Also a factor of how you roll for damage that isn't really discussed here and has an impact on play is the speed at which mech are taken off the table. Across the multiple methods of rolling damage while the total damage rolled overall might equal out in the long run the impact of how much damage is being dropped at any one time matters. Namely when you start getting 6+ damage in an attack that can very easily remove a pretty sizable swathe of lighter mechs in one go. Versus granular damage from that same attack will allow that damaged mech to stay on the board for several more turns. Even if it is only one more turn of shooting that much be committed to dealing with the damaged mechs can significantly impact the course of a match in meaningful ways. In my experience the various methods of granular damage rolls leads to less swingy/spiking results. While also adding depth by creating further pros/cons of various mechs that have more armor versus structure when you are more likely to take several smaller hits across your total health pool.
Excellent post, thanks! Yeah, I’m sure there’d be a ton to dig into regarding different damage and armor profiles when it comes to the different methods. I’m getting such interesting discussion out of this video here and elsewhere that I’m considering a follow-up taking all of this stuff into account. Not sure I’m clever enough and/or have enough time to spreadsheet all of it thoroughly, but certainly these points need to be discussed as well.
But that logic actually goes both ways and you only focussed on one side! Doing 6 dmg vs a 6 HP mech, the attacker would prefer it all depend on a single roll. But when dealing 6 dmg to a damaged mech having only 2 HP left, the attacker would very much prefer the rolls to be split and shoot like a shot gun. Like assume a 7+ to hit: 6 dmg vs 6 hp: RAW: 58% kill chance MAR: 4% kill chance DFA: 24% kill chance 6 dmg vs 2 hp: RAW: 58% kill chance MAR: 95% kill chance DFA: 80% kill chance In the end, I feel like this simplification of the damage system steals a very characteristic part of Classic Battletech. You basically lose the differentiation in the damage profile between a Hunchback and a Jenner. A hunchback rolling a quadrillion dice and then doing some partial damage feels wrong to me... But playing all or nothing on a mech supposedly carrying a dozen lasers feels as wrong as well. So if playing with a good friend, I would always welcome to actually differentiate. You've got a hunchie? Roll once, go big. Your black knight or Jenner? chip away!
Great video overall. I personally really like MAR the most of all systems because of it's critical hit chance being so much higher, while also giving lighter mechs more of a chance of surviving generally from shots from high output enemy mechs. To me crits are fantastic, because they add flavour and complications to a game that would be fairly simple and straight-forward otherwise, especially campaigns or narrative series of missions. I'd put it this way, playing Classic Battletech you're not going to remember your Catapult firing away all game and just chewing up an enemy mech with LRMs and lasers, just shooting it until it's dead. You ARE going to remember your Wolverine running up a hill to a ledge one hex higher than the Catapult and kicking it in the face, tearing its side torso open and ripping its arm off, causing an ammo explosion that blows up the Cat. Similar thing with AS, I'm not going to remember my Bushwacker just shooting a guy till he's dead, but I definitely remember the time my partner's Battle Cobra got a headshot on my full health Atlas and hollowed out the cockpit with its large lasers hahaha. Dice tells stories and crits are the twists and turns for me. Of course the limits of one crit per source of damage is still in effect so if someone brings a Kraken 3 and lands 3 sets of boxcars on your Mad Cat in one shooting you still only take one crit, but upping those chances of having a crit is more fun to me. And as others have said there's plenty of great ways to mitigate this danger if you and your opponent agree to it, like the dedicated crit dice and such.
I understand this is what they do at Southern Assault. Interesting compromise between variable damage and keeping the critical chance at the intended level.
The way I play it as well. Keeps the 2d6 statistics per damage and keeping the crit roll to one pair of dice( often red :) ). Multiple damage rolls are just more in tune with the many weapons systems fireing at once. Imho that is :)
I've seen a couple of videos and articles on this subject now, and they've all misunderstood some important points about the maths. These points make a big difference in how you should interpret each method when you try to decide which you prefer: 1) First, understand that you don't actually need to 'simulate' anything here, you can *calculate* it all with maths. Probabilistically (and therefore statistically, over many rolls), the DFA 'pilot die' method is not just 'close' to the default 'rules as written (RAW)' method... it is IDENTICAL. As is the 'multiple attack rolls' method. The difference between these methods is in how they tend to balance out within a *single game*, due to the number of rolls they involve: the RAW method is the most swingy in a single game (the fewest dice, most convenient); the 'multiple attack rolls' method is the least swingy in a single game (the most dice, most inconvenient); the DFA method is a compromise between these two extremes, balancing the pros and cons of each (medium number of dice, medium convenience). But the alternate 'single attack roll, multiple damage rolls at 3+ each' method and the 'D12 attack roll' method are probabilistically very different, and therefore yield very different statistical results. 2) The DFA method (and the 'multiple attack rolls' method) does of course yield more critical hits *if you count all pairs of sixes as valid for critical hits*. (Again, you can calculate the probabilities, no simulation required.) You may prefer it like that, or not - but it's certainly very different from RAW. However, it's easy to make it probabilistically identical to RAW if you prefer to keep it that way: For the DFA method, simply use a different colour for *one* of the smaller dice, and then count a critical hit ONLY when both the pilot die and that one special die score a six - sixes on the other small dice don't count for critical hits. This makes the DFA method probabilistically the same as the RAW method both for damage AND for critical hits. With this tweak, the DFA method is the perfect way to balance the extremes of 'not enough dice rolls to balance out the swinginess' and 'too many dice rolls, which slow things down' WITHOUT changing the overall probabilities. 3) If you like the DFA method, and you want more critical hits than you get with RAW, but not loads more, then: Ignore the bit I explained above about the special (different coloured) smaller die, and instead, when the pilot die and *one or more* smaller dice score six, simply count this as only *one* critical hit, not multiple critical hits. --- Personally, I prefer the DFA method because it balances practical pros and cons *without* changing the overall probabilities of damage, and doesn't have to change the probabilities of critical hits either if you understand how to do it right (as in point (2) above). But I also *like* to increase the probability of critical hits a bit over RAW, so in my solo games I've been using the variation I described at point (3) above. I hope this helps some readers to make a more informed decision about which method they prefer.
Great post! On your point number 3: This is how both the multiple attack rolls and the pilot die are meant to be played and how I did it in my calculations, just forgot to mention it.
@@almostgoodvariant Cool. Yes, good point - my main points still stand, but as a matter of detail point (2) is a slight tweak to the DFA method, not the DFA method as written. My main goal in point (2) was to show that, if we want to, we can use the 'pilot die' method in a way that yields the *exact* same overall probabilities as RAW, for critical hits too (not just for damage only). It takes only a very small change to the DFA implementation to achieve this. But in fact, I enjoy the increased rate of critical hits that the DFA method yields as at point (3), even though it's more than RAW. Good to know that your stats match this approach (I skimmed over that section rather quickly, so didn't linger on the stats or dust off my maths to check them). I would not enjoy the even higher rate of critical hits we'd get from counting *each and every* pairing of sixes (either in the pilot die method, or in the multiple attacks method)! The DFA approach feels just right to me at the moment. Nice video by the way, I certainly don't mean to be negative about it. Just wanted to highlight these points which I've seen various people either miss entirely, or misunderstand and misrepresent.
We have been playing using 2D6 per damage, but to balance out the crits for extra damage, rolling a pair of snake eyes deducts one damage from the total done. Playing into the idea of a botched shot messing up your overall weapon volley. It has done a very good job of balancing out the spike in critical hits.
Hey! Thanks for putting out your videos! I'm new to BattleTech and am just easing my way into playing and having my 6-year-old son learn with me. I appreciate your other videos of how to speed up gameplay. So I have only gotten 1 game in from the beginner box (I know the armored combat and alpha strike are better dollarwise, but those will be my next purchases).
Thanks for the comment! I think Alpha Strike might be the way to go with a six-year-old. I demoed Alpha Strike to a bunch of kids aged 10-12 in the past year and they got the hang of it quickly. The Beginner Box’s lighter BattleTech ruleset might also work, but I’ve never played using those rules.
I like rolling a separate pair of dice for each point of damage as it best simulates the feeling of firing multiple weapons systems. More crits is cool too. The D12 method is insane. Without a probably curve it would throw off how each unit plays. Point values would somehow need to be completely recalculated for every single unit.
I've come to the same conclusion as you and prefer multiple attack rolls (MAR). I like the chance to have more crits in a game (even if the % chance is only raised slightly, every little helps!) and I like the grindier nature of multiple attacks rolls where each attack can often nick a point of armour or two off a target (even fast light mechs). I've been gaming for decades now and so I happen to have enough differing dice that finding 10 different pairs of dice is easy enough (the ANH-5W is very silly). I find the RAW approach of single attack role to be too swingy - good rolls for you and bad rolls for your opponent can have half their force wiped on the first turn and then even if they get a little luck after that point they are generally too far behind to make a comeback. I've not tried the pilot dice approach or variable damage but don't feel the need. I really like the feel of the game with MAR.
The other benefit to the Multiple Attack Rolls method is that it works much more smoothly with certain Special abilities and alternate ammo types like HT, FLK, or SRM. Before you roll, you just choose which pairs of dice correspond to the special attacks and then can apply the special's rules to that pair if it hits. The rulebook explains this on the page that has the MAR rules. Example: if the mech deals 3 damage at Short range and has a HT 1/1/- special, then when you roll your 3 attacks at Short range, you choose one pair of dice to have the HT special (before rolling). If that one hits, it also causes the heat buildup.
I'm just here for the Spirit Cat dice. I see Spirit Cats, I press like. I have two 'boxes o' death' I use when I play. Each damage point gets its own roll, and the first box is the dedicated crit roll as well. It's fun and makes lights and mediums last much longer.
Pilot Die all the way!! I love rolling the Pilot Die method, because it increases the chance for criticals as you mentioned, but it also retains some elements of the RAW (rules as written) dice rolling method, where you still have a chance to miss completely, ie; if you roll a '1' on your Pilot die and your to-hit number was 8 or more. I feel like there is a thematic element to it as well - I can imagine a Pilot lining up his shot perfectly but slips at the last minute when pulling the trigger (bad Pilot die roll), so his shots all miss. Likewise, like RAW there is a chance that all your shots can automatically hit as well (ie; you roll a Pilot die of '6' and your to-hit number was '7'). With MAR it is very unlikely that ALL of your shots will hit or miss.
I do agree with your assessment. The multiple hit makes the game feel different and granular. I tend to use the DFA system, but allow one roll per damage as careful aim - in my experience it isn't too overpowered because if you get a 6 but only make 1dmg you'll feel bad for not rolling all at once, on the other had it can be useful for long range shots and make the game feel cinematic when used alongside the DFA system.
Our community plays with the Variable Damage rules. It works just fine and works well with SCAs, SPAs, formations, etc. Based on our experience, we tried the DFA's pilot dice with our games before. But we ditched it because it creates too much of an imbalance when paired with SCAs and SPAs. We also can't agree on solving some issues with the pilot dice system. For example, if a player decides to use a reroll (Lucky SPA), we can't agree if we have to reroll the entire roll (together with the pilot die), just the pilot die, or just one of the dice. So we decided to just go with the variable damage. And we haven't had any problems since then.
I thinkPilot dice gives a more realistic feel to me especially if you are coming from classic BT, where you are accustomed to fire many different weapons.
Thanks for a great video! I played with a default system and it feels pretty meh. Gonna to try multiple attack and DFA pilot die rolls today. Again thanks!
I've played a couple of games with D12 MAR. I like that it increases the chance for crits, making it feel more like CBT in terms of damage. I also feel like it evens out the playing field between Inner Sphere and Clans by making those high rolls needed by the Sphere a little more likely.
Thinking about getting into Alpha Strike (use to play battle tech decades ago) and one of the videos I watch about the dice roll methods really hit home. Large damage mechs will decimate in one shot small light mechs with a lucky 'single hit'. This makes crits and armor meaningless with the smaller mech as one hit kills. Rolling multiple dice pairs for each potential damage means you will not 'all hit' or 'all miss' making crits something that can affect light mechs.
Multiple Attack Rolls feels the best, like you are firing several weapons systems at once, any of which have an equal chance at a certain range to miss or hit (Alpha Strike doesn't really represent pulse lasers and their increased accuracy) . Also stops units being simply deleted with a single Dice roll, which is underwhelming. Feels more like true Battletech, including more weapons equaling more chances to do a crit (even tough in Alpha Strike with Multiple Attack Dice it would be capped at one "natural crit" of 12- but you still have more chances to do that one crit).
I believe that Alpha Strike gives some extra damage when Pulse Lasers are present in significant numbers. Take the Rifleman IIC, which has 5 damage in each range bracket. For the most part, Alpha Strike damage seems to be "how much damage does this mech fire" divided by 10. Example being a Hunchback, AC/20 does 20, pair of medium lasers does 10 total - all of that adds up to 30 damage, and the Hunchback does 3 damage at medium range. So, back to the Rifleman IIC, four large pulse lasers does 40 damage, but the Rifleman IIC has 5 damage. Likewise the Wraith TR1 variant does 21 damage if all 3 pulse lasers hit, which would normally round to 2 damage, but the Wraith in Alpha Strike does 3 damage. Seems to me in both cases they've rounded up the damage.
I use the multiple attack rolls variant rule from the Commander's Edition Alpha Strike. I've tried the pilot die system from DFA (I'm a patreon supporter of theirs) but I didn't like the "feel" of it.
I play with Death from Above style. I prefer it because when using Lucky pts, I use them to modify the pilot die instead of the damage. Feels more right that a pilots aim being lucky instead of a lucky stray shot. I've rolled bad on pilot die then used a lucky point and scoring a critical hit. Once effectively head shoting an Atlas with a Wasp of all things. My opponent after witnessing that called that mech "lucky bastard", so later I stenciled the name on its base.
i agree with multiple attack rolls. just wiping units off the board in 7 damage hits feels anticlimactic. makes the critical hit table seem superfluous as mechs die so quickly
Yep, one of my issues with RAW. I guess the variable damage rule (roll 1d6 per damage point, 3+ delivers damage) was written to prevent exactly this but boy do I not like the idea.
The one use I can see for RAW is if you're doing a truly large scale battle. Throw a cluster at a regiment and speed pays off because no individual unit really matters that much. But like most everyone I prefer variable damage, and the pilot die system works the best. A bit of frustration is okay because it levels out through the course of the game.
As someone who hasn't played since high school in '88 I really appreciate how you broke things down in your video. Thank you. I think I'm going to be using the DFA style when I get my teenager into playing. Great video.
@@danwehmeier9717 that’s how it is in the rulebook, yeah. I believe Southern Assault’s idea is that only a specific pair of dice can land that one crit, not every pair.
I'm trying a kind of 2.0 version of the game and calling it Beta Strike. It's like Alpha Strike but with a more Mechwarrior sim like feel with the following house rules; 1) Initiative sequence; Highest roll moves first instead of last, and does their unit firing at the beginning, during or at the end of their movement. Damage takes effect immediately. With a commander, the player may choose their units to act in any order they like. Without a commander, or if the commander is killed, then movement goes from the size 1 units first, to size 2, 3 then 4. This allows units to do 'shots on the run' then get into cover. Use target's most recent TMM 2) Us the Death from Above pilot die system for attack rolls 3) Applying damage; use a / X to cross off damage for each armour bubble. This effectively doubles the armour and structure of all units. eg, a unit takes 3 points of damage, instead of blotting out 3 armour bubbles, the first bubble gets a / and X and the second bubble gets a /. This increases the longevity of all units to help balance rule 1. 4) Clan Range; Clan players get a slight bump in their range bracket; Short= up to 8" or 4 hexes, Medium= 9" to 26" or 5 to 13 hexes, Long= 27" to 44" or 14 to 22 hexes. This represents the better ranges of Clan weapons. 5) Play it on mapheets preferably; Half the unit unit movement as described in the Commanders Edition. Alpha Strike (Beta Strike) is an abstract version of the game, and mapsheets are abstract battlefields. Classic Battletech is a detailed version of the game and 3d battlefields are detailed terrain sets. Give it a try if you're open to experimentation.
Interesting! That’s a pretty significant change to how the system works and almost like a different game entirely, fitting, then, that you’d call it Beta Strike! Would love to give it a go some time, will need to see if someone likes the idea.
@@almostgoodvariant Yeah it’s enough of a change from the base game that it needs another name. There was one other rule I’m looking to try next game. And funny enough it’s an actual Alpha Strike. One 2d6 roll at a +1 to hit. Do full damage, plus overheat damage, plus 1. Adds 1 point per Over Heat value plus 1 extra heat. The Alpha Strike was always supposed to be a devestating attack, and in the PC games it usually focuses on one part of the mech with 1 pull of the trigger.
I prefer MAR. I loathe the option of the "pilot die". It makes it way too swingy, IMO. Multiple Attack Role gives a bit more flexibility than the all-or-nothing for RAW.
It just occurred to me: D12 with MAR? One roll with D12 sounds really awful, but MAR would have some intresting implications. Bad pilot in good mech is better than elite pilot in bad mech, and if your mech has very specific range bracket where it does most of its damage potential, it REALLY pays off to keep it there. Not to mention multi-crit glory shots become somewhat likely. And i guess someone with more experience could come up even more weird consequences...
I also heard people using D12 for attacks. I understood this is with a colored dice for criticals. Not sure how that works out and whether its 1 D12 or multiple for each 'attack' point. D12 is more even vs 2D6 I guess.
D12 is flat probably vs bell curve of 2d6. It does increase the chance of crit, but also decrease the chances to hit in the mid range of the possible results. I played some D12 games because people playing with me were DnD players and it was easier for them to catch up. Personally I prefer 2d6 because it feels more like a simulation, where a trained soldier is more likely to reliably deliver a sure shot than hitting a bullseye, or fumbling it completely. Also, I like to switch between the ways of calculating to hit depending on the game scale. It's MAR/PilotDie for under one lance or a star per side, and RAW when there's 2+ lances per side.
My kids and I play with d12s, one for each attack point in a given shot. I haven't noticed a big difference in frequency of hits or crits from using 2d6 per attack point, but since my kids are a bit younger the numbers on the d12 are easier for them to read. What I love about BTech, especially AS, is how malleable it is.
We play D12 but use one different coloured dice for the "Crit" chance - so if you had damage 3 you would roll 2d12 of 1 colour and 1d12 crit dice - it works for us :)
Also a factor of how you roll for damage that isn't really discussed here and has an impact on play is the speed at which mech are taken off the table. Across the multiple methods of rolling damage while the total damage rolled overall might equal out in the long run the impact of how much damage is being dropped at any one time matters. Namely when you start getting 6+ damage in an attack that can very easily remove a pretty sizable swathe of lighter mechs in one go. Versus granular damage from that same attack will allow that damaged mech to stay on the board for several more turns. Even if it is only one more turn of shooting that much be committed to dealing with the damaged mechs can significantly impact the course of a match in meaningful ways.
In my experience the various methods of granular damage rolls leads to less swingy/spiking results. While also adding depth by creating further pros/cons of various mechs that have more armor versus structure when you are more likely to take several smaller hits across your total health pool.
Excellent post, thanks! Yeah, I’m sure there’d be a ton to dig into regarding different damage and armor profiles when it comes to the different methods. I’m getting such interesting discussion out of this video here and elsewhere that I’m considering a follow-up taking all of this stuff into account. Not sure I’m clever enough and/or have enough time to spreadsheet all of it thoroughly, but certainly these points need to be discussed as well.
But that logic actually goes both ways and you only focussed on one side!
Doing 6 dmg vs a 6 HP mech, the attacker would prefer it all depend on a single roll.
But when dealing 6 dmg to a damaged mech having only 2 HP left, the attacker would very much prefer the rolls to be split and shoot like a shot gun.
Like assume a 7+ to hit:
6 dmg vs 6 hp:
RAW: 58% kill chance
MAR: 4% kill chance
DFA: 24% kill chance
6 dmg vs 2 hp:
RAW: 58% kill chance
MAR: 95% kill chance
DFA: 80% kill chance
In the end, I feel like this simplification of the damage system steals a very characteristic part of Classic Battletech. You basically lose the differentiation in the damage profile between a Hunchback and a Jenner. A hunchback rolling a quadrillion dice and then doing some partial damage feels wrong to me... But playing all or nothing on a mech supposedly carrying a dozen lasers feels as wrong as well. So if playing with a good friend, I would always welcome to actually differentiate. You've got a hunchie? Roll once, go big. Your black knight or Jenner? chip away!
Great video overall. I personally really like MAR the most of all systems because of it's critical hit chance being so much higher, while also giving lighter mechs more of a chance of surviving generally from shots from high output enemy mechs.
To me crits are fantastic, because they add flavour and complications to a game that would be fairly simple and straight-forward otherwise, especially campaigns or narrative series of missions. I'd put it this way, playing Classic Battletech you're not going to remember your Catapult firing away all game and just chewing up an enemy mech with LRMs and lasers, just shooting it until it's dead. You ARE going to remember your Wolverine running up a hill to a ledge one hex higher than the Catapult and kicking it in the face, tearing its side torso open and ripping its arm off, causing an ammo explosion that blows up the Cat. Similar thing with AS, I'm not going to remember my Bushwacker just shooting a guy till he's dead, but I definitely remember the time my partner's Battle Cobra got a headshot on my full health Atlas and hollowed out the cockpit with its large lasers hahaha. Dice tells stories and crits are the twists and turns for me.
Of course the limits of one crit per source of damage is still in effect so if someone brings a Kraken 3 and lands 3 sets of boxcars on your Mad Cat in one shooting you still only take one crit, but upping those chances of having a crit is more fun to me. And as others have said there's plenty of great ways to mitigate this danger if you and your opponent agree to it, like the dedicated crit dice and such.
Multiple Attack rolls but with a dedicated critical hit dice pair (so only one chance every attack roll to land a critical)
I understand this is what they do at Southern Assault. Interesting compromise between variable damage and keeping the critical chance at the intended level.
This is the local variant in popular use in my area too.
The way I play it as well. Keeps the 2d6 statistics per damage and keeping the crit roll to one pair of dice( often red :) ). Multiple damage rolls are just more in tune with the many weapons systems fireing at once. Imho that is :)
I've seen a couple of videos and articles on this subject now, and they've all misunderstood some important points about the maths. These points make a big difference in how you should interpret each method when you try to decide which you prefer:
1) First, understand that you don't actually need to 'simulate' anything here, you can *calculate* it all with maths.
Probabilistically (and therefore statistically, over many rolls), the DFA 'pilot die' method is not just 'close' to the default 'rules as written (RAW)' method... it is IDENTICAL. As is the 'multiple attack rolls' method.
The difference between these methods is in how they tend to balance out within a *single game*, due to the number of rolls they involve: the RAW method is the most swingy in a single game (the fewest dice, most convenient); the 'multiple attack rolls' method is the least swingy in a single game (the most dice, most inconvenient); the DFA method is a compromise between these two extremes, balancing the pros and cons of each (medium number of dice, medium convenience).
But the alternate 'single attack roll, multiple damage rolls at 3+ each' method and the 'D12 attack roll' method are probabilistically very different, and therefore yield very different statistical results.
2) The DFA method (and the 'multiple attack rolls' method) does of course yield more critical hits *if you count all pairs of sixes as valid for critical hits*. (Again, you can calculate the probabilities, no simulation required.) You may prefer it like that, or not - but it's certainly very different from RAW. However, it's easy to make it probabilistically identical to RAW if you prefer to keep it that way:
For the DFA method, simply use a different colour for *one* of the smaller dice, and then count a critical hit ONLY when both the pilot die and that one special die score a six - sixes on the other small dice don't count for critical hits. This makes the DFA method probabilistically the same as the RAW method both for damage AND for critical hits.
With this tweak, the DFA method is the perfect way to balance the extremes of 'not enough dice rolls to balance out the swinginess' and 'too many dice rolls, which slow things down' WITHOUT changing the overall probabilities.
3) If you like the DFA method, and you want more critical hits than you get with RAW, but not loads more, then: Ignore the bit I explained above about the special (different coloured) smaller die, and instead, when the pilot die and *one or more* smaller dice score six, simply count this as only *one* critical hit, not multiple critical hits.
---
Personally, I prefer the DFA method because it balances practical pros and cons *without* changing the overall probabilities of damage, and doesn't have to change the probabilities of critical hits either if you understand how to do it right (as in point (2) above). But I also *like* to increase the probability of critical hits a bit over RAW, so in my solo games I've been using the variation I described at point (3) above.
I hope this helps some readers to make a more informed decision about which method they prefer.
Great post! On your point number 3: This is how both the multiple attack rolls and the pilot die are meant to be played and how I did it in my calculations, just forgot to mention it.
@@almostgoodvariant Cool. Yes, good point - my main points still stand, but as a matter of detail point (2) is a slight tweak to the DFA method, not the DFA method as written.
My main goal in point (2) was to show that, if we want to, we can use the 'pilot die' method in a way that yields the *exact* same overall probabilities as RAW, for critical hits too (not just for damage only). It takes only a very small change to the DFA implementation to achieve this.
But in fact, I enjoy the increased rate of critical hits that the DFA method yields as at point (3), even though it's more than RAW. Good to know that your stats match this approach (I skimmed over that section rather quickly, so didn't linger on the stats or dust off my maths to check them).
I would not enjoy the even higher rate of critical hits we'd get from counting *each and every* pairing of sixes (either in the pilot die method, or in the multiple attacks method)! The DFA approach feels just right to me at the moment.
Nice video by the way, I certainly don't mean to be negative about it. Just wanted to highlight these points which I've seen various people either miss entirely, or misunderstand and misrepresent.
Just found your channel really great videos! Im just getting into battletech so these have been fantastic!
We have been playing using 2D6 per damage, but to balance out the crits for extra damage, rolling a pair of snake eyes deducts one damage from the total done. Playing into the idea of a botched shot messing up your overall weapon volley. It has done a very good job of balancing out the spike in critical hits.
Interesting compromise! I’d love to run the numbers on that.
Hey! Thanks for putting out your videos! I'm new to BattleTech and am just easing my way into playing and having my 6-year-old son learn with me. I appreciate your other videos of how to speed up gameplay. So I have only gotten 1 game in from the beginner box (I know the armored combat and alpha strike are better dollarwise, but those will be my next purchases).
Thanks for the comment! I think Alpha Strike might be the way to go with a six-year-old. I demoed Alpha Strike to a bunch of kids aged 10-12 in the past year and they got the hang of it quickly. The Beginner Box’s lighter BattleTech ruleset might also work, but I’ve never played using those rules.
I like rolling a separate pair of dice for each point of damage as it best simulates the feeling of firing multiple weapons systems. More crits is cool too. The D12 method is insane. Without a probably curve it would throw off how each unit plays. Point values would somehow need to be completely recalculated for every single unit.
I've come to the same conclusion as you and prefer multiple attack rolls (MAR). I like the chance to have more crits in a game (even if the % chance is only raised slightly, every little helps!) and I like the grindier nature of multiple attacks rolls where each attack can often nick a point of armour or two off a target (even fast light mechs). I've been gaming for decades now and so I happen to have enough differing dice that finding 10 different pairs of dice is easy enough (the ANH-5W is very silly).
I find the RAW approach of single attack role to be too swingy - good rolls for you and bad rolls for your opponent can have half their force wiped on the first turn and then even if they get a little luck after that point they are generally too far behind to make a comeback.
I've not tried the pilot dice approach or variable damage but don't feel the need. I really like the feel of the game with MAR.
Pilot die is cool, give it a go sometime :)
The other benefit to the Multiple Attack Rolls method is that it works much more smoothly with certain Special abilities and alternate ammo types like HT, FLK, or SRM. Before you roll, you just choose which pairs of dice correspond to the special attacks and then can apply the special's rules to that pair if it hits. The rulebook explains this on the page that has the MAR rules. Example: if the mech deals 3 damage at Short range and has a HT 1/1/- special, then when you roll your 3 attacks at Short range, you choose one pair of dice to have the HT special (before rolling). If that one hits, it also causes the heat buildup.
I'm just here for the Spirit Cat dice. I see Spirit Cats, I press like.
I have two 'boxes o' death' I use when I play. Each damage point gets its own roll, and the first box is the dedicated crit roll as well. It's fun and makes lights and mediums last much longer.
The community here in Colorado uses MAR. For large games at home I'll use RAW just for sake of speed.
I actually play the 2nd method that you showed where you roll a number of dice equal to damage and do 1 damage per 3+. It works just fine.
Pilot Die all the way!! I love rolling the Pilot Die method, because it increases the chance for criticals as you mentioned, but it also retains some elements of the RAW (rules as written) dice rolling method, where you still have a chance to miss completely, ie; if you roll a '1' on your Pilot die and your to-hit number was 8 or more. I feel like there is a thematic element to it as well - I can imagine a Pilot lining up his shot perfectly but slips at the last minute when pulling the trigger (bad Pilot die roll), so his shots all miss. Likewise, like RAW there is a chance that all your shots can automatically hit as well (ie; you roll a Pilot die of '6' and your to-hit number was '7'). With MAR it is very unlikely that ALL of your shots will hit or miss.
Excellent points! Some of it’s something I started thinking about after finishing the video.
I do agree with your assessment. The multiple hit makes the game feel different and granular. I tend to use the DFA system, but allow one roll per damage as careful aim - in my experience it isn't too overpowered because if you get a 6 but only make 1dmg you'll feel bad for not rolling all at once, on the other had it can be useful for long range shots and make the game feel cinematic when used alongside the DFA system.
Our community plays with the Variable Damage rules. It works just fine and works well with SCAs, SPAs, formations, etc.
Based on our experience, we tried the DFA's pilot dice with our games before. But we ditched it because it creates too much of an imbalance when paired with SCAs and SPAs. We also can't agree on solving some issues with the pilot dice system. For example, if a player decides to use a reroll (Lucky SPA), we can't agree if we have to reroll the entire roll (together with the pilot die), just the pilot die, or just one of the dice.
So we decided to just go with the variable damage. And we haven't had any problems since then.
I thinkPilot dice gives a more realistic feel to me especially if you are coming from classic BT, where you are accustomed to fire many different weapons.
Thanks for a great video! I played with a default system and it feels pretty meh. Gonna to try multiple attack and DFA pilot die rolls today. Again thanks!
I've played a couple of games with D12 MAR. I like that it increases the chance for crits, making it feel more like CBT in terms of damage. I also feel like it evens out the playing field between Inner Sphere and Clans by making those high rolls needed by the Sphere a little more likely.
That’s a good point! Maybe I’d need to run these numbers in a follow-up video.
Thinking about getting into Alpha Strike (use to play battle tech decades ago) and one of the videos I watch about the dice roll methods really hit home. Large damage mechs will decimate in one shot small light mechs with a lucky 'single hit'. This makes crits and armor meaningless with the smaller mech as one hit kills. Rolling multiple dice pairs for each potential damage means you will not 'all hit' or 'all miss' making crits something that can affect light mechs.
Multiple Attack Rolls feels the best, like you are firing several weapons systems at once, any of which have an equal chance at a certain range to miss or hit (Alpha Strike doesn't really represent pulse lasers and their increased accuracy) . Also stops units being simply deleted with a single Dice roll, which is underwhelming. Feels more like true Battletech, including more weapons equaling more chances to do a crit (even tough in Alpha Strike with Multiple Attack Dice it would be capped at one "natural crit" of 12- but you still have more chances to do that one crit).
I believe that Alpha Strike gives some extra damage when Pulse Lasers are present in significant numbers. Take the Rifleman IIC, which has 5 damage in each range bracket. For the most part, Alpha Strike damage seems to be "how much damage does this mech fire" divided by 10. Example being a Hunchback, AC/20 does 20, pair of medium lasers does 10 total - all of that adds up to 30 damage, and the Hunchback does 3 damage at medium range. So, back to the Rifleman IIC, four large pulse lasers does 40 damage, but the Rifleman IIC has 5 damage. Likewise the Wraith TR1 variant does 21 damage if all 3 pulse lasers hit, which would normally round to 2 damage, but the Wraith in Alpha Strike does 3 damage. Seems to me in both cases they've rounded up the damage.
Our first games used the 3+ damage point method.
I use the multiple attack rolls variant rule from the Commander's Edition Alpha Strike. I've tried the pilot die system from DFA (I'm a patreon supporter of theirs) but I didn't like the "feel" of it.
I play with Death from Above style. I prefer it because when using Lucky pts, I use them to modify the pilot die instead of the damage. Feels more right that a pilots aim being lucky instead of a lucky stray shot. I've rolled bad on pilot die then used a lucky point and scoring a critical hit. Once effectively head shoting an Atlas with a Wasp of all things. My opponent after witnessing that called that mech "lucky bastard", so later I stenciled the name on its base.
i agree with multiple attack rolls. just wiping units off the board in 7 damage hits feels anticlimactic. makes the critical hit table seem superfluous as mechs die so quickly
Yep, one of my issues with RAW. I guess the variable damage rule (roll 1d6 per damage point, 3+ delivers damage) was written to prevent exactly this but boy do I not like the idea.
I havn't played enough AS, but would the RAW allow for overkill, and thus be a interesting factor on profiles and list design?
Interesting thanks
The one use I can see for RAW is if you're doing a truly large scale battle. Throw a cluster at a regiment and speed pays off because no individual unit really matters that much. But like most everyone I prefer variable damage, and the pilot die system works the best. A bit of frustration is okay because it levels out through the course of the game.
Definitely, speed is the main advantage of RAW. If I’d play a game with like 1000-ish PV per side I’d definitely suggest using RAW.
As someone who hasn't played since high school in '88 I really appreciate how you broke things down in your video. Thank you. I think I'm going to be using the DFA style when I get my teenager into playing. Great video.
Thanks! I’ve played Alpha Strike with some kids aged 10-12 and they grokked the system super quickly. I’m sure yours will too!
More Dice = More FUN!
I played default once and it was terribly boring.
MAR with a maximum of 1 crit per attack phase. Don’t need to add extra dice like they do in Southern Assault.
@@danwehmeier9717 that’s how it is in the rulebook, yeah. I believe Southern Assault’s idea is that only a specific pair of dice can land that one crit, not every pair.
I just use a lot of D12 but you can only do one critical max per roll +1 crit for strut
only multiple attack rolls - true variant
I'm trying a kind of 2.0 version of the game and calling it Beta Strike. It's like Alpha Strike but with a more Mechwarrior sim like feel with the following house rules;
1) Initiative sequence; Highest roll moves first instead of last, and does their unit firing at the beginning, during or at the end of their movement. Damage takes effect immediately. With a commander, the player may choose their units to act in any order they like. Without a commander, or if the commander is killed, then movement goes from the size 1 units first, to size 2, 3 then 4. This allows units to do 'shots on the run' then get into cover. Use target's most recent TMM
2) Us the Death from Above pilot die system for attack rolls
3) Applying damage; use a / X to cross off damage for each armour bubble. This effectively doubles the armour and structure of all units. eg, a unit takes 3 points of damage, instead of blotting out 3 armour bubbles, the first bubble gets a / and X and the second bubble gets a /. This increases the longevity of all units to help balance rule 1.
4) Clan Range; Clan players get a slight bump in their range bracket; Short= up to 8" or 4 hexes, Medium= 9" to 26" or 5 to 13 hexes, Long= 27" to 44" or 14 to 22 hexes. This represents the better ranges of Clan weapons.
5) Play it on mapheets preferably; Half the unit unit movement as described in the Commanders Edition. Alpha Strike (Beta Strike) is an abstract version of the game, and mapsheets are abstract battlefields. Classic Battletech is a detailed version of the game and 3d battlefields are detailed terrain sets.
Give it a try if you're open to experimentation.
Interesting! That’s a pretty significant change to how the system works and almost like a different game entirely, fitting, then, that you’d call it Beta Strike! Would love to give it a go some time, will need to see if someone likes the idea.
@@almostgoodvariant Yeah it’s enough of a change from the base game that it needs another name. There was one other rule I’m looking to try next game. And funny enough it’s an actual Alpha Strike. One 2d6 roll at a +1 to hit. Do full damage, plus overheat damage, plus 1. Adds 1 point per Over Heat value plus 1 extra heat. The Alpha Strike was always supposed to be a devestating attack, and in the PC games it usually focuses on one part of the mech with 1 pull of the trigger.
I prefer MAR. I loathe the option of the "pilot die". It makes it way too swingy, IMO. Multiple Attack Role gives a bit more flexibility than the all-or-nothing for RAW.
Pilot Die is the middle option in terms of swingyness yeah? RAW is the swingiest, Pilot Die in the middle, MAR the least swingy.
@@CTCParadox Agreed. That's why I prefer MAR all the way.
Loved the video, only suggestion is don''t use fancy dice. I can never tell if they are rolling a 6 or a 1. :)
Good point! However, BattleTech dice always have the logo/fancy picture as a 6.
The DFA system seems to frequently be all or nothing.
That is my issue with it. However, in that sense it does align more with the way the AS rules are written.
@@almostgoodvariant Sure, but I think that it's in their classic BT rules, too.
It just occurred to me: D12 with MAR?
One roll with D12 sounds really awful, but MAR would have some intresting implications. Bad pilot in good mech is better than elite pilot in bad mech, and if your mech has very specific range bracket where it does most of its damage potential, it REALLY pays off to keep it there. Not to mention multi-crit glory shots become somewhat likely.
And i guess someone with more experience could come up even more weird consequences...
Interesting thought! Maybe I’ll need to run these numbers in a follow-up video.
Pilot die is why I don't play Alpha Strike. Really, really dislike it.
Interesting! Just really don’t like how it feels or something else? I suppose your local players like to only use it, then.
I also heard people using D12 for attacks. I understood this is with a colored dice for criticals. Not sure how that works out and whether its 1 D12 or multiple for each 'attack' point. D12 is more even vs 2D6 I guess.
D12 is flat probably vs bell curve of 2d6. It does increase the chance of crit, but also decrease the chances to hit in the mid range of the possible results.
I played some D12 games because people playing with me were DnD players and it was easier for them to catch up. Personally I prefer 2d6 because it feels more like a simulation, where a trained soldier is more likely to reliably deliver a sure shot than hitting a bullseye, or fumbling it completely.
Also, I like to switch between the ways of calculating to hit depending on the game scale. It's MAR/PilotDie for under one lance or a star per side, and RAW when there's 2+ lances per side.
My kids and I play with d12s, one for each attack point in a given shot. I haven't noticed a big difference in frequency of hits or crits from using 2d6 per attack point, but since my kids are a bit younger the numbers on the d12 are easier for them to read.
What I love about BTech, especially AS, is how malleable it is.
We play D12 but use one different coloured dice for the "Crit" chance - so if you had damage 3 you would roll 2d12 of 1 colour and 1d12 crit dice - it works for us :)