Reset?

[chaosxtreme]

Hey guys.

I know it has been mentioned before but I wanted to see what other people think.

I think its about time for a reset.

The FWL is producing Clan Tech (go us).

The Lyran Falcons are merging with a periphery state as an equal partner.

Mind you its been a extremely awesome ride but everything that has happened is beginning to become a barrier to entry.

Think about it new player comes in and "So I am in Clan Blood Spirit...well no the Blood Spirits went ape shit and tried to kill everyone in a War of Reaving that wiped out a huge chunk of the home worlds population before treating to Nueva Castille which they renamed Nueva Sangria."

But that's every faction and it has been rich and exciting but I think its time to pick a new starting point and begin again, and with a new starting point comes *gasp* an idea I had.

Now I for one have a few idea's for rule changes.

- Unit FP Size Cap's
- Revisions to skill level and having to have X# of a type of unit to have better units (sliding scale for smaller factions)
- R&D need's to be fixed. There is "It should be hard" and then there is "40 years during a tech renaissance and 7 years of Real life with a total of like 6 discoveries".
- Upkeep for unit's. Should be expensive.
- Factories also be "Mother of god you are crippling your nation's entitlement programs for future generations to build a spanking new locust factory." with a Jship factory being "Well there goes 6 month's of our military budget."

Honestly who here loses at any level a single MF or SY and goes "Oh no's I got to get that back or I have surrendered a major advantage."

Anyway just struck me today that its really time for a reset. Thought I would ask if anyone else feels the same.

[Holt]

For the same reasons you mention above I do not think it is time for a reset.

Everyone has worked hard to create those changes from the canon universe, people have been working for years crafting the factions the way they want, why just end it?

Also what would be the point of people molding factions anew if someone is going to come in and say, 'ok guys we've changed enough, lets restart again'.

[Marlin]

The problem I have is the lack of players. This may have to do with the huge deviation of Canon. Clans were put down because of Playerlack (Coyotes aside) We had a 20 year jump with more questions open than solved.

Several players have several factions under control and this might be the biggest problem. Also, the level of Warfare is far too much for my taste. A small simple game on one divided world with actual MM action would be ideal for me. Others may love it right now, I rather do not.

Dunno really. It has gone on very long and went through several crisises. Without players like now I would say shut it down and start anew in a much smaller setting. according to player numbers.

[chaosxtreme]

Exactly.

Look I feel for those who have been around since the beginning and have been molding factions but...

We keep having to put those factions down one by one do to not having enough people to run them.

Or people who had nothing to do with the molding come in and either ignore it or take it in a new direction.

I mean how many clan's are left?

Blood Spirits (sort of), Diamond Shark's, Jade Falcons (again this one is a matter of opinion), Raven/Bear/Rasalhauge (Also a matter of opinion), Star Adders (up for debate), Spirit Cats, Steel Viper's, Hell's Horses (see previous mentions about Raven's, Falcons and etc) and Ice Hellion.

This is less then the war of reaving and a couple of those on that list could disappear next turn or the turn after.

Inner Sphere is hardly better. We have 5 great house's and periphery state's dropping like flies/going dark.

Now if no one is of a mind to do a restart I am good with that but comeon guy's look at the situation and ask yourself....is anyone going to be ok with any drastic change's to the rules without a restart? Does anyone have a clear idea of everything that has occurred in the history of this game? I mean I did a lot of looking and I think I have a better idea then most but even now I come across new stuff all the time.

[Marlin]

SOme history is indeed lost forever while much is still in the archives, but it would take months for a new player to sift through it. The wiki is also there.

The moves and wipes of forums added to that heavy burden for new blood.

[Iron Mongoose]

I definatly think that the reset that we already had was a lost oppertunity.  I had hoped it would be used to ballance things more, and to be an oppertunity to restart with all the rules changes we could have wanted.  Rather, we just tweeked the rules and just rolled the universe foward in a more or less frozen form, with no real wars or losses or gains (relitive to anyone else) for anyone, how ever much it may have been needed to bring things into ballance.

Of course, I'm not playing anymore, and whatever anyone might think the primary reason isn't anything about the game or the people in it (though I won't say there arn't secondary reasons that include thouse); its my family.  So, my voice counts for little.

But, I think that, ballance or no, rules or no, the sort of universe that this univise has become is in a lot of ways too rich for a small number of people.  Most factions have enough accumulated cherictors and enough history and enough units with great stories that it would take two or three players to do it right.  The Adders and their conglomeration of sub factions was definatly that way; even with Grae and Dis and me we could hardly have kept up.  I think the FWL might be that way, since the best days were times with three and four people working against one another.  Even Parm, who's been keeping the MoC and Horses up for something like a decade from game to game, did his best work when Ian was around and Plainsfox and everyone else.

The notion that we can take advantage of the history we've made for ourselves with such a small number of people is problematic.  And as has been said, there's no clear way to fix that.  A croud of new players would be great, but how to fit them into the game, and its five year history?  How can we teach someone about why the Horses and not the Ravens or anyone else merged with the OA, or why the Ravens and Bears did merge, or why the Adders have five or six difrent personalities in them, or any of the other celebrity couples we've made?  How can we teach them about the Terrans, and the way in which that super-faction drove the game so long and left such a lasting mark on thouse who lived through it? 

That anyway is my view.  But of course, don't stop playing because of me, since I am excited to see how the game goes along, even just as a spectator.

[Cannonshop]

I'm NOT excited by the prospect of a reset.  Sure, there are rules I'd like to see clarified and updated, and yes, there's a shortage of players...

but a reset isn't going to fix the second one, and the first part doesn't really require it.

Some of the player loss we've had, came from cases of bad-sportsmanship.  Either someone didn't get special treatment they hadn't earned from the Staff, or someone was losing for the first time in the game ever, or someone was sock-puppeting.  We all know who these are, I'm not sure bringing them back is a good idea, reset or not.

but it ain't deviation from Canon that's caused player loss-it's simple competition.  For a long time, the FGC game had no competitors, it was the only game, as they say, in town, and everyone knew it.

Now, there's 3010 over on the main site-another "Reset" idea that is on-again-off-again.

Some of the player loss is due to simple attrition-people's lives get too busy, or they deploy, or they burn out.  That's not deviation from Canon causing that, it's reality intruding on free time.


So a Reset isn't going to fix that, either.


Third, is location.  This game started on the main CBT boards five or six years ago, it moved to intelser because the STAFF wanted to do a RESET to a game that deviated LESS from the CANON. Not game-staff, but SITE staff. THAT is how we got 3010, and why this game moved to Intelser, where we have a dice-roller script that they don't, allowing us to handle rolling resolution without relying on Oliveash's word as to the results.

3010 blundered around for two years before it actually started, and has had a hell of a time keeping GM staff, thus really proving that location can make up for a multitude of sins-without the CBT main site supporting it, it would've died last year from lack of interest...during the same period that THIS game was slowing down.


Fourth: I'm not excited by a Reset.  It would have to be so incredibly, mind-blowing awesome that I couldn't resist.  going back to Canon is...not that awesome,  Sorry.   What we've done on our own far outstrips the hack-work of the plot-by-committee that was the Late FASA era, or the disappointing "jihad" era which promised something awesome but delivered the 3rd succession war warmed over with a soft-side of cheese, and I won't even begin to speak on what I think of the DA/AOD eras with their cardboard-cut-out-villains and hackneyed 'plots'.  

The goofy shit here, was done by PLAYERS, not people who're supposed to be paid on the quality of their work.  There have even been 'natural consequences' to player actions in this game-unlike many of hte events in the CBT CANON.

At least the actions in this game, non-canon as they are, make sense in the framework and context of the game being played.


I honestly don't think resetting to an earlier era, or to Canon, is going to give me that "what're they doing now??" interest, nor do I think it's going to fix the manpower issues, nor the rules issues.  Replace the rules issues with other rules issues? sure, it'll do that, but it's not enough that a reset would keep me coming back.

ergo, I don't see me joining or heading a faction in another reset of the game.

[Daemonknight]

- Unit FP Size Cap's
- Revisions to skill level and having to have X# of a type of unit to have better units (sliding scale for smaller factions)
- R&D need's to be fixed. There is "It should be hard" and then there is "40 years during a tech renaissance and 7 years of Real life with a total of like 6 discoveries".
- Upkeep for unit's. Should be expensive.
- Factories also be "Mother of god you are crippling your nation's entitlement programs for future generations to build a spanking new locust factory." with a Jship factory being "Well there goes 6 month's of our military budget."

#1: being incorporated. 3049 is using RATs, so every unit is built using specific components, and the FP of the unit is tied directly to the BV of the units that comprise it. 1 FP = 1000BV. Each faction will start out with a few pre-made Regiment-sized formations(if anyone is familiar with Flashpoint's RAT/Military sheet, thats what we are using), but new ones can certinly be customized. New 'Industry' rules will be made to allow for tracking of what designs/variants a faction has access to, aswell as what weapon's technology it has access to. It will also detail how to add/replace a unit in a specific RAT, aswell as how to modify the order on the existing RATs.

#2: being incorporated, as you and I discussed, and as I've mentioned previously when the subject came up in the rules discussion thread.

#3: R&D is being totally revamped, and will no longer function as random rolls. SP(Science Points) are generated by shunting RPs into Prestigious Facilities(thus creating a maximum SP/turn mechanism). When you generate the SP, you apply it to a specific Project. Each PF can only apply it's SP to a single Project, however each PF can 'target' a seperate Project each turn. However, R&D is an expensive undertaking. Projects like developing a new variant of an existing chasis are less expensive than developing a totally new chasis, which is less expensive than something else. Weapons research is more expensive(in terms of SP) than new battlemech chasis(as new chasis is straight engineering, while new weapons requires a broader set of subjects and theoreticall research, in addition to the engineering requirements). Other research gives improved economics, better movement speeds, and increased efficency. 'Random Event Rolls' will also be applied, some of which allow for special breakthroughs(such as giving a faction access to the special 'Restricted Technology' tech trees, which cannot otherwise be persued.

Also, each faction's weapons and design/variant tech trees will be unique to that faction, to avoid some of the problems we've had here.

For example: the Ultra AC/2 was designed by the FWL in 3057. Only the FWL can research the Ultra AC/2 weapon, and no designs/variants with an UAC/2 can be added to any faction's RAT untill after the FWL researches it. Also, because weapons can only be researched by their original faction, access to technology is much more precious. A faction can 'lisence' another to build a specific tech. So, if the FWL researches the Ultra AC/2, but the FS wants it, it has 2 options: request access to the tech from the FWL, or try and steal the tech.

The FWL can either sell the technology(thereby giving the FS the ability to produce it indefinetely), or grant the FS a 'production lisence'. If the FWL sells the technology, the FS has the Ultra AC/2 just as if they had researched it themselves. However, if the FWL grants a 'Production Lisence', the FS can only have designs w/ a UAC/2 on their RATs for as long as the FWL keeps the PL valid. The FWL could suddenly decide to void the PL, and the FS can no longer build units that include UAC/2s(the design stays on the RAT untill the FS changes it, but that RAT cannot be built any longer). Because the FS doesn't actually have the tech, they also cannot sell or grant PLs of that tech to another faction.

The FS' other option is to steal it. That requires an 'Industrial Espionage' intelligence mission target one of the FWL's PFs. If successful, the FS adds the technology to it's own Tech Tree(basiclly it becomes a special research branch, thats cheaper than usual, because examples of the tech exist and can be used to reverse engineer it).

Also note that the above rules for PFs or IE missions can be used for any militay technology: weapon systems, battlemech designs/variants, vehicles, aerospace fighters, anything. The only restriction is that you cannot add Clantech to an IS tech tree, or vice versa. Sorry, no dual-tech factions in this game, unless 2 factions wholly merge, which merges their technology trees, and will be massively expensive.



#4: Upkeep is being handled by the Flashpoint formulas. It is quite expensive, there isn't a single faction in the current game that could support it's existing military. By that I mean they wouldn't have enough ready cash to even repair combat damage, let alone build new units, conduct trade, or do anything other than move their units around.(Upkeep is ALWAYS a % of your gross income, so nobody would ever actually be at negetive RPs in a turn because of Upkeep).

#5: Cool idea, not sure theres a way to actually make that happen without increasing the cost of the factories/shipyards, which then requires a revamp of the actual unit construction system, which I was toying with anyways. Will look into it, nice thought.

Dave and I have been discussing the new rules for a few weeks. This game isn't ending untill the new rules are ready for play- not playtest, actually ready to run. Dave also needs time to get the new sheets built, a map prepared, and making sure we have enough players to fill all of the faction slots.

Currently, I only know of 2 confirmed players; Chaos(FWL), and myself(ComStar). Dave B has right of first refusal on the FRR, but he wont know if he has time untill the curtain is ready to drop.

Dave B is also looking at removing the MP system, and going with having to actually track civilian/transport assets as normal units(meaning that you can attack an enemy's transport abilities directly, via SF or direct action). It would also allow for using civilian fleets to generate RP through trade(ie use a Trade Route movement order, which would have the unit basiclly use a back-and-forth path, generating RP each time it returned to it's starting location from it's 'trade point'). We've discussed adding a Trade Hub hex improvement for this, but its all a nebulous idea at this point.

[Fatebringer]

Blood Spirits (sort of)

Hey! We're still here! Just mostly in the homeworlds. Considering that they had over 10 Galaxies when they were handed off to me and two naval stars, they are still a force to be reconned with. The map update doesn't show yet how they took over the Nuevo Castille. When it does, you'll see the Spirits aren't gone, in fact since this is OOC, I'm just waiting for the GM's to tell me it's the right time go ahead and make a move on the Hanseatic League. I mean, the RP will come before the action and they've got their little raider / trail nusaince missions , then there was the recent development that is probably gonna get the Star Colonel that is bringing the information to the Warrior Council killed, he's one of the only people I made that would even consider the Ex-Fire Mandril Adder's offer. I highly doubt the rest of the spirits will even give it consideration, and he will have to fight for his life, but if he can stay alive.... who knows.

Raven/Bear/Rasalhauge (Also a matter of opinion)

I new Dominion is compartmentalized. The Raven Protectorate is the most seperate of them all. The main thing that the Dominion has integrated is the militiary, but they still remain listed as Ghost Bear Touman, Kungsarme, Hemvernet, and Snow Raven Touman. Even the navy is broken down like that with the Raven Fleet being labeled seperately. Each have their own equiment RAT, etc. This is how the Ravens and Bears justify that neither Clan has been absorbed. The Ravens have their Warrior Council on New Caledonia, the Bears have their Warrior Council on Alshain. Things are as they aught to be.

There is still the clause on the books that allows the Ravens to leave the New Dominion if things ever became a problem. The Bears took back their holdings on Bearclaw and the Ravens have taken claim to all the worlds in the Raven Protectorate so if there was a split things would be easy to sort out.

[Fatebringer]

I gamed with a DnD group that had two different modes.

The first mode was an ever expanding campaign that never ended. I think I had at least 10 players with three characters each and they rotated missions, while some people in the group were talking about creating even more characters... the result, I stopped playing in the game because it had no end and we never leveled past a certain point because we were always switching up characters.

The second mode, after the game-that-never-ends finally ended, people kept planning new games. The games usually lasted only a game session or two, and we would be continuously making new characters... the result, we never got leveled past a certain point because we were making new games. It seemed people didn't want to play, they just wanted to make new characters.

I finally would only play in games where the GM could tell me he had a plan for the game so we could progress and goals set up so there was an end. Now, it would be pretty hard to make that happen in our FGC type setting without more GM interaction. Something I'm in favor of instead of random events and the GM existing to only be a referee.

I see DK planning his 3049 game and after the War of Reaving book came out I saw people talking about a WoR game. But ...  we have a game that just started! I know I want to keep playing FGC 3091. Even if my helpers have not been active, I have been and I'd like to know from anyone that plans on running a new game, are these games supposed to replace 3091 or run tandem to it? Do you think creating either of these games get people to come back and why?

While I don't think creating new games will increase our player base, both suggestions have some merit. The benefit of a 3049 game is a reduced number of factions required to play them will gel with our player base, but will people want to play out the slaughter? Clan mechs vs Inner Sphere Level 1?

For the War of Reaving, I like the fact that there's an end to the plotline! At the end, both the IS Clans and the HW Clans essentially agreee not to go after one another and rebuild, but the scenarios aren't balanced and what's the incentive for a Clan Snow Raven type faction that manages to beat the odds and get away from the Inner Sphere with more of their stuff? They still have to leave the game. Plus, what about the people that don't want to play Clan?

Right now, we have one game and a limited player base. The only reason I would consider switching to a new game, is to create a game that is more manageble for the GM's so they don't get frustrated and bow out. For the most part, I like the FGC history and we have no incentive to follow any cannon events at this point because our plotline diverged at an early and critical point. Players have weakened some of the powerhouse nations, and small factions are stronger then they ever would have been without these twists.

Before, I thought the game needed a "Clan Code of Conduct." AKA, how to enforce the Clan system and zellbrigen in our game. However, after reading the War of Reaving, I will shut the hell up from here on out about what Clanner are supposed to do and what honor means to a Clan.

I agree that units should have size limitations for two reasons. First to keep the games more realistic, and secondly to help create a standard for unit training. The only exception to this of course should be the Warships that have their calculations already limited by what they can carry.

I agree that this game needs something to prevent stacks of doom and make playing Megamek more accessable. However, we would have to agree with the GM's for any measure to do this.

I suggest that since Aerospace has proven to be considerably more versatile than the regular ground units in this game, we should make all aerospace be built as Mobile or LF Mobile units. That would let Mechs be the kings of the battlefield again and help people with their MP pools. Maby this will encourage more playing megamek.

The one thing I don't want to see is ground RAT's. It works good for a game pre-3050, but the current selections and cross-faction access to tech make things a lot more interesting and to create RAT's would be limiting.

[Iron Mongoose]

I think a significant worry with a very GM driven game is the past falures of such games. 

FGC III featured a very GM driven component, in which a misterious enemy (likely the WoB, but its not fully clear) with specal technology (nukes and specal fighter killing devices for space combat) was in action against verious factions, and the players were reacting to that.  As I mentioned, GB ran that game a lot like one would run a smaller, more presonal game, so his idea of a GM driven story accords closely with Fate's expectations for his DnD games.

FGC IV was to be the invasion game, but it had problems.

FGC V (what we're in right now, still, though no one but a very few old timers who spoke about the others as 3 and 4 (1 and 2 were just before my time) would know it what way) featured a mix.  There was a GM innitation but player driven story about the war on the Falcons.  But there was also always the presence of GM factions to drive action directly.  And look and how many people were (and some are still) livid about the Terrans, and about other things as well (the FWL was up in arms when we were told that we had no choice but to send 15 of our 60 regements to fight the Falcons, for example; its why we never sent any air cover for them and sent largely crummy units). 

So Harlock in FGC VI and DR6 in this game have every reason to reflect back and think 1) no one will be happy if we try and drive the game and 2) the players should be able to start their own wars just fine with out us (in both games, despite problems with implementation, this has infact largely come true).

I do think with fewer players, a smaller senerio game might 1) be for feasable and 2) fit the population size better, but it could never have the sort of open ended depth that has cherictorized all the successful FGCs (and even the unsuccessful ones, in their own ways) and that has over time created the universe we're enjoying (or not) now.  For a full FGC with all the factions to be really plot driven?  I think if you can see a way to do that, that I'd be intrested.  But for me, I look back on what has been done and I don't know that I can see it being done to any more success than that.

[Daemonknight]

Fate, how do we have a game that just started? 91 is the exact same game in every way as it was before. The rules havn't changed, AT ALL. I used copy/paste to put them into the 3091 section. I called it that because it was easier to reset the turn counter after the timejump. But its the same exact game, not a new one.

We have all these big huge factions that basiclly can't be touched except by the others just like it. We have IS nations somehow gaining Dual Tech status without any real basis, in the course of 3 turns? Half the Clans are basiclly IS houses with better tech at this point, since they've basiclly lost all sense of what it actually means to be Clan- lets not forget, the WoR has zero influence on our game, since the events leading to it didn't happen.

From what DR and I were discussing, 3049 is replacing 3091. Too much has happened in 91s past, and theres barely anything going on. The Falcons are doing their dance with the Adders, the Cats made their bid for the MH(and lost), but otherwise, nothing. Theres no external RP coming from the FWL(Chaos is busy with rl); theres no external RP coming from the CC(because I guess CS is just a placeholder now); I havn't done much RP for the FS because I have background things running, and they're running to aid the MH.

Oh by the way, the SL has been semi-useless from the start. Nothing ever happens in the GC almost since I started playing. And theres no incentive for any of it to change, because theres so much 'history' of doing things differently, the only reason its even BT anymore, is because of the names. If we changed the names on the Great Houses, or the Clans, to just random stuff, nobody could ever tell what we are playing is infact Battletech anymore.

I hear people say "well, theres not enough MM, we need more MM", which is total crap. Theres been over 50 combats in the last 2 turns between the Adders and Lyrans/Falcons, and I havn't had a single PM about someone wanting to run an MM match, including the ex-CSA players.

So yes, I think we need a reset now, because the game is simply too unwieldy. I came in a bit over a year ago, and even then, it was nearly impossible to actually know what was going on previously, because theres just so much damn stuff to read through, and its not like you can go "i need the full history of Faction X, oh there it is!". Nope, you need all the combat threads, and that faction's RP thread, and the RP threads of any faction they've had IC interactions with. Oh, and you're likely still missing stuff that was done via PM(ie in secret) like 10 turns ago, because thats important.

We have a dwindling playerbase, and even new players are faced with a mountain of information they'll never actually be able to digest.

As for RATs, I think RATs are needed, for ground and aerospace. A faction only has so many production lines- no faction is in continous production of EVERY design and variant in it's inventory at any given time. And oh btw, being able to mix-match your ground forces allows the same foolishness as we saw with ASF prior to their equipment tables, except its even worse, because you've got more options- half of which are likely never used because they arn't optimal for the situation. Nobody has 100% optimized mech regiments.

Using the RasDom as an example, if we take the Flashpoint RAT page, you have 5 'tech level's in the IS bar, and 3 Tiers of Clan tech. And since you can mix/match technology, you have plenty of options. How many different Light Mech battalions do you need? I'll bet if we let each player design their own RATs, there would be plenty of examples of X variant appearing across multiple tables. Nobody would have each and every line item filled with a unique chasis/variant, guaranteed.

[Cannonshop]

-modified by the Moderator

the game is ongoing, melodramatic comments are unnessicary, check the Turn 3 thread for details

[Cannonshop]

welll... I overreacted.


RATs similar to the way the Naval Tab is currently structured would be a definite good idea, the problem I see (and it's not really a problem if the dropdowns are structured right) is the differences in organizational structure-Comstar derived base six units, Clan base five, rest of the inner sphere base four, and Marian Base Ten.

The essential fractional values for units is already listed in the Rules thread, it's just that forces would have to actually be defined-which ain't really a problem either.

Something like a column on the sheet for Infantry, BA, Tanks, Mechs, *(maybe one column for each weight class)  on the Ground Force tab, fed by RAT's as on the Naval Equipment tab.  You structure the RAT, then fill in how many Companies/Stars of each type in a given Battalion/Cluster/forgot the comstar designation for a Battalion sized complement.


The values then propogate to give you your FP value.  It works for Naval, it should work for the ground tab, and it would definitely add structure to MM fights, as well as limiting the size of any given line-item ground unit.

It also means that your native tech has some MEANING and value.


Other changes that might be of use, would be finding some way to make the Loyalty ratings actually valuable in SimRes or SpecOps missions, then a means to track and reward that.  It's easier to concieve of with the Clans, who have a 'public morality' structure that is well defined.  (Forget the events in War of Reaving for a moment here-the conditions that caused that aren't necessarily prevalent OR likely in an FC game.)
and, of course, making skill level mean more than just a pip up or down in the cost multiplier-the better units tend to, in history, to punch above their technical weight.  This tends to translate as what we use 'critical hits' to describe in the game-so an improved chance of critical scaled to dissimilarity of units (i.e. green vs. elite in extreme examples) might be called for. IMHO, the scale should 'slide' based on the skill levels of both parties-the military adage says that competent troops armed with sticks and rocks will beat incompetent troops armed with Machine Guns-the battle of Isandlwana is a good example of this, as is the Battle of the Hundered Slain.  More modern examples (at larger scale) would includeXuan Loc and Khe Sanh.  Other examples (from the other side) would be Rommel's campaign in North Africa, or the 101st Airborne's defense during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II.

in all of these examples, the commitment of the troops on each side (represented abstractly by a "Loyalty Rating") and their Veterancy (represented by a "Skill" rating) had as much to do (or more to do) with who won the battle, as the technology, armament, and numbers did (Relative FP values or BV.)

So, how to represent that?

First, let's address the easy one: Veterancy-this is a stat that has no emotional connection, doesn't lend itself to forced pumping, and doesn't really require much in the way of changes to the existing rules to work...

Veterancy Rating:

Untrained:.68
Very Green: .77
Green: .86
Regular: 1
Veteran: 1.25
Elite:1.5
Legendary: 2
Heroic: 2.5

okay, that's the current model...

Now, here's my suggestion:

Untrained:  Crit  on 12
Very Green: Crit on 10-12
Green: Crit on 9-12
Regular: Crit on 8
Veteran: Crit on 8 + 1 bonus Critical chance on 12
Elite: Crit on 7, +1 bonus critical chance over the standard on 11-12
Legendary: Crit on 7, +1 bonus critical chance on 10-12
Heroic: Crit on 7, +1 bonus Crit chance on 9-12

Bonus criticals apply in addition to the standard critical chance scale, thus a Veteran unit with a to-hit roll of 12, checks twice for a critical hit, instead of only checking once, reflecting the superior skill of the unit.

Assigning skill:

Skill costs XP, you get it by using the units, and it is awarded in specific ways:

1 xp for Simple resolution battle with equal number opponents, of equal skill.
.5 xp if the simple resolution battle is against inferior forces half the size (round down) of the winning unit, or if the winning unit is 2 or more steps superior veterancy to their defeated foes.
1.5 if the victorious unit is half the FP value of an opponent or less in Simple Resolution, or if the winning unit is 2 or more steps inferior in veterancy to their defeated foes.

Double these numbers if the battle is fought in Megamek or MegaAero.

XP is spent on a 1 XP for each 5 FP (plus 1 RP per 5 FP) being upgraded. This number doubles each step above Veteran.


Example:

Jimmie's Pizzaface Coma Company (5 FP, Green) faces off against the Elite Ballcrusher Keshik (10FP Veteran), and by some miracle, manages to win.

Award: JPCC gets 1.5xp(force size difference)+1.5xp(Veterancy difference)=3xp.  Upon the survivors reaching a friendly PF site, and spending a turn training (after rebuilding) they move up from Green, through Regular, straight to Veteran, with 1xp remaining in their unit's pool.

Had the battle gone the other way, the Elite Ballcrusher Keshik remains at their current rating-but gains (.5 for FP difference)+(.5 for veterancy difference)=1 xp. it will take six more such battles against inferior foes, for the EBCK to reach Elite Status.

Why the difference? people don't learn from doing things that are easy, they learn from doing things that are Hard.  It's harder to win a fight against someone inferior to you, than it is to win against a superior foe.




Legendary: