Blasted wrote:
1. FSM. It's a complete turd.
When BV1 was all the rage, there was a large problem with light vehicle swarms. FSM was introduced as an integral part of BV2 to address it. It's terrible in both implementation and affect, to the point that most players don't use it. Of course, being designed as a non optional part of BV2, this leads to light vehicle swarms being overly good again. (As an aside, savanahs used to be the swarmer of choice, but I believe that most players have moved to other motive systems due to changes to stop hovercraft introduced in Total War.)
FSM isn't integral to BV2. In fact it's actually impossible to calculate until you know the units each side has already chosen.
FSM was put in place more to counter Initiative sinking than to counter vehicle swarms (vehicle swarms are pretty much an edge case), and even then, it's only an issue if you're really getting into 4 to 1 odds or greater that it starts to become an issue. It's also difficult to 'break' this unless you're trying to put yourself at a deliberate disadvantage.
2. Doesn't take into consideration placement.
There are many 'mechs out there with placement issues, but let me pick on the original Marauder. Stupid crit placement means that a decent player will explode it much earlier than should otherwise have happened. It is in no way worth the value assigned to it. It's a limitation of the BV system which can't be addressed by fiddling the numbers.
Uh... no. The best you can do angle to the side with ammo and hope you crit it after you've already stripped away all the torso armor. It's a disadvantage, but it's very, very minor. I'd be surprised if it came up enough to be more than a minor statical blip. Short of locations with lone ammo slots, most other placement is demonstrably negligible in effects it has on fights and thus not worthy of a note in BV.
Theres the issue of weapons mounter in legs, for the whole like 5 that actually do that, but again, the difference in actual use is so small as to not warrant a noticeable BV change.
3. Overpricing of options.
Again, some issues from BV1 (such as LPL boats coring out 'mechs in a single turn) has lead to the great overcosting of some equipment. c3 and LPLs fit there. No one takes c3 lances, they're far too expensive under BV2 (Fair warning for the oblivious - that was hyperbole, but the point stands). Specialized LPL 'mechs barely make their value, but mediocre 'mechs equiping them get costed as if they were excellent. This is especially bad for IS LPLs which are poor weapons to begin with.
This has lead to an inbalance where bad 'mechs are costed the same as good. See my earlier comment on trap options.
c3 lances are
slightly over costed. They're still taken and used, often religiously by some people because despite being slightly over costed, they are that good.
Your statement about Clan Large Pulse Lasers inflating BV is likewise wrong. An urbanmech with 2 clan large pulse lasers and a TC is 1056. With an Ultra AC 20 instead it's 915. A 35 tonner with a 6/9 movement, the same armor and 2 clan large pulse lasers and TC is 1541 BV. It's not the PLGL that's increasing the BV, it's the speed of the mech. Likewise you won't find a mediocre machine that has a BV equal to a superb machine just because of the equipment it carries. You can get some slightly over costed machines, namely with c3 (if you join it to a network) or with MASC, but those are about the biggest offenders for being incorrectly costed, and they wouldn't preclude you from using those machines against equal BV machines and being able to win.
Going on to say that "You can fix this with tactics" is stupid. As if your opponent is not going to use tactics as well. Your adversary who has parked a couple of gauss tanks at the edge of the map isn't going to be surprised by your attempts to get into SRM range to deliver infernos or an LBX20 blast. Furthermore, just because it's possible to win with bad options, doesn't mean BV2 isn't imbalanced. Also, saying that it's balanced as long as you don't use the imbalanced options is nuts. D&D classes are balanced as long as everyone is a wizard or you party consists of monks. It's a ridiculous argument. Simply the fact that you continually run into the same 'mechs again and again under BV2 should be confirmation that there's an issue with the balance.
An MML launcher is capable of providing mobile cover in the form of Smoke LRMs while closing, and then large salvos of SRMs once in range, not to mention Inferno rounds which will basically remove the tank without effort. An LB-10-X has a range only 4 hexes shorter than the gauss, hitting more often due to the -1, and pulls out 6 chances to do bad things to the tank on average. An LB-5-X is 1 hex shorter range and averages 3 chances on a hit. Using fast mechs and cover makes it possible to close with the tank, and using spotters and indirect LRM fire make it possible to take out the tank without the need to actually be able to be hit back. Depending on positioning, a few artillery rounds could ruin it as well, not to mention that if you take the tank and end up fighting in a jungle it's almost worthless.
I don't see the same mechs over and over. I see some mechs more than others, like the Hellstar because they're effective and easy to use, but I just as often see Hellstars ripped to shreds by 3025 archers using indirect fire, and if you actually do testing, you see that supposedly inferior (in terms of player perspective) mechs actually take out a Hellstar 1 on 1 more than they get beaten.
None of this should be of any surprise to Btech players. You cannot use the battletech forums without tripping over a new "BV2 is bad, here's my solution" threads which spawn again every month or so. It's been the case for the last five years. I find the assertion that it is balanced as disconcerting as the time I ran into a grognard espousing 1E monks as wizard slayers.
Well, if you had an actual clue what you were talking about, or apparently any ability to actually play battletech you'd understand why BV2 is relatively balanced. It is a useful tool, and it basically does do what it advertises and BT as a whole isn't even remotely close to:
However the game is hideously imbalanced and suffers from the type of trap options D&D can only dream about.
Come back once you learn the difference between 'minor balance issues' and 'hideously imbalanced with trap options D&D can only dream about.' It'd be nice if you brought something that actually shows this hideous imbalance too. Maybe you can cite a specific mech, cannon or custom that breaks BV2? Or a force composition that does so?