Rules Questions and Comments

[JediBear]

My POV on CBRN has always been that while no one sould be jumping out of their skin to use them, if we don't give people the opportunity (and temptation!) to stockpile and develop them, then the game is preventing the players from making a moral choice about whether or not to use them and - more importantly - preventing them from having the opportunity to roleplay how they react to others' use of these types of arms.

The thing is that I agree -- with the caveat that players being players we do not have the cultural background to make those moral decisions in a way that is appropriate and (more importantly) fun.

That being the case we can't and shouldn't be trusted with the choice.

Yes, nuclear weapons aganst ground-based targets would be anathema to anyone whose playing sane-

And this is exactly my point. You qualify the statement with words like "ground-based" and "sane" and as such weaken the statement from its canonical equivalent.

Not a single nuclear weapon was actually employed between the Second Succession War and the Fed Com Civil War. Not one. Not against space-based targets. Not even by mad-men and fools. Nobody built them. Nobody used them. Nobody. Ever.

And even when they came out, the people who used them became social pariahs, fit only for exile or execution. We don't have anything like a mechanism for that sort of thing in this game.

So I remain firmly in the "No BC and we should never have had N" camp.

Also, once again, we arn't in canon-land anymore.

I agree. You brought it up.

As for the Battletech-Nuketech joke, i could make a similar case for warships.

The case for Warship dominance is greatly exaggerated. They're overpriced, under-powered, and all they really bring to your faction is a way to put a bunch of MPs in the same too-expensive basket with a bunch of FPs. There's a reason my OWA never wanted them and my Ghost Bears never built them. To wit: Fighters and Jump/Dropships are better.

People build warships because they're cool in exactly the way 'Mechs are cool and Nukes are not. They're more prestige than power, they're your faction's thing, whatever, but you don't build them to win the game. They don't do that.

The position of Aerospace forces in this game actually goes along with my point. Because of mistakes (many since corrected) in the way the rules were built and players' inability to restrain themselves Aerospace forces are far more prominent than they should be.

Nukes aren't the way to put Naval forces back in their box.

To do that properly, you need to fix the rules.

[Daemonknight]

'fixing' implies a breakdown in the rules. the rules are just fine on warships- they're extremely expensive, and serve mostly to boost your Cyclical MP field, and also to give you, as you said, prestigious naval assets. Added to that, the huge naval ASF flotillas are generally considered Stack of Doom units, and frowned upon. They're super cheap to build, and can do what warships do, but better. The only way to fix that, is to remove Independant Wings from the naval units. Make each and every unit in the naval tab tied to either a warship or jumpship- forcing people to pay the x6 or x10 modifier for building big ASF flotillas. That would lessen them.

However, I disagree that the warship thing is overrated. The FS for example has a huge ground force, but its almost useless against some factions, because they'd never get to the ground to fight, thanks to huge naval fleets- the FWL, the Snow Ravens, and the Sprit Cats(according to rumor anyways). Yet we don't see massive naval fleets in cannon- because they're super expensive. However, we also don't see massive aerospace fight fleets either. Take away 'independant wing', and you are now balancing out 'stack of doom' ASF units, and now only need to contend with the huge warships, or start spamming out little jumpships and stocking them with Patrol dropships.


And I'm still waiting for a good reason behind the 'I hate nukes' or 'I hate bioweapons'. Theres been many people agreeing they dislike them, but nobody has given a real reason, so I'm forced to assume its a 'moral' issue. Well, its a game folks. Some have said it should be RP-driven, which I personally disagree with, but it doesn't matter at the moment. If I'm bossing a faction, my faction leader is going to want to have every possible option availible to him, for every possible situation. That includes NBC weapons.

and the mechanism for 'social pariahs, exile, execution', Jedi, is the players. If someone uses nukes and you hate them for it- its on you to actually do something about it. the rules shouldn't punish someone for a perfectly viable and legal(mechanics wise) military strategy. Just like orbital bombardments, the only mechanism for dealing with it, is the players themselves. I'm pretty sure nukes have been used in game already. I know for a fact atleast 1 faction has threatened their use. there was no big outcry against that. Nobody really mentioned it.

I remain firmly in the 'we SHOULD have NBC, because nobody should be barred from using it, just because people don't like them on principle' camp. And if we're going to have them, there should be good rules for them, not something tossed together to say they're in, but neglected because people dislike them, and don't want to have to defend against them.

[JediBear]

The only way to fix that, is to remove Independant Wings from the naval units.

Nonsense. I say that because the Independent Wings themselves aren't the problem. The problem is that it's possible to construct them so quickly in such large numbers and at such minimal expense. Indeed, they cost no more per FP than 'Mechs and are built from the very same factories!

In the canon universe, aerospace fighters are actually rare and expensive, with a Warship's two dozen or so fighters generally representing a decisive force in themselves. That we got where we are in such a few short years (as it was) is a clear indicator that something was and is broken.

So there are several ways to reign this in. Yes, you can (and should) nix Independent Wings. Naval Fighters are assigned to specific ships, not just dropped off on planetary bases by passing merchant ships. While you're at it, double their cost and either give them their own factories or make them use shipyard time to build. And impose firm limits on how many a faction can have or impose some kind of upkeep system.

However, I disagree that the warship thing is overrated. The FS for example has a huge ground force, but its almost useless against some factions, because they'd never get to the ground to fight, thanks to huge naval fleets- the FWL, the Snow Ravens, and the Sprit Cats(according to rumor anyways).

Firstly, that's less than wholly true.

Secondly, all that means is that there's an area that needs fixing. All-out interdiction of a planetary surface is next to impossible in canon.

In any case, that's not really Warships doing that. Non-warship naval power is far more cost-effective.

Yet we don't see massive naval fleets in cannon- because they're super expensive.

More than that. They're expensive, often ineffective, and difficult to build, maintain, and staff.

And I'm still waiting for a good reason behind the 'I hate nukes' or 'I hate bioweapons'.

To be clear, my reason was that I don't think people, including me, should be trusted with them.

Moreover, "this game will cease to be fun for me" is not a non-issue. You only have a game as long as you have players, and you only have players as long as they're having fun.

and the mechanism for 'social pariahs, exile, execution', Jedi, is the players.

And as such, as I said, there is no such mechanism.

the rules shouldn't punish someone for a perfectly viable and legal(mechanics wise) military strategy.

Yes they should. Because it shouldn't be a perfectly viable military strategy. It should be an horrific war crime that acts as a political third-rail and moves you cleanly over the moral event horizon. Players can't simulate that effect because as much as we might like to, we can't seize the other guy's faction and make it go to war with itself the way it should.

We simply have no way of handling social pressure or political dissent. It's one of the greatest weaknesses this game has and it makes NBC rules totally unworkable in concept.

[chaosxtreme]

Yeah the fleet is not for "winning" infact I cringe when I have to use it in combat because they are just not suited for it in the game mechanics.

I build them purely for the Prestige of it.

[Fatebringer]

Amen to that Chaos. When it comes down to it, I wouldn't have needed to create the Raven Stack of Doom if it weren't for the need for them. Heck, the Clans wouldn't have sent us to the Inner Sphere if it wasn't a Grand Council decision, but no one seemed to complain when we kicked the TH's ass! <Grumble Grumble> and they still have one of my Levi II's, the day is coming, oh yes, the day is coming when we shall right that wrong!

the rules shouldn't punish someone for a perfectly viable and legal(mechanics wise) military strategy.

Yes they should. Because it shouldn't be a perfectly viable military strategy. It should be an horrific war crime that acts as a political third-rail and moves you cleanly over the moral event horizon. Players can't simulate that effect because as much as we might like to, we can't seize the other guy's faction and make it go to war with itself the way it should.

We simply have no way of handling social pressure or political dissent. It's one of the greatest weaknesses this game has and it makes NBC rules totally unworkable in concept.

I think the way you put this also explains why I feel frustrated. There is no In-Game way to express the political pressure and social stigma that should be placed upon people. If a Faction Leader doesn't have the time or desire to police their own faction's actions, then it just doesn't happen.

If you lucky, someone issues another trial that normally doesn't resolve the issue because the losing party role-plays like nothing happens and the cycle continues which was one of the things that held up the Grand Council again and again.

[Dave Baughman]

There is no In-Game way to express the political pressure and social stigma that should be placed upon people. If a Faction Leader doesn't have the time or desire to police their own faction's actions, then it just doesn't happen.

I suppose one solution would be to introduce Public Support rules like we did in Flashpoint. Those provided a way to set up game-mechanical penalties for certain actions without the heavy-handed method of "taking away the keys" from faction leaders.

They'd have to be rebalanced for FGC, and would require modifications to certain other aspects of the game (like unit loyalty ratings), but it might be one option to strike a balance between the "freedom of choice" camp and the "roleplaying enforcement is needed to preserve the atmosphere" camp.

[Cannonshop]

There is no In-Game way to express the political pressure and social stigma that should be placed upon people. If a Faction Leader doesn't have the time or desire to police their own faction's actions, then it just doesn't happen.

I suppose one solution would be to introduce Public Support rules like we did in Flashpoint. Those provided a way to set up game-mechanical penalties for certain actions without the heavy-handed method of "taking away the keys" from faction leaders.

They'd have to be rebalanced for FGC, and would require modifications to certain other aspects of the game (like unit loyalty ratings), but it might be one option to strike a balance between the "freedom of choice" camp and the "roleplaying enforcement is needed to preserve the atmosphere" camp.

that sounds suspiciously like adding to Deathrider's workload by...well...lots.

On the CBRN front... We've had, in game, incidents of both Bio-weapons and Nukes, but we didn't have rules for the bioweapons at the time.

What seems to me to be forgotten in this, is that bio, unlike nukes (which can be configured for minimal fallout-at least, theoretically, and generate less long-term fallout if air-burst, rather than ground-burst deployment is used) is the gift that keeps on giving-when they're effective, or a minor annoyance when they aren't-and not much in-between the two.  For example, an Ebola or Anthrax outbreak might shut down a small town for a while, or government building, but it's no "Captain Trips" that can depopulate a continent in a matter of days, and a world in a matter of weeks.

It's all about the lag time-the faster the bio acts, the smaller its actual radius of effectiveness.  When we were formulating the Arluna Flu storyline back in Turn 26, we gave the virus a sixty day period of contagious-but-no-symptoms (similar to many STD's), physical contact and airborne transmission, and a patient lethality based on Influenza B.

It's probably the seminal example of a "Nightmare Bug"-it'll spread a long way (relatively-sixty days gives it about a five hex range based on typical jumpship traffic) and the impacts are cumulative-you don't get instant one-turn kills beyond the initial hex of deployment, and it's relatively easy in-game to shut down traffic...assuming you know it's out there, have control of the space, and are willing to invest in the blockade necessary.

The rules presented are basically "Nukes in a different container"-we're dealing with interstellar civilizations, with merchant traffic and trade that, per the setting, is the only thing keeping some worlds ALIVE.  Bio isn't nukes, the damage isn't easily contained once it's out, living things are unpredictable, and viruses in particular are difficult to contain once they've spread to hosts outside the lab.  Designer virii are worse, because they're already subject to mutation (had to be, otherwise you couldn't weaponize them.) 

Point being, unless the target world's already under an iron-bound blockade, releasing them isn't the same as dropping a bomb-there's no neato remote detector going to tell you that an object or cargo is 'hot' with bio (or, say, a person, or bit of livestock, or cargo of grain...)

If the target world IS, then it raises an entirely different issue-Bio is the gift that keeps on giving, the only reason to release it, is intentional genocide-to keep that bug from spreading from the target world, you have to cordon and hold it until it burns out, for a weaponized bug, that means until everyone that is going to die of it, has died.

If you have a "Cure", you need to have it in-stock and distributed BEFORE you deploy the bug, otherwise it WILL blow back on you...and you have to update it constantly for new random strains-this could easily eat the research budget for a given faction, and then start digging into other budgets before it's over.

Which is really, really NOT like dropping even a very dirty bomb-the damage from a dirty nuke is contained in the same hex-radioactive fallout isn't going to spread offworld in the bodies of rats or refugees, and even if it does, it's unlikely to kill anyone OTHER than the rats and refugees before it can be contained.

[Fatebringer]

If you have a "Cure", you need to have it in-stock and distributed BEFORE you deploy the bug, otherwise it WILL blow back on you...and you have to update it constantly for new random strains-this could easily eat the research budget for a given faction, and then start digging into other budgets before it's over.

Which is exatly what I was saying. If you have the ability to counter this, so might other people. The only way to fairly judge something like that would be to introduce ratings again what would once again introduce an extra element that requires tracking.

[Daemonknight]

Fate, did you read the bio rules? There was special research to counter act bioweapons. You don't need to use the Intel ratings scheme(which btw, I thought was a perfectly good system, as it meant some nations had really good intel services- ROM and Wolfnet being excellent examples of Intel Groups that basiclly had the run of the IS unless they ran into each other, and some had crap intel services- the Watch was basiclly a joke when it ran into even periphery Intel services). I never liked when the intel ratings were dropped, and now I have to pay extra to get my intelligence actions more effective. It makes less sense to spend money on individual missions, than on a larger 'expand your intelligence service cost' of building up your intel ratings.

And as for the political pressure issue, I have to point out, that the only example we have in real life of a nuclear warhead being used against an enemy, is when the US bombed Japan. And there is alot less insititutional hatred there than between some of the BT factions. Yeah sure, nukes are bad in just about every non-military sense you can think of. Then again, when it comes right down to it- if you're in a life-and-death struggle for the fate of your nation, whose going to bring up a civil war right then?

And I have to suppress a laugh at the thought of people being upset that someone isn't writing enough social backlash into their RP. There have been actions by Clan factions(myself included mind you), that NO clan warrior in the history of BT, would ever condone, or even allow to go foreward without dozens of Trials of Refusal and Grieveance. It doesn't matter for specifics, i'm sure we can all think of something someone else did, and said 'how the hell would their Warrior Council even allow that farce to take place'?

I agree that this hamstrings the GC- whats the point of issuing a ToG, if the player behind the character doesn't alter his RP, or faction goals, when his Khan loses a ToG, or is killed?


And Jedi- yes it is a perfectly viable MILITARY strategy. Its also a huge political gamble, which is what you're getting act, but from a purely military viewpoint, nuclear weapons are your best friend. The non-military backlash is likewise your worst enemy, atleast from your viewpoint. I disagree, but I have a sneaking suspicion that personal RL views on the subject are bleeding thru to the game. I personally don't have an issue with nuclear weapons, rl or otherwise, and you can view that however you like.

[Iron Mongoose]

I would argue that the cultural and social world in the US and in Japan in 1945, and up to the present, has relitively little in common with that of 2750-3065, and on that issue none in common at all, to the point where we really can't use that as a point of refrence for how someone in 3090 should view a nuke.  To simply point to semi-objective statistics rather than politics (I don't know the rules for this board, but I'd sooner say out of that issue if I could), each real atomic bombing did less damage than the fire bombings of Tokyo shortly before, and Heroshima is now a thriving city (I've never been to Nagasaki, but I'm told that apart from having a mob problem, its a lovely city again as well).  Conversly, in the late 2700s multiple entire worlds were obliterated out of existance, and others made so that they had to be abandoned later on, and have never been recovered.  The bombings in 1945 came after Japan had been in a relitively no holds bared war for 8 years, and only 25 years after the end of the massively distructive WWI; the Third Succession War was so civilized that mechs were alowed to go and hook up to coolant trucks in battle and not be shot, and no one would ever think of damaging a precious bit of lostech like a jumpship, lest they be made a periah and the whole Inner Sphere turn on them.

[Deathrider6]

The only way to put the WS genie back into the bottle so to speak would be for me to do a rules revision...I have several changes thatg were planned for the restart but they were to combat the stack of dhoom on the other hand this turn certain players have proven that stack of doom can be rendered not effective. As for the other point (CBR class weapons) they do have a use and at least with CHemical and Biological Weapons R and D can and should help. Do I feel they should be in our game of stompy robot politics? Sure but there woudl have to be a mechanic as Dave mentioned previously to balance them out. Nukes on a planet are a bad thing and the Ares Conventions of 2412 (canon ref) do state this very clearly not that anyone here pays them more than lip service. would there be more work on my end? You Betcha there would. Is this a bad thing? Maybe yes maybe no...I will admit I'm trying to lighten things up so I have time to role-play and have fun myself but I run this game so I can't have everything. To be honest if I had this game running the way I wanted it to I would have lots of work the first week of the turn and again the last week of the turn so that I could paricipate at an RP level for the two weeks in between and be able to referee disputes make rulling etc,etc. We're getting closer to that. Do I want to add new toys for all of you to fling at each other? Yes! New stuff is good. It just needs to be balanced out so we don't have "Clan Glow in the Dark Centipede" and "House Corrosive Ooze". Just my .02 C-Bills.

[Daemonknight]

I nominate the FWL for House Corrosive Ooze

[chaosxtreme]

Please the FWL is strictly nuclear in our response to such things.

Captain-General someone has used chem/bio/conventional weapons against the FWL!

C-G NUKEM!

Captain-General the Lyrans are surrendering

C-G NUKEM!

Captain-General The Lyrans are dead

C-G NUKEM!

Captain General the Lyrans have zombified and are mutating into some sort of half man, half falcon, all zombie.

C-G....wait what? Aw hell NUKEM!

[Fatebringer]

"Clan Glow in the Dark Centipede"

So that's what happened to the Burrocks in the FGC, I wondered about that

[Daemonknight]

Please the FWL is strictly nuclear in our response to such things.

Captain-General someone has used chem/bio/conventional weapons against the FWL!

C-G NUKEM!

Captain-General the Lyrans are surrendering

C-G NUKEM!

Captain-General The Lyrans are dead

C-G NUKEM!

Captain General the Lyrans have zombified and are mutating into some sort of half man, half falcon, all zombie.

C-G....wait what? Aw hell NUKEM!

You are hereby to be refered to as Duke. And if you've played DNF, thats not a compliment