Welcome Anonymous !


 

Battletech Universe

General Gaming

BV vs BV2: don't care

Discuss general gaming issues NOT specifically related to MechWarrior, MechCommander, MechAssault or BT PnP games

Moderator: Ravion Hawk

BV vs BV2: don't care

Postby Dragnse7en » Fri May 02, 2008 11:40 pm

Never used it. I tried, but it scrambled my brain. Now I don't care. Neither does anyone in my local group.

Clan is clan, IS is inner spere, so why make it like that?

IMHO - the BV system is pointing towards WYSIWYG. This is a stupid flex in the rules, and here in Massachusetts we don't take kindly to strange rules. We're too busy hanging witches and stirring up baked beans . . .

chowdah - New England clam chowdah - yummm
}: )~<

Christopher
AKA
Dragnse7en

http://dynamicdetailsanddesigns.enacre.net/index.htm IE only sorry :(
Dragnse7en
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: Northampton,MA

Postby AVA MANGO TWO » Sat May 03, 2008 12:36 am

Atleast theres a strong breeze and a faint whiff in the air when you all get together for a game Chris... :lol:
Image
Image
AVA MANGO TWO
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Redstar Renegades
Redstar Renegades
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 7913
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: London, England

Postby Davitch » Sat May 03, 2008 12:41 am

I have tried to use both systems and have found that it is not necessarily the system that balances the game, but what tactics you use and experience of the player. So to be truly honest I don't like either, but I will use the BV before I use 2.0.
Image
Davitch
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 1055
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:05 am

Postby Prophet » Sat May 03, 2008 10:09 pm

I guess the reason I am not liking the 2.0 version is that I am used to the old one. I guess it will just take awhile for me to get used to the changes. BUt which ever one is used, I think there needs to be one of them.
Prophet
 

Postby Heimdall » Sun May 04, 2008 12:17 pm

BV 2.0 removed many of the loopholes in BV1 that allowed people to create falsely low BV 'Mechs when compared to their real fire power. One common tactic which can no longer be done is to load a unit with flamers to bring its BV down by about 40% or more if built right.
Heimdall
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Calgary AB, Canada

Postby Paint it Pink » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:00 pm

Having recently got HMPro, check it out, PPC fry your brains with this puppy, big fat gauss rifle will bowl you over, this program is state of the art badass...

Sorry, just channeling Aliens there for a moment. :oops:

What I meant to say is, I get the record sheets printed out and they have C-Bill cost on them. What is wrong about using this to balance forces?
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby AVA MANGO TWO » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:06 pm

Alot of people do use C-Bill costs to work out there forces for a game, BV is just another way of doing it.
Image
Image
AVA MANGO TWO
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Redstar Renegades
Redstar Renegades
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 7913
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: London, England

Postby Paint it Pink » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:09 pm

Yes but, no...

A little more detail might be helpful? :P
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby Dragnse7en » Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:26 pm

I can agree with calculating force size with C-bill cost. Since I learned of C-Bills over twenty years ago, I just didn't care to learn a new seperate system for calculating force size. To each their own I guess :)
}: )~<

Christopher
AKA
Dragnse7en

http://dynamicdetailsanddesigns.enacre.net/index.htm IE only sorry :(
Dragnse7en
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: Northampton,MA

Postby Paint it Pink » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:24 am

Yes, but no, but yes, but no... :wink:

Why I agree, C-Bills is a method to cost a force, what I'm kinda of asking here is relative values?

For instance here is a comparison of a couple of tweaked mechs I have:

Wasp C-Bills 1.6 million, BV 391.
Battlemaster 8.7 C-Bills BV 1231.

I've rounded down the C-Bills to make the ratios easier to calculate.

So C-Bills 5.4 Wasps per Battlemaster.
Or BV 3.1 Wasps per Battlemaster.

Now that is two Wasps more in C-Bills, and a five to one odds looks pretty good to me. Three to one odds not so good.

Now if we were to have a free market economy, we could probably work this out using a trading options model. Life is probably too short to set this up! :roll:

PS: I have no idea whether or not I've used BV1 or BV2, but I think I chose BV2. :?
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby Blackheart » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:46 am

Total weight.

Cbills and BV are going to rise and fall with certain equipment (BV falls w/ XL engines, but Cbills go WAY up).

Total weight, never changes.

So, if you have 80 tons left and you wanna bring that under-gunned Charger against my Thug, you go right ahead. Maybe next time you'll have learned your lesson and picked a better 'Mech for the weight.

Besides, the BV system is exploited by power-gamers in every way possible. Back when I played MegamekNET, there was a table floating around that showed which units were BV efficient, and which ones weren't. So, you used BV efficient units for planetary assaults and other land-grabbing games, but for minor patrols and skirmishes you fielded the "crap". Really made good 'Mechs rather useless, and you could forget using anything other than 4/5 pilots. "JVN-10N??? Scrap it and get a -10F, the 10N is over-BVed and will get pwned." Of course, we all know how deadly a JVN-10N Javelin can be once a few holes have been opened.

Again, use tonnage. It never lies.
Image

Image

Image
Blackheart
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 3097
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Kosciusko, MS

Postby AVA MANGO TWO » Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:18 am

Well ive just installed BV2 on my HMP just to keep pace with the Total Warfare rules, but i dought it will change my method of picking a force to game with if i play Inner sphere vs Inner sphere be it House, Merc or Pirate ill go with C-Bill cost, if i game Inner sphere vs Clan alang a ding dong ill choose mass weight. :) zac
Image
Image
AVA MANGO TWO
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Redstar Renegades
Redstar Renegades
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 7913
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: London, England

Postby Paint it Pink » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:04 pm

As an oldy, I always used tons, but there again I use to know what mechs were efficient. I imagine as I pick up the changes, post Clan, I will get my mojo back, or something. :wink:
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby Typhoon » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:22 pm

I have used BV, CBills, and tonnage for battles and have found that tonnage works well for I.S. vs I.S. and Clan vs Clan battles but not so well for I.S. vs Clan battles. It can be done but the I.S. needs at least double the Clan tonnage, especially in the 3050 era, to make a decent battle.

This comes from plenty of experience as I loved trying to fight the Clan on even terms.

CBills works well in any battle if the I.S. player is careful and wise.

BV is a decent balancing system but not without its faults. I do like the original BV system for tournament play. It is especially good when you use the Piloting/Gunnery modifiers.

I have yet to try BV2 and I don't think I will be using it any time soon , however, I am interested in trying it out.


My feeling is that groups have to find what works best for them. My old group used tonnage and CBills depending on what factions were being used. Most often we used tonnage when playing I.S. battles but used CBills for other battles. We even used CV back in the day but hated trying to do the math when we designed machines.
Typhoon
Forum Administrator
Forum Administrator
Clan Wolf-in-Exile
Clan Wolf-in-Exile
Khan
Khan




 
Posts: 6446
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 2:03 am
Location: Kitakami, Iwate, Japan

Postby Cipher » Wed Oct 08, 2008 10:17 am

Heimdall wrote:BV 2.0 removed many of the loopholes in BV1 that allowed people to create falsely low BV 'Mechs when compared to their real fire power. One common tactic which can no longer be done is to load a unit with flamers to bring its BV down by about 40% or more if built right.


Something like this right

Code: Select all
               BattleMech Technical Readout

Type/Model:    Flame Thrower
Tech:          Clan / 3050
Config:        Biped BattleMech
Rules:         Level 2, Standard design

Mass:          100 tons
Chassis:       Endo Steel
Power Plant:   400 Fusion
Walking Speed: 43.2 km/h
Maximum Speed: 64.8 km/h
Jump Jets:     None
Jump Capacity: 0 meters
Armor Type:    Standard
Armament:     
  36 Flamers
Manufacturer:  (Unknown)
  Location:    (Unknown)
Communications System:  (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System:  (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model:    Flame Thrower
Mass:          100 tons

Equipment:                                 Crits    Mass
Int. Struct.:  152 pts Endo Steel            7      5.00
 (Endo Steel Loc: 1 HD, 2 LT, 2 RT, 1 LL, 1 RL)
Engine:        400 Fusion                    6     52.50
   Walking MP:   4
   Running MP:   6
   Jumping MP:   0
Heat Sinks:     16 Double [32]               0      6.00
Gyro:                                        4      4.00
Cockpit, Life Supt., Sensors:                5      3.00
Actuators: L: Sh+UA+LA+H    R: Sh+UA+LA+H   16       .00
Armor Factor:  184 pts Standard              0     11.50

                          Internal    Armor
                          Structure   Value
   Head:                      3          9     
   Center Torso:             31         26     
   Center Torso (Rear):                  9     
   L/R Side Torso:           21      19/19     
   L/R Side Torso (Rear):              6/6     
   L/R Arm:                  17      20/20     
   L/R Leg:                  21      25/25     

Weapons and Equipment    Loc  Heat  Ammo   Crits    Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
8 Flamers                RA     24           8      4.00
8 Flamers                LA     24           8      4.00
9 Flamers                RT     27           9      4.50
9 Flamers                LT     27           9      4.50
2 Flamers                CT      6           2      1.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS:                        108          74    100.00
Crits & Tons Left:                           4       .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost:        10,547,334 C-Bills
Battle Value:      523
Cost per BV:       20,166.99
Weapon Value:      298 / 298 (Ratio = .57 / .57)
Damage Factors:    SRDmg = 8;  MRDmg = 0;  LRDmg = 0
BattleForce2:      MP: 4,  Armor/Structure: 5/8
                   Damage PB/M/L: 3/-/-,  Overheat: 4
                   Class: MA;  Point Value: 5
Cipher
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:13 pm

Postby Shadow Slayer » Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:11 am

I personally think that BV2 unmodified for force size is the best way to play.

The thing about tonnage driven games is that while it works fine in pre-3050 games, anything after 3050 tech just doesn't work. Expecially when it comes to Clan vs IS tech. You either Double weight against the clans that in anything past 3060 tech means that it tips the favor to the IS side, or you don't which ALWAYS tips the favor to the clans side.

C-bills does a better job, but at the same time, there are many "cheap" mechs, as well as the point that when it comes to clan tech, while the clan mechs can get much pricier then the IS mechs, its at such a disporportional rate that it really isn't all that good.

BV is in my opinion the best way to balance the game. Expecially if you stick to cannon units or only allow MARGINAL wiggle room to give yourself custom rides. Like anything before it, it can be exploited, but the level of exploitation from my experiance is SIGNIFICANTLY less then anything else. I know a ton of the veteran 3025 players tend to not like it too much because it means that premium choice mechs come at a premium choice price. But personally, the game itself doesn't punish you from taking them, but gives other mechs in the spotlight time to shine. As well as the fact that BV is the only GOOD avenue that allows you to play not only Clan vs IS tech, but also Mech Lances vs combined arms forces.

It also brings back an emphisis that I feel was lost in post 3050 games, and thats that the real stars of BV games tend not to be the premium units that are completely heat officiant and can throw around 3 or more ER PPC's a turn without skipping a beat. But the "Average" mechs that have their flaws, be it poor range, poor loadout, poor armor, or poor heat efficiency, it brings back the emphasis of piloting the mechs, and not just taking a force that you end up just going in a toe to toe rockem' sockem' robots beat'em up match with.

There is always the argument of initiative sinking units, but the group I play with tends to go combined arms anyways, which means that there is very little of that when both sides are using a variaty of mechs, vehicles and infantry.

Ultimately, its whatever works for whomever you play against, but I find that unless your playing with Level 1 tech, there really is no way besides BV that can give you a "balancing board" for everything else from Clan Vs IS matches, to not punishing people who wish to use conventional infantry or aerospace fighters.
Shadow Slayer
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: USA, San Francisco

Postby Paint it Pink » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:10 pm

Having just played a post 3050 game with tonnage I think I can say that I would like to replay the game with BV, because by the BV calculation I'd have had another mech or two, depending on choices of course.

However, in all fairness, I lost initiative for every turn bar one, and I was using one new mech for me, and one that I'd swore I'd never use again, and I'm off now to rip its record sheet to shreds. :twisted:
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby Shadow Slayer » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:22 pm

man, what mech was that?
Shadow Slayer
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: USA, San Francisco

Postby shalom itay » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:59 pm

Just wanted to fuel it up a bit...

In Comabt Operations (pages 42-45) you can find the "ultimate" way to even things up based on BV. The book represents a mind boggling iterative formula to do that. My advice to you, if you want to try it, Use Excel's Solver option to do the math for you.
shalom itay
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:23 am
Location: Israel

Postby Paint it Pink » Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:01 pm

Shadow Slayer wrote:man, what mech was that?


A Marauder 5S, an otherwise fine machine brought down by the XL engine. I wouldn't have XL engines in slow heavy mechs, because it is only a matter of time before you lose a torso section, and then your mech is toast.
The Unseen once seen cannot be unseen

Image

http://panther6actual.blogspot.com/
Paint it Pink
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:21 am
Location: London, England

Postby Shadow Slayer » Sun Feb 01, 2009 8:10 pm

yeah, in my experiances, XL's only really work for you when your mech actually is fast enough or can jump far enough to boost up your modifier to something decent, or when your loadout is seriously much greater then another mech would normally be.

In BV games, XL's can be good though because they can reduce the value of an otherwise good mech. Yeah, that does mean that the mech is more venerable, but if your playing with a force that is made for a "Blitzkreig" like tactic, then the extra trade off in high output of weapons can be good.
Shadow Slayer
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: USA, San Francisco


Return to General Gaming

cron

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Login