Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darrian Wolffe]

Addendum to "Gameplay Issues"

Solo Scenario Rules:

I thought I had written these explicitly already, but they aren't in the 4.0 rules packet and I can't find them anywhere so here we go again

Certain scenarios may be generated as "Solo" missions.  These are smaller scenarios intended to be played by a single PC Lance Leader, against 1 or possibly 2 OPFOR players. Solo Missions taking place before a contract mission MUST be played prior to the contract mission's in-game date, unless a timely appeal is made to the GM ("I know my solo is on 3 Feb '55 and the unit fights on 4 Feb '55, but I couldn't get my solo in before this weekend's game because my cat spontaneously combusted when she inhaled swamp gas leaking from a weather balloon that was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflecting the light from Venus").  A lance may not take part in a Solo Mission and a contract mission which occur on the same in-game day.

A player may always refuse to play a Solo Mission; unlike the contract missions, Solo Missions are optional and will neither add nor subtract from the unit's Contract Score.  They are generated, modified, and resolved exactly as normal scenarios, with certain exceptions.  These exceptions are outlined below:

Mission Parameters: The rules for a specific Solo Mission may conflict with HM,WT campaign rules.  In such a case, the rules for the Solo Mission take precedence.

Player Participation: Only members of a single Lance may participate in a Solo Mission.  No PC reinforcements are permitted.  Unless the scenario specifies otherwise, up to 4 units of that Lance Leader's lance (including the Lance Leader themselves) may deploy.  it is up to the PC player to find themselves someone to play against.  While games are preferred to be played in person, Megamek is an acceptable substitute if a player finds themselves in a bind.

Battlefield Support: Unless the scenario specifies otherwise, Battlefield Support does not exist for Solo Missions.

Salvage: The Lance Leader has total control of any and all salvage recovered during a Solo Mission.  They are still bound by the percentages listed in the contract (ie, if your contract is 40% salvage, you can salvage up to 4 million CB worth of units from the 10 million CB lance you just fought), and may not go into "salvage debt".  Any room which the unit has under the salvage cap has no effect on the amount salvagable in Solo Missions.  If the Lance Leader wishes, he may donate a salvaged unit from a Solo Mission to the Unit.  Note that the Lance Leader must first have room in their stable prior to salvaging a unit, or donating it.  A Lance Leader who has 7 Mechs and wishes to salvage one and donate one cannot do so; they have the space to salvage only a single Mech.  Finally, the total salvage value of the Solo Mission is ADDED to the total salvage value for the contract once the mission is completed - even if little is salvaged in a Solo Mission, the overall unit is still aided by virtue of being able to salvage more CB value in later missions.

Ejected Pilots: Ejected pilots remaining on the battlefield once victory conditions have been met are NOT automatically captured.  The only way to capture an enemy pilot is to end your Mech's movement in the pilot's hex.  This is true regardless of which side controls the battlefield. 

Victory Conditions: The game ends at the end of the game turn in which the victory conditions for one side are met.  You may not deliberately prolong the game in order to maximize salvage value or capture ejected pilots.  OPFOR players are expected to report to the GM if this is happening.  Likewise, if it is clear the the OPFOR player(s) are deliberately stringing the game along or not attempting to meet their victory conditions, the onus is on the PC player to declare victory, and then come to the GM with a report on what happened. Basically, play the game, end the game, don't be a greedy dick.

Rewards: Several Solo Missions indicate some sort of conditional reward for success.  Rolls on the Random Bonus Table, cash, or even an SLDF Mech.  In no case do the rewards for a Solo Mission count as salvage, and non-personnel rewards may not be traded or donated to any other unit member.  This is the SOLE EXCEPTION to the "8 Mechs per stable" rule: a Lance Leader who ends up with a 9th Mech as a result of a Solo Mission Reward may immediately sell or donate (to the unit) sufficient Mechs or vehicles to bring them back to a legal Mech Stable configuration.

After-action Reports: For purposes of tracking the campaign progress, a short after-action report on a Solo Mission is mandatory.  You get all the XP, all the salvage, and all the control...so you also get some paperwork.  A short AAR should be posted in the relevant Solo Mission thread no more than a week after the game.  A blow-by-blow account is not necessary; 1-3 short-ish paragraphs detailing how things started, what happened, how it ended, what/who you captured, and what/who you lost, is perfectly cromulent.

[Hat]

Rob, as you look at a rules update, I'm curious if the unit is allowed to convert vehicles and aerospace fighters from one standard configuration to another.  Looking at the Maxims for example, it'd be good to convert them to be able to carry BA (Field Refit version, not factory) as an example.

[Ice]

Rob just to check on the wording and clarification on this. Let me know if you want me to move threads on this to questions. The 3.1 and 4 rules show

Battle Loss Compensation: If you have a unit destroyed during the contract, the employer pays a percentage of
that unit’s retail value, directly to the Lance Leader who lost the unit. This covers ONLY loss of the unit, not the cost of
destroyed or damaged components.

Retail value vs stock is whats being brought into question.

Prior it was the believed to be stock value but shows retail was this changed to reflect over all unit price or is it still meant to be initial stock mech? If the secondary part of not covering components etc is meant to imply this then A small suggestion on wording change.

Retail I would suggest be switched to units pre-customization stock value. Pretty much eliminates the rest of sentence and leaves no questions as any rules stuff comes up but doesnt necessarily need the rest of sentence dropped.

Battle Loss Compensation: If you have a unit destroyed during the contract, the employer pays a percentage of
that unit’s pre-customization stock value, directly to the Lance Leader who lost the unit. This covers ONLY loss of the unit, not cost of the additional
destroyed or damaged components.

[Darrian Wolffe]

This is my current 4-1 changelog.  Everything here is already in the new document.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?

-Added Passenger Compartment rules to "Special Case and Advanced Rules"
-Added Refitting Ammunition rules to "Customizations"
-ClanTech is not available in Periphery nations until 3065. No cLPLs to buy in Marian space.
-Clarified Contact's ability to get ClanTech anywhere in the setting
-Replaced Blind Fighter SPA with All-Weather Fighter SPA and added relevant pre-requisite
-Adjusted Contract Score rules to be in line with current AtB rules.
-Clarified non-combat character Edge.
-Added "Impossible Scenario Guidelines" under the "Gameplay Contingencies" section.
-Clarified taking Prisoners under "Post Mission Steps".
-Added full rules for Solo Scenarios
-Removed abbreviated "Individual scenario" rules (redundant due to above)
-Clarified Battle Loss Compensation to be the current value of the unit, not the stock value
-Clarified Unit CO's ability to deploy vehicle platoons in Pre-Mission Steps
-Reduced unit's Combat Vehicle cap.
-Correctly mistake in "Determine Battlefield Support" which limited ASFs to a single attack per game
-Adjusted Base Retirement Target Number
-Lowered XP reward for MVP and Most Enjoyable; both players get full value in a 2-way tie
-Clarified procedure on Personnel Recruitment in "Recruitment" section
-Clarified Hiring Bonuses and when to apply them
-Added CO XP
-Added ability and rules to upgrade certain Unit-level assets
-Actually bothered to remove "Lucky" from the SPA section
-Removed Appendix 4: Mech Quirk Effects (use BMM instead)
-Clarified that Anti-Air Targeting is active at all times on all Mechs, NPC or otherwise.
-Added clear Title Trait effects

[Hat]

1. If a mech lance and conventional forces are being deployed as reinforcements in the same mission, can they be combined into a single forge using the rules for calculating turn arrived (can’t be all jump if we’ve got vehicles unless we’ve got Kangas) and then applying the appropriate officer’s Strategy be that the lance commander or conventional force commander?  If they need to be treated as independent reinforcements that’s fine, but wanted to check.
2. You mentioned that local OpFor forces can’t spot at least for standard OpFor forces. Can we clarify that for both the Ranger and OpFor sides?  I would expect if we have support outside of our direct chain of command we’d be limited as well. I would think that applies to the liaison officer, but perhaps not.
3. There are arguably going to be more upgrade kits available, is the unit able to convert through some process a standard vehicle or aerospace fighter from one stock version to another?
4. You had talked about considering the command XP idea. Are you planning on including this concept in this rules update?
5. You noted Clan Endo and FF is the same cost as IS. Probably worth noting in the rules.

[deadlyfire2345]

Could we add something about buying parts already pre podded and add the 25% to the component at purchase?

[Darrian Wolffe]

Could we add something about buying parts already pre podded and add the 25% to the component at purchase?

Pre-podded IS parts?  So, like, "IS Large Laser (podable)"?

I was holding off mentioning them until those actually became a thing, after the release of IS OmniMechs.  Until that happens, no, you can't, but afterwards you can, and IIRC those rules already exist within the purchase costs listed in TechManual.  If they aren't, I'll add them to the rules for clarities sake.

1. If a mech lance and conventional forces are being deployed as reinforcements in the same mission, can they be combined into a single forge using the rules for calculating turn arrived

I specifically didn't, and removed the language that originally *forced* the CO to deploy them all as a group, to allow for some platoons to arrive sooner than others. It also removes the ability to stack superfast vehicles into a group of slower units in order to drop the average speed of the group.  Stack 2 Savannah Masters with 2 Alacorns, and you get an average speed of 7; with a Tactics +3 platoon leader and that's 6 guass rifles on the board as reinforcements on Turn 2.

2. You mentioned that local OpFor forces can’t spot at least for standard OpFor forces. Can we clarify that for both the Ranger and OpFor sides?  I would expect if we have support outside of our direct chain of command we’d be limited as well. I would think that applies to the liaison officer, but perhaps not.

That's an existing limitation in MegaMek, and I didn't want to have to go through the rules and explain every "decision" that MegaMek makes for how it handles things inside AtB.  Mostly because once I start, it's probably 20 pages of rules that AtB already does anyway.  I can mention it for clarity somewhere I suppose, but it's a slippery slope.  The spotting rules already say that only units from the same force can spot for other units in the same force.  A force of "FWL Primary OPFOR" and "FWL Local Forces" are specifically different forces, and therefore cannot spot for each other as per TW, even though they're all fighting against the Rangers.  "FWL OPFOR Reinforcements are added to the Primary OPFOR, and are not a separate force, if that makes sense. We could theoretically see "FWL Local Reinforcements" as well, which would be added to the FWL Local Forces.

3. There are arguably going to be more upgrade kits available, is the unit able to convert through some process a standard vehicle or aerospace fighter from one stock version to another?

I hadn't planned on it, trying to limit customization and in-detail work to only Mechs. However, I'm ameinable to discussion on this, as long as it goes purely stock to stock. I will also point out that I will never allow infantry to adjust. Partly cause the rules are dumb, partly because I refuse to allow the Heavy Armor/Federated M42B infantry platoon on any table I ever run (infantry platoon does 68 damage, out to ~10 hexes, and it takes 2 damage points per infantryman to kill them).

  4. You had talked about considering the command XP idea. Are you planning on including this concept in this rules update?

Just forgot. Thank you for the reminder.

5. You noted Clan Endo and FF is the same cost as IS. Probably worth noting in the rules.

Those are already the rules. TechManual, pg 277-78.  The costs are identical whether or not the Endo or Ferro is Clan or IS tech base.

[Hat]

For the reinforcement lances, I see your point.  I'm fine to leave that as they are.  One minor note, Tactics doesn't decrease the arrival time, strategy does.  So far the only conventional forces that have any Strategy skill whatsoever is Major Bray at +3.  In part trying to see how to make vehicles useful where they aren't deployed as part of a scenario as a target.  The LRM Carriers for example could be handy to include but with a base reinforcement time of turn 9 (12 - cruise speed of 3) just to hit the board edge, it's unlikely for them to be useful.  Not a big deal as they still make sense from an overall unit perspective and so will include them as part of the TO&E even if they're primarily a money sink / target.  The focus should be on the Mechs and adding a lance of vehicles to the game slows things down, but may be situationally useful.  I don't mind deemphasizing them.

For the spotting rules, don't worry about it if you've already called it out.  I'll just try to remember it.

For the non-Mech changes, I'm only looking at moving from stock to stock.  The rest becomes more of a headache/nightmare/unreasonable as time goes on.  Looking to keep it simple without needing to sell a perfectly good stock L1 vehicle to change it to a different stock L1 or L2 vehicle. 

[Darrian Wolffe]

Edited 4-1 changelog. Please inspect and comment accordingly.

[Darrian Wolffe]

Actually, let's not be stupid this time.

Here's a DRAFT of the 4-1 ruleset.  Please inspect and comment accordingly.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/0gpni41x1vbda9q/Have+Mech,+Will+Travel+Campaign+Rules+v4-1+DRAFT.pdf/file

[Hat]

Ok, had a chance to do a quick review of a chunk of the rules.  Here are my comments so far:

Title impact on Acquisition checks should be added to the Purchasing parts section on page 10.
Check

Spare BattleMechs on p. 15 should note the exception for Star League cache and if there are any other exceptions, probably noted more by a general "if the mission type explicitly overrules the restriction."
Check

Unit level assets p 23.
Infantry (including battle armor) - 1 battalion
Vehicles - used to be 1 battalion, now reduced to 28 (16 + 12) which seems like a bit of an odd number.  What prompted the change?
That's not new. 4 platoons plus a company of spares, because 4 platoons is 2 players worth of vehicles which might be controlled on the table at once.

Unit CO Experience p.25 - is XP retroactive for time already spent or does it pick up fresh with the first May post contract end?  Wouldn't need to get added to the ruleset itself as at most it is a 1 time conversion.
Yeah, we'll go with some retroactivity. Consider yourself to have successfully completed 2 contracts to this point (Sudeten and Tukayyid) and take XP accordingly.

Dropship Availability table p.26 lists through 3050.  I expect it's considered current, if there's a known end/replacement date it would be helpful to list it.
There's no data later that than, so consider the table to apply to 3050+

Refitting Ammunition p.31 - 32, does GR ammo as a giant solid slug need to be converted or are the 2 interchangable?
Yes. Verbiage added.

Repair and Modification of Other Unit Types p 34. does not match rules provided in the Unit section, more specifically a reference should be added for the upgrade process.  The repair item is still accurate, though may be worth referencing the rules further up in the rule set.
Corrected

[Darrian Wolffe]

Replies to issues raised will be made inline with the post, as per Hat's post above, to keep this thread from ballooning.  DO NOT start rules *debates* in this thread.  Discussion/fights over rules should be had in other threads, or you can call me so we can talk via voice, which is much faster than this.

[Hat]

<snip>

Unit level assets p 23.
Infantry (including battle armor) - 1 battalion
Vehicles - used to be 1 battalion, now reduced to 28 (16 + 12) which seems like a bit of an odd number.  What prompted the change?
That's not new. 4 platoons plus a company of spares, because 4 platoons is 2 players worth of vehicles which might be controlled on the table at once.

Per current rules it's 24 combat vehicles and 12 support.  I'm fine if you want to change it.  It's a bit of an odd number from an in-universe perspective, but I understand you're looking to manage it for tabletop purposes.  The compromise would be to leave it at the higher number and simply limit the number of deployable non-Mech forces to a specific default.

Unit CO Experience p.25 - is XP retroactive for time already spent or does it pick up fresh with the first May post contract end?  Wouldn't need to get added to the ruleset itself as at most it is a 1 time conversion.
Yeah, we'll go with some retroactivity. Consider yourself to have successfully completed 2 contracts to this point (Sudeten and Tukayyid) and take XP accordingly.

Ok, I'm confused still.  It sounds like your measure is contracts.  If that's the case, do not use the term Mission as it already has a specific meaning especially as it relates to contracts.  In terms of what qualifies it's described as a reward for the extra effort needed.  The effort doesn't change regardless of whether the contract is successful or not, and things that make for unsuccessful ones, such as screwing up and not saving a roll to get out of a horrible random roll are certainly learning experiences.  I won't make that mistake again.  I would recommend it's contracts completed, not just successful ones.  If there's a future CO with less than good skills, they'll suffer twice - once for not having the skills in the first place and then second for not gaining the extra XP to help fix the fact that they don't have the good skills in the first place.

In terms of the retroactive XP, Kato took over at the end of Kestrel, no worries about that one.  Sudeten happened (not technically a contract) and you noted that as something to get XP for, then Liber happened (Successful contract), Justice occurred (2 missions complete, contract dissolved), not long enough to be either a successful or unsuccessful contract, Tukayyid was completed successfully and we're now on Angel (not finished). By what I think your intent is it would be 12 XP (Liber, Tukayyid) with 6 XP (Sudeten) being as yet undetermined.  Nothing for Liber (never completed) or Angel (not yet completed).

[Darrian Wolffe]

Ok, I'm confused still.  It sounds like your measure is contracts.  If that's the case, do not use the term Mission as it already has a specific meaning especially as it relates to contracts. 

AtB used the term Mission to be synonymous with Contract, which is the problem.

It says Mission, you say Contract, same thing.
It says Scenario, you say Mission, same thing.

[Hat]

Ok, I'm confused still.  It sounds like your measure is contracts.  If that's the case, do not use the term Mission as it already has a specific meaning especially as it relates to contracts. 

AtB used the term Mission to be synonymous with Contract, which is the problem.

It says Mission, you say Contract, same thing.
It says Scenario, you say Mission, same thing.

Yes, but none of the rest of us deal with AtB. That’s fine, clear now.