forces, then I know to anticipate 3 to 5 lances of mechs, armor. infantry and maybe vtol or artillery.
THAT is the original idea of this game. not points and balancing forces. war is never about having a fair fight and this game is no exception. if I go to play somewhere, I bring a battalion strength force of combined arms. when my opponent says he has a company of mechs, it's my choice how to oppose this. even if he has just a Lance of mechs, it's still my decision what type of Lance to field. that's how this game was always meant to be played. not by having a designated points allotment, but by having an army!
so, where does my fleet of 5 warships, 22 dropships, and 16 squadrons of Aerospace fighters come into play? I intend to use orbital bombardment and land my forces in close proximity so my dropships can provide covering fire while my troops deploy. just a guess, 15 million points?!?
you cannot properly fight a battle with your forces fighting with one gun tied behind your back. points are limiting, restrictive and force players to build units outside of the lore.
and again, that's why points system is a bad method for this game.
@@bruced648 if you have the time and the group of players willing to commit to a full scale battle from warships to infantry I applaud you, but most people have an evening or two to devote to their hobby, and you're focusing a bit too much on the WAR part of wargame. If you're implying that a Lance or company versus a regiment is OK to play because that's how real war is then you're wasting you're time and your opponents time. It's a warGAME, and any other wargame on the market comes with a designated standard scale of play. Battletech is designed for Lance vs Lance combat. I've ran company vs company and it took three 8 hour sessions. The game breaks down and slows to a crawl after a certain point. At the end of the day battletech is about having fun with some buddies, and if full scale warfare is your jam, go for it. Some people want to enjoy the competition of playing against eachother in a structured environment where they use strategy and tactics to their fullest and see whose the better Lance/force commander.
I once asked what the standard BV for tournament play was, and was surprised to find that, there was no standard. Since you brought this up, I would like to know what would you purpose this standard would be? would 5,000 be sufficient?
That's the 64,000 BV question. I want to say that 5k would be enough, but once you start utilizing better pilots you pay a hefty price. 6K might be more comfortable to work with if you don't want everyone stuck with 4/5 mechwarriors.
trying to set a designated point value without setting a few important factors first, is kinda useless.
if we agree to use 5000 pts, sounds great. however, what time period? what TRO's are allowed? can I use my own designs? are we strictly mechs or is this Total Warfare rules and advanced rules? are we permitting artillery and/or Aero?
that's a long list of variables to apply to a points system. I didn't even get into certain Clan honor rules, pilot skills or advanced pilot skill options.
let's keep it simple. we each get 2500 pts. max TRO is year 3049 (pre-clan). only mechs. now you have a foundation to plan your forces.
this game is not designed for balanced play. that doesn't exist in the lore and it doesn't exist in the rules. but, if you are just learning the game, keep things simple. not more than 4-8 pieces on the board for each faction. once you are comfortable with mechs, add some vehicles and infantry. again, not more than 4-8 pieces on the board.
I've been playing B-tech since 1984. I am entertained that you never use c-bills as a method of unit creation. that's the only way we play. the bv system to create "balanced" play doesn't work for our campaign. trying to use tonnage, won't let us take into consideration salvage, repairs, supplies, salaries or transit costs.
you say that you want a 'standard method' to build a force. this was never an intention of this game. having units that different factions typically use, is part of the lore. but the idea of balanced play, is not the games focus. your need for game balance is actually the exact opposite of any of the novels or scenario books or even the video games.
this has always been a story of the struggles humanity has made for itself to expand within the Galaxy. the wargame is a tool to tell this story. as actual history shows us, nothing is fair! why do you insist that your gaming experience is fair? without the challenge of having odds stacked against you, all your doing is throwing a chance cube or flipping a coin and saying who wins.
anyone can place 4 mechs on the table, follow the basic rules, and against a 'balanced' opponent (same bv value), have a basic 50/50 chance to win. this is not the intention of the games creators!
unless you are constantly playing in tournaments, you should be playing for the story. if you want balanced play, choose a different game!
Balancing by c-bills and tonnage are an entirely different beast. Those things are best for the RPG centric BattleTech games. We're actually focusing on tournament rules when it comes to using BV to create games. In games where you show up at a store and throw down, random and not run by a GM or Demo Agent, you should be able to play with guidance from some sort of BV standard. BattleTech doesn't 'officially' have that which is why you see newcomers constantly ask how to build forces, what 'mechs are the best, what to use, etc. Also, it's worth noting that there have been tournament rules published before. There is a set on Sarna.net published by Fanpro in 2004.
@@TheMemoryCore I understand the problem. it stems from other game systems that focus on tournaments and these players becoming interested in battletech. Fasa attempted to tackle this with CV and later BV.
the inherent problem is complicated. while some factions have preferred mechs/vehicles, there is no exclusivity. even the Total War book doesn't have a good answer. Catalyst games did a fair job listing tables by faction of typical units (pgs 264-271). but it doesn't show methods for grouping certain things together.
while other games use a standardized points structure, battletech has too many variables to simply apply points and state that is an balanced match.
example: 4000 pts, your force might have 2 to 4 mechs, my force could be all rifle infantry.
not sure that would play out fairly!
the better method is by force size (Lance, company, battalion). then have limits to weight class (light lance: 3 lt, 1 med)(med lance: 1 lt, 2, med, 1 hvy)(hvy lance: 1 med, 2 hvy, 1 aslt)(assault lance: 2 hvy, 2 aslt).
of course, this is a suggested list. players would agree to the forces configuration, timeline and technology available.
a match might look like this:
1 med lance v 1 med lance
4th succession war
any TRO prior to 3049 (pre-clan)
if playing post clan invasion, the battles should be very unbalanced from 3049-3055 (invasion thru tukayyid), but have the clan forces playing with clan honor rules. after 3055, I.S. and clan have a much greater tech balance.
again, explaining this to a new player is a challenge. but this game was never intended for simple, throw down armies. that's why the points system looks good and works in theory, but isn't really that good overall.
my personal force is an Army consisting of 5 Corp. our games involve planetary system invasions. we pull out a company or battalion for a designated objective. our pre-game Intel simple consists of "company size force". it has nothing to do with points. the Intel doesn't say "15,000 points defending". this is why the original and following sets of rules have large sections that show units from company and up. they show the equipment in those units and some have the pilots Info. from those examples, you set up your own forces... not by points, but thru the lore and playing within the games story line.