Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 8:23:13 GMT -7
I admire your dedication to metal! I USED to do metal minis. I painted them up, added modifications, had fun. In a five year period, however, I moved from MI, to CA, to IN, to GA. Careful as I was, they still got banged up. That's about the time I switched to paper minis. I also run demos at conventions, and paper counters for the 'mechs just works better. Easier to carry, much lower investment loss if someone "forgets to return" the 'mech they were using.
|
|
|
Post by thescreamingswede on Jun 12, 2017 15:45:00 GMT -7
All the minis I have are metal, and yeah, hauling them around is a pain. I have customized a couple boxes to haul them in in an upright position, segmented to keep them separate and padded with that thin white foam insert sheets you get from things like a stereo or a TV. Stack them up and they weigh a considerable amount. I use a hockey bag outfitted with a cardboard liner to haul my train stuff in when I go to model railroad shows and the like and the thing, when full, weighs around 60/80 pounds! And it's only a portion of what I have available for my H.O. stuff and doesn't include any of my O scale narrow gauge trains. My Star Trek minis are much more difficult to move though, and I have yet to go through a move without suffering at least 5% casualties (that's a lot when you think of how many I have). It's usually minor stuff, like stands or nacelles popping off, but still, it's a pain in the butt. I have no problems with resin or even plastic minis, though the early Battletech ones were made with a rather cheap plastic and were poorly scaled and molded. I stuck to metal through those years and have just continued that tradition. I have another company of tanks to paint now and about an equal amount of mechs to work on, plus I have about two dozen aerospace to work on. I love it. It's fun to build and paint them so I don't mind doing it. My eldest boy, who now buys his own Battletech stuff, asked me once who gets all your minis when I die. I said he better work on building up his muscles because they are all coming with me and my coffin is going to weigh a ton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 18:36:28 GMT -7
Have you played the Mechwarrior RPG? I truly enjoy 1st edition the most, even if the layout of the book is a total train wreck. Once you get it kind of organized, it's not bad at all. Besides, ya gotta love a critical hit location of "Spleen".
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Jun 14, 2017 9:26:29 GMT -7
Have you played the Mechwarrior RPG? I truly enjoy 1st edition the most, even if the layout of the book is a total train wreck. Once you get it kind of organized, it's not bad at all. Besides, ya gotta love a critical hit location of "Spleen". I heard the 2nd ed rules were the 'best' in regards to getting new comers involved and playability etc, i also was told to avoid the 3rd ed and TOW ones like the plague truth or not?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2017 10:56:50 GMT -7
Yeah... 2nd has better layout, and a nice set of Archetypes and much better art. It's a good set of rules, but I still lean towards 1st edition. It has the clunkiness I associate with the war-torn 31st century.
And Yeah... 3rd edition is a sack of burning poo. I never subjected myself to TOW.
Mostly, I drop the "Mechwarrior" side of the game with my current game group. They thought it was fun, but they really just wanted to blow up 'Mechs.
|
|
|
Post by thescreamingswede on Jun 14, 2017 13:07:01 GMT -7
I've played all of them except ATOW. Didn't hate any of them, but didn't like all of them either. I liked aspects of all of them, but there were things I didn't like in any of them too.
As it stands, my group has three GMs at the moment, mostly because I work shift work and can't be there every game night to GM (which is a Friday, btw). Each GM has come up with his own way of RPG-ing characters since we focus more on the combat side of things, so a fully blown set of character stats are unnecessary.
One guy favors giving out skills based on how much background work you do for your character and likes to give out "buffs", as he calls it, to add spice to the regular play. For example, he will give your character a missile specialty, which will give a bonus only to missile systems, like a +2 on the cluster table, or extending the range brackets by one hex. Another would be a quickdraw ability that would allow someone with an arm mounted main weapon the ability to fire before everyone else, breaking the simultaneous rule by having the effects of said shot occur before any other fire is done. These specialties go beyond the combat realm though too. My one character used to be a businessman with contacts to the Solaris Mafia. He ran his own stable, but started at the bottom fixing things, so he has both legit and black market business contacts as well as being a capable vehicle mechanic and driver. He was able to modify his J. Edgar hovercraft to carry a PPC in the turret by tracking down an Extra Light fusion plant to save the weight for it. It also sped up the already fast hovertank.
The other fellow leans more towards the Clans and that era. His campaign is one of a Dark Caste group working covertly for another clan looking to regain its former glory while trying to stay anonymous. This allowed him to bring in characters that weren't all just true or freebirth warriors; allowing scientists and mechanics and merchants to play and pilot as well. His skills tree was angled that way, so being a warrior was definitely an advantage while in the mech, but everything else was a lot harder since warriors, especially the trueborn ones, generally didn't do a lot of work outside combat and politics. Since it was his first time GM-ing, he leaned on me for guidance, so my trueborn warrior character was psychic, something Battletech never really touched on. That way I could keep him from pulling a total party kill by accident.
I use a hybrid system of my own design, though I tend to remain more true to just the pure combat aspect and build a story around the encounters. I will be incorporating more RPG in my next campaign since it will be a serious deviation from the established canon of the game. I have been running an SLDF campaign from the year 2772 from the eyes of a SLDF unit fighting to liberate Terra from Stephan the Ursurper for the past three plus years. Since the final battle did not go according to established facts, I will be basically rebuilding the history of the franchise following the Amaris Civil War and the liberation of Terra in 2779 on up through the Succession Wars and into the 3039 era. I will also be introducing things that were beyond what the original designers had planned, mostly because I don't believe in a "Human only" universe. Development of characters will be based on a points/buy system will take place at certain intervals, representing a multi-generational campaign over several eras.
Either that or I introduce them to the Star Trek RPG and let the other two run Battletech. The group was on board with this idea as well, so I might run both for shits and giggles.
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Jun 14, 2017 14:25:18 GMT -7
Either that or I introduce them to the Star Trek RPG and let the other two run Battletech. The group was on board with this idea as well, so I might run both for shits and giggles. Definitely introduce them to the FASA TOS RPG if you can. Fun times indeed! By the way, how many Firestorm Armada and Trek minis do you have? I'm misreading (I think) that you have ten thousand plus!😀 Mark
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2017 15:08:14 GMT -7
I am trying to get my group to try ST:STCS or ST:RPG, but they discovered "Silent Death" which is a bit easier to play than ST:STCS. I also like the idea of rotating GM's. Our game night is Thursdays, and I have to be at work before 06:30, so I can't always go. I have every other Friday off, though, so it works out. For a couple of weeks we tried ShadowRun on my off weeks, but the GM was not so great (he role played your characters for you to get you where he wanted...). He sort of vanished when no one showed up for a couple of weeks.
The Trek RPG is certainly cleaner and more playable that Mechwarrior 1st ed.
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Jun 14, 2017 16:31:04 GMT -7
I am trying to get my group to try ST:STCS or ST:RPG, but they discovered "Silent Death" which is a bit easier to play than ST:STCS. I also like the idea of rotating GM's. Our game night is Thursdays, and I have to be at work before 06:30, so I can't always go. I have every other Friday off, though, so it works out. For a couple of weeks we tried ShadowRun on my off weeks, but the GM was not so great (he role played your characters for you to get you where he wanted...). He sort of vanished when no one showed up for a couple of weeks. The Trek RPG is certainly cleaner and more playable that Mechwarrior 1st ed. Is there any similarities to the FASA Trek rpg/stcs vs mechwarrior/battletech rules? My group oddly loves the FASA Trek system for both roles and has an itch to try the mech system but if one edition vs another is similar to the FASA trek system that'd be a big boon!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2017 17:19:13 GMT -7
They both use paper, dice, and imagination... beyond that, not much in common really.
Going from ST:RPG to Mechwarrior 1st ed will seem very clunky. 2nd Ed is quite a bit more organized.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Jun 14, 2017 19:13:27 GMT -7
Growing up my mecha fantasy of choice was Macross/Robotech and as such I hated Battletech. Coming from the sleek and agile mecha of the Macross/Robotech universe the clunky ugly behemoths in Battletech just weren't appealing. It didn't help things that Battletech "stole" many of the Macross mecha for their game. It wasn't until far later that I gained an appreciation for Battletech. I also am a very aesthetically minded person and the early Battletech art was terrible. Later editions had some nice art and the mech translations for games like Mechwarrior 4 made many of the mechs look far better. I now have an appreciation for Battletech.
Unfortunately, I never get to play. I just don't have time or resources to devote to such a powerful money and time sink. I tried to get into Megamek, but even with the time savings afforded by automated mechanics I still had no one to play with. I'd actually be interested in trying to get some games going if anyone is interested.
|
|
|
Post by thescreamingswede on Jun 14, 2017 21:38:49 GMT -7
Either that or I introduce them to the Star Trek RPG and let the other two run Battletech. The group was on board with this idea as well, so I might run both for shits and giggles. Definitely introduce them to the FASA TOS RPG if you can. Fun times indeed! By the way, how many Firestorm Armada and Trek minis do you have? I'm misreading (I think) that you have ten thousand plus!😀 Mark Hahaha. Oops! A little red on my face for sure. That should have been "four digit number". Who in their right mind would own 10K? hahaha. The breakdown.... Star Trek/SFB = 1002 Firestorm Armada = 300 Battletech = 408 I also have everything from a game called AT-43 in either duplicate or triplicate, which equals about 700+ individual pieces (I'd have to look on my spreadsheet for that one) and a fan race made from a Heroscape race (about 100 pieces). While we're at it, I own... 47 H.O. scale steam locomotives 6 H.O. diesel engines 375 assorted H.O. scale cars (and about a dozen or so to be built) 8 O scale narrow gauge steam locomotives 63 O scale narrow gauge cars. Two layouts, one 20.5 x 28 feet (H.O.) and one O scale narrow gauge layout (was 40 by five feet, but is under reconstruction and reconfiguration to something around 12 x 20). Sheesh! No wonder I'm always broke. LOL
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Jun 15, 2017 17:28:18 GMT -7
They both use paper, dice, and imagination... beyond that, not much in common really. Going from ST:RPG to Mechwarrior 1st ed will seem very clunky. 2nd Ed is quite a bit more organized. Thanks! I'll keep that in mind!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2017 4:43:50 GMT -7
Re-reading that, I sound like I'm being a jerk. Actually, it's kind of surprising how one company can come up with two systems that are so different. They really do not have much in common at all. I think that Star Trek is actually the better rpg system, but both are a lot of fun. Of course, these guys also came up with Shadowrun - possibly the crunchiest RPG of them all. Weird and different as their systems may be, it is still better than the one-size-fits all of d20 or Fuzion.
I can look at MW2ed and I know it is a better game than MW1ed, but I just like the particular brand of clunkiness in 1st edition. Mechwarrior is based on 2d6, and characters are created suing a point system. There are only two races (Inner Sphere Humans and Clan Humans), and by Star Trek standards there is not much difference between them. There are, however, a LOT of factions and a LOT of weapons to choose from. Almost nothing has a "Stun" setting either, so characters get pretty beaten up.
|
|
|
Post by krebizfan on Jun 16, 2017 11:33:10 GMT -7
I think the three FASA systems (Star Trek, Doctor Who, MechWarrior) were all related designs where the later design teams tried to change the dice and in the case of MechWarrior replaced the schools of Star Trek with a simple point buy mechanic. The difference was in the playtesting. Star Trek's designers had played a form of Traveller with Runequest rules and then tested each change as it diverged from the inspirations. The other games involved porting mechanics but have a lot more rough edges.
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Jun 16, 2017 14:58:17 GMT -7
@swede
Thanks for that clarification. That's still an impressive starship minis collection! One of these days, I must actually count how many I have!
And I wish I could find that small handful of Mechs I got painted up. Only played occasionally, although I got a bigger collection of Clix Mechs.
When that game came out, three of us picked a faction each (I went Bannons' Raiders, it's the pirate in me!), and although it's a blind collectable game, our local Forbidden Planet took to opening out the boxes and selling items as singles. We modified the rules slightly (doubled ranges), and it meant you could collect and build up your factions without having odds and ends. When you match up the basic Clix game with LOTS of scenery, it's great fun!
Mark
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Jun 18, 2017 6:03:37 GMT -7
Just curious but people keep mentioning using paper counters, in all my searching ive not come about any mech counters for battletech any links to such? free or not is fine!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 8:16:52 GMT -7
I actually made my counters in Powerpoint using the 'mech images I downloaded from Sarna.net. Unfortunately, I can't find that file. My "paper minis" use the stands for Steve Jackson's " Cardboard Heroes" system, but Mr. Jackson no longer sells them. I have found an alternate supplier here at " The Game Crafter". I'll keep digging for that file. It may be on one of my spare files. Here are a couple of photos I found on the interwebs
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Jun 18, 2017 10:53:39 GMT -7
Regarding paper minis: I listen to a podcast that is co-hosted by Denis Loubet. Denis is an artists and did the art for cardboard heroes. On the pod cast he has mentioned that he was recently commissioned to re-do the art for cardboard heroes. I'm not sure when they will be available but I'm pretty sure that they are being re-released.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 12:41:04 GMT -7
I checked the web page for "Cardboard Heroes". It looks as though they have moved away form the plastic stands to a triangular (as viewed from the side) stand-up where the bottoms of each interconnect to form a flat base. (see below). In my work with other game companies, such a change is sometimes used to update some art that was not as well-received by purchasers as was hoped.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Jun 18, 2017 12:52:27 GMT -7
From what Denis has said on the podcast one of the primary motivators was that modern technology allows for far superior print quality and the old art just wasn't detailed enough. It just didn't have to be given the print resolution for mass market products at the time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 15:43:24 GMT -7
At least that's a good reason to redraw some art. FASA had to remove some Battletech art due to a lawsuit. I've spoken with people from the Harmony Gold side of the suit and they have explained to me that the will not discuss the particulars (ever). A friend of mine is doing art for FASA's new game and tried to pry a little (as he is a big old Battletech fan), and got a similar response. Since then they have been the " UNSEEN" 'Mechs. There have been efforts to redesign them, but fans are always kind of "meh" towards the new art. I'm "Okay" with some, like others, dislike others. From what I have dug up, it sounds like FASA had the rights to use the art, but it was too expensive to fight in court. Actually, Battletech was originally "Battledroids" but Lucas found out and sued them, so they changed it to a much better and cooler name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 17:10:09 GMT -7
WOW. I actually found the file I was after. Since I play 3025 era, I only have 3025 'mechs. 3025 Mech Counters.zip (968.51 KB) Sorry, I had to zip it. The pdf was 1.6 meg. The PowerPoint zips down to 1.8 meg, so I cannot post it here.
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Jun 18, 2017 17:25:08 GMT -7
Didn't one of the boxed basic Battletech sets come with paper stand up counters with plastic bases to stand them up with? I'm sure that's the one I have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 18:27:55 GMT -7
Yes. That was the boxed set of 2nd edition. There was never an actual 1st edition of Battletech.
|
|