I also think charge is "off"
I mean a mech is supposed to be a mighty war machine with massive guns. They are supposed to be gunfighters, not sumos

Kinra and Shiva.pt said it well: the rules of base contact are a problem.

These rules were adapted from Mage Knight, a game where point values between 10 and 60 were most commonly played (sorry if that isn't true anymore... it's been awhile since I've played it). MW has units ranging from 4 to 300 with the 4 to 150 point range seeing the most play. If my 10 point unit shuts down your 60 point unit, that's somehow more palatable than a 4 pointer shutting down my 150 pointer.

When a mech is based by anything, it is either immobilized or neutralized - sometimes both. If you breakaway you are neutralized - unable to take any kind of offensive action. If you stay and fight you are immobilized. This catch-22 was somewhat balanced by also making your based unit invulnerable to enemy ranged combat - until, of course, powerful and cost-effective artillery showed up. At the same time, transports showed up - if you base my transport I have a good chance at being able to move away, unload and shoot - so the immobilize/neutralize choice has been broken, this unit combo can do both. And of course VTOL's change the base-break equation too. It is significant that the three units most people see as "broken" are the ones that change the base-break rules.

I'm not saying I like the base-break rules the old way. Other posters have pointed out that they are dumb and don't simulate a futuristic battlefield very well.

I think the base-break concept, as currently formulated, is poorly suited to a science fiction game involving flying units, artillery, and massive differences in unit scale.

barzillai has illuminated my point most excellently. "Basing" is a concept that has far too much significance at the moment. I can understand if it's useful with Grapple (as Fa Shih armour costs 23-29 points, and are specialized for pinning 'Mechs) but per se, base contact with vehicles or infantry has no reason to immobilize 'Mechs (though I can see how a 'Mech could do so).

A subset of the Artillery problem:

Given that bigger units tend to have higher defence scores, it is likely that the armour of a unit contributes to the defence score (with extra-tough and specialised armour types being represented by the armour SEs).

However, artillery ignores the units defence score (as it is not targeted at units), which means all artillery gains a certain amount of 'hidden' armour piercing (as it were).
Likewise (for the same reason), artillery ignores the point defence, decoy, camouflage and electronic camo SEs (this is not necessarily wrong for all these cases, depending what PSB we're using for artillery fire).

Something else to consider.

Charles

This has developed into a definitive. The detractors have a point. Each one of these tactics can be countered. But when they are used together they make most mechs unusable. Not to mention slowww the game down.

Here is my list in priority order:

1) Super artillery. People complained about this in FFE and it got worse by leaps and bounds. The new SS AAs have such a high level of firepower and good range at a very low cost. You can now with the game without leaving your DZ.

2) VTOLs. Complement the new artillery turtle. They have great stats, low cost and a great move and shoot option.

3) _____ DROP. Its not just tanks anymore. SS TAC, arty, and DF kanazuchis are all great droppers. Giving all these bad ### units a move and shoot capability simply over powers them vs the guys that don't have it (ie mechs).

I still use my heavy, 2" min range tanks with flankers quite successfully. Warflail is correct. Tankdrop adds NOTHING to the game.

4) Capture. Its way too easy. Full strength assault should not be surrendering to infantry. Period.

5) Base and break. Just pure frustration for those of us who try to use mechs. WK simply added to the misery with their nonsense rules for heat w/ run w/ failed break.

6) Chargemonkeytude. I put this last because it should not be addressed until the other issues are solved. Charging is so powerful that in renders ranged combat obsolete. Plus, it makes games often come down to a single dice roll (I prefer 2 or 3 rolls).

Each one of these issues, that have almost universal agreement, could be addressed very easily. The go slow approach from WK just adds to the aggravation.

here is an easy fix to arty.

It takes one action for every pog you drop. This would also make the command abiility a little more useful in 300 point games.

The trouble with arty is the "extra actions" you get. Using 2 three pog pieces forces an opponent to move 6 units and if he only has three actions well he is screwed. not always but you get the jist.

Ok the one unit problem I would like to illuminate is with infantry. Now I no this is not CBT but it is based on BattleTech or so I thought. My current problem with Infantry other than what has been already said is their fast movement rate. I'm lead to believe that a average size man carrying up to 40 to 50 lbs of equipment can move as fast as a 30 ft tall assault mech that has a foot stride longer than a man is tall. The same goes for BA it is as fast as most mechs can walk. Ok I know mechs can run but the point is they should not have to run to escape infantry. When it comes down to it I'm starting to believe that the root of allot of this games problems stem from the rules this game uses. Face it the rules were made for a medieval close combat game not for a modern combat game were ranged combat is the norm and closing with the enemy is paramount to suicide.

Ohh. 1 more thing before I go Jackal__ I have no idea what the quality of your players is like but to sit there and say Vtols can do nothing to artillery is just plan wrong. I have destroyed more artillery used by quality players with my HL Donnars and HL Shun vtols than I can count, in fact if not for those Vtols I do not think I would have come in 3rd and my venues FW event. Have you not seen the BR Sprint in action. Just wondering :confused:

Great Thread! I agree with War Flail on everything.

However, after reading through most of this thread I think another problem is missing. It has been missing since day 1 of DA. Energy attacks that only do 1 damage to infantry. This was purely a game balance tool put in to make infantry a little better. In these days of uber capturing and strong mech like infantry with grapple and things like that. A lot of mechs, vehicles and some infantry have been marginalized because of this rule.

I also agree with the problems of mechs being tied up by infantry and vehicles with minimum ranges not being able to damage opponents inside that minimum.

I eagerly await the thread on solutions.

Thanks

This isnt exactly on topic, but here it is.

Imagine this:

Infantry vs Infantry. As they shoot consecutivly at each other, their stats go down progressivley, but not so fast that after the first shot, the damaged infantry cant shoot at the first. You have to keep rolling 10s and 11s all the way down until one is dead (this of course doesnt apply vs 3 damage infantry, but they are rare).
Infantry vs Infantry combat is VERY balanced.

Tank vs Tank:
Now it depends on the tank. Tanks range from 30 point wimps to 100+ points semi-mobile gun emplacements. In an lower-point fight, the equilibrium is more or less maitained - but less so than in infantry.
In the highest point fight, the tank that hits first will win vs the tank the got hit. With one hit, the second tank suddenly has to roll 14+ to hit the first.
With mechs its the same thing - a mech deals 4 damage to another, and the one that got hit suddenly needs 13+ to hit. This means game over.

Its one of the problems with the game. If getting the first shot in wasn't so important, many complaints would just go away. Getting hit by a vtol would give the mech a chance to retaliate. Now, a mech that's hit by a DF Donar (or a SC donar) gets its attack value down to 8 (usually - i'm talking about smaller mechs). It then needs a 13 to hit the donar back. The donar, to hit again, only needs a 9, at most.

My SC Donar almost salvaged A. Kirawasa with 1 semi-lucky shot: one roll of 11, then it only needed a 9. Then, it only needed a 8. Result: one click from salvage 147point mech. And I only used 60 of my points. THATS what's wrong. Using 60 points to make 140+ useless. THATS when I got converted to the "I wont use mechs" camp. Last sunday. (BTW - I ended up losing the game... Because my mech was more costly (Arnis)

I know we're looking for problems only, but I have a question for the CBTers out there:

In CBT, didn't charging inflict a LOT of damage on your 'Mech, even though your adversary would likely take more?

I'm probably wrong, but if not, wouldn't having the target 'Mech inflict primary -1 to the charger fix things? (or some such thing)

More on-topic, I think addressing the issue of infantry basing 'Mechs helps with the artillery problem, where players base 'Mechs only to nuke their own troops with arty.

I agree with all your points Warflail, excellent post. I would tweak capture myself a bit as well (no IT or crits) in addition. I think the base mechanic is here to stay, anything short of MW 2.0 can’t change the game that much. The other issues I believe could be addressed with some simple changes. The game is crying out for a new rulebook anyway, I think WK should finally make some non half-ssed solutions to game balance problems for a change instead of burying their heads in the sand and releasing more poorly playtested product.

Yes it does do considerable damage to yourself as well. Not as much as the opponent will take .. but still ... it doesn't compare to what we have here in MW. In CBT you may do 10 or more points of damage but it depends on a lot of circumstances. But also keep in mind most medium mechs have a total armor rating around 100-200 so 10 or even 20 points isn't always devastating. In MW you do the same damage as your primary attack +1 (which I never agreed with) ... which means usually it's around 4-6 damage or so. That is a LOT of damage in this game ... pretty much 50% or more of most mechs non-salvage clicks of life. That's the same as a CBT charge doing like make 50-100 points of damage! Insane. Plus then you heap on the fact that the attacker only takes 1 damage regardless of the outcome ... pretty small by comparison. The defender doesn't even get a bonus to his defense. If we were to apply some CBT logic to MW then the attacker would take 1/2 the damage done to the defender (rounded up).

I have no problem with the lowly infantry being able to tie up larger units, because if that Mech/Tank ignored them they would be able to pry open a hatch and throw a grenade in or in some other way disable the unit. Untrained does not mean stupid.

Thats why you see machine guns on tanks, heck I've even heard of M2 Bradley's turning thier 30mm chaingun on a M1A1 Abrams MBT to blow infantry off them.

If they get close they are a serious threat.

It's a 25mm Autocannon not a 30mm chaingun. Also the M2 would use it's M240C 7.62mm MG to take out infantry on friendly vehicles not the 25mm. This is a classic WWII Pacific Theater tactic developed my the Jarheads called "Scratch my back"

Yes - that threat is what capture attempts are. You should be able to choose if you want to risk a capture by not firing to those little ants scurrying at your feet or shoot the other, big, lumbering mass of guns coming in your general direction.
If shoot at the other target, you risk a capture. If your mech is based by 3 infantry (lets say DF Shock Troopers) and a big tank rolls into range, do you shoot the DF shock troopers, break away and run, or do you shoot the tank (if you could)?
You should be able to make the choice, even knowing that if you shoot the tank, you're problably going to loose that mech...