Battletech

[Mutazoia]

Sure, it's possible. Lemme run you through the math: to one-shot a Mech without breaching its armor, you have to roll a 2 on 2d6. That's a 1/36 probability. Then you have to roll a 12 (because you have to get 3 engine crits), with is another 1/36. Then all three hits have to be on the engine, which takes up half the crit slots in the location, so that's roughly 1/8 (actually a little lower, given that you reroll if you hit the same crit slot). Total probability: 1/10368. Doing it three times in a row would be that probability cubed, with exceeds 1 in 1000000000000 (that's one trillion).

Actually a hit or two to non cased ammo would work just as well as getting 3 successive engine hits, and has a higher probability... if some one is stupid or cocky enough not to case their ammo

[Mutazoia]

But this is all beside the point. My problem isn't that he's special. I could live with all that if he had any flaws, but he doesn't. He's perfect. He's impossible. He's totally unrelatable, and that makes him unlikable to me. The rules that he breaks so casually are supposed to be as immutable as the laws of physics in the real world. Kai can walk outside, declare that gravity doesn't apply any more, and start flying. That's seriously ****ed up.

Well...it might be just me but the fact that he's the main character of a book MAKES him special...your not going to read a book about some one who sits around reading comic books for 200 some-odd pages. Main characters in ANY genera are special, even if they are supposed to be ordinary people in extraordinary situations. Watch Die Hard... do you think a real person could dive off the exploding roof of a sky scraper, swing on a fire hose and pop safely through a reinforced plate glass window? Hell no. Main characters get to suspend the laws of pretty much anything if it makes a story people will want to read/watch.

[John Campbell]

On a side note...best ramming attack I ever did was with a custom locust mod, MASC and Triple Str. Myomer...
MASC and TSM aren't compatible.

I am reminded, though, of my favorite custom Locust, which was the result of a bit of fluff in TR:3050 describing how the Capellans were experimenting with TSM on the old LCT-1V, and my noticing that there was absolutely no way an LCT-1V could get hot enough for the TSM to activate. (This was before people started talking about shutting off heat sinks, which I still consider kind of cheesy.)

So I built a Locust that could.

LCT-7L Locust
20 tons
160 XL (8/12/0)
10 (20) DHS
Endo Steel
Triple-Strength Myomer
standard LCT-1V armor (64 points; head 8, side torsos 8/2, CT 10/2, arms 4, legs 8 and gods I can still do that off the top of my head)
ML CT
3xML RA
3xML LA

BV: 830
2,992,000.00 C-Bills

If it fires all seven MLs and runs, it gains 3 heat. Do this for three rounds, and the TSM kicks in. Then you drop down to using six MLs and running, and it's heat-neutral, stays right there at the sweet spot. It's about as well-armored as you can make a 20-tonner (not very). With the TSM hot, it moves 9/14. And it's shooting six medium lasers. Using it on other mechs its size is like tossing beer cans into a wood chipper.

It has an XL, which I'm not fond of, but it's small enough that it's not too ridiculously expensive, and it's a 20-ton mech... it's fragile enough that it's not going to survive long after the side torso is opened up in any case.

The biggest downside I've found is that the arms are standard-Locust under-armored... a single large laser (or Munchclan ER ML) hit will take one off completely, and the bulk of its firepower is in its arms. But I didn't want to rearrange the armor, and the MLs in the arms are an obvious match for the Locust visuals. (The real Locust, not the Reseen thing. Though IIRC the Reseen Locust isn't too bad. Not like the abortion they're calling a Marauder now.)


Actually a hit or two to non cased ammo would work just as well as getting 3 successive engine hits, and has a higher probability... if some one is stupid or cocky enough not to case their ammo
Or an Inner Sphere XL and any ammo at all (even a torso-mounted Gauss), CASEd or not. Which is woefully common in canon designs.


edit: Incidentally, mechs like that Locust are the reason that BV exists. It's a 20-ton mech with a BV more typical of a mid-range medium and higher than a couple of the crappier heavies. Or a Charger. And it totally deserves it. It'll eat any canon 20-tonner I'm familiar with for lunch, and it really is a match for much heavier mechs... and not just the brain-damaged designs like the Charger*. If you're balancing things by straight-up tonnage, a few machines like that around will utterly destroy the balance.

Even if you stick to canon designs... a Charger vs. an Awesome is not a fair fight. A Charger vs. a Dragon is not a fair fight (and it's not the 20-tons-lighter Dragon getting the short end of the stick). A Catapult vs. a JagerMech is not a fair fight. A Thunderbolt vs. a Catapult is not a fair fight. (Last time I fought that one, I (driving the close-range-brawler Thud) ended up kiting the LRM-boat Catapult because I ran him out of LRM ammo and still had half of my LRM bin left and my large laser that outranged the MLs he had left. He never got me below half armor anywhere; I peeled most of his locations before I finally legged him and he surrendered when I backed out to 10 hexes and pointed the LL at him.) A Thunderbolt vs. a JagerMech isn't even close to a fair fight.

* LCT-7L Locust vs. CGR-1A1 Charger goes something like: Stay 4-9 hexes away. Walk slowly backwards, shooting. Optionally, laugh.

[Mutazoia]

MASC and TSM aren't compatible. oops yup I remeber that now...can't remembered what I shoehorned in there though I remember dropping most of the armor for a bigger engine, giving it a C3 slave, a tag and narc system and an SRM. Either the MASC or TSM...the mech's entire purpose was to zip around and light up targets for the arrow 4's and the LRM equipped Mechs (its been almost 20 years, I remember the charge but not the exact build lol)

[mangosta71]

Actually a hit or two to non cased ammo would work just as well as getting 3 successive engine hits, and has a higher probability... if some one is stupid or cocky enough not to case their ammo
1) All Clan Mechs have CASE.
2) Only a roll of 2 on 2d6 results in a roll on the critical table without breaching armor. This means that a single attacker can only hit one location in this manner per turn.
3) I'm unaware of a single Clan design that stores ammunition in the center torso, and an ammunition explosion in the side torso of a Clan Mech with an XL engine only results in 2 engine hits - not enough to put it out of commission without extensive other damage. It's theoretically possible to do this on one side one turn and the other the following turn, but it's explicitly stated that Kai only fired at each Clan Mech once.

Well...it might be just me but the fact that he's the main character of a book MAKES him special...your not going to read a book about some one who sits around reading comic books for 200 some-odd pages. Main characters in ANY genera are special, even if they are supposed to be ordinary people in extraordinary situations. Main characters get to suspend the laws of pretty much anything if it makes a story people will want to read/watch.
As I said, special is fine. Uncommon talent that makes a guy a figurative god on the battlefield is plausible. But being able to suspend the laws of reality that apply to everyone else and become a literal god on the battlefield?

It's the same reason I'm bored by superheroes - they, by definition, don't follow the rules. A character that wins by finding and exploiting a weakness is more interesting than a character that gets into an impossible situation that can only be won by the author coming and saying "LOL ALL THE BAD GUYS DIE FOR NO REASON BECAUSE I SAID SO." I look at Kai and see an author trolling his audience. Apparently a lot of people like that, which is fine, but it's not my cup of tea.

[Reverent-One]

As I said, special is fine. Uncommon talent that makes a guy a figurative god on the battlefield is plausible. But being able to suspend the laws of reality that apply to everyone else and become a literal god on the battlefield?


What laws of reality are you referring to? The tabletop game rules? Which are explicitly stated to not apply in the fiction?

[mangosta71]

What laws of reality are you referring to? The tabletop game rules? Which are explicitly stated to not apply in the fiction?
The same books that say "This guy can't actually do the stuff he does in the book according to the rules of the system" also say "Here are his stats, so you can see how he does everything according to the rules of the system."

I call bull**** on that. If they wanted to have a different set of rules in the fiction, they shouldn't have generated the characters in the gaming ruleset. They also shouldn't make the rules of the gaming system apply to their minor characters. How often does a major character have to deal with his targeting getting fouled up or his Mech slowing/shutting down/exploding because of heat buildup if minor characters have to deal with those issues? If a major character can make a called shot, why can't anyone else? They way they pick and choose which rules apply to which characters makes the whole story into a gigantic Deus ex machina.

[Reverent-One]

The same books that say "This guy can't actually do the stuff he does in the book according to the rules of the system" also say "Here are his stats, so you can see how he does everything according to the rules of the system."

Important part bolded, the game stats for characters are how they would work if translated into the game. The translation is not a perfect process though. I've never seen a game with associated fiction where we should assume the game mechanics perfectly represent the world the characters live in, because they will not, because it is a game and thus gameplay concerns will trump fluff concerns in the game's design every time (or at least they should).

[Mando Knight]

MASC and TSM aren't compatible.
TSM and Supercharger are, though.

Or an Inner Sphere XL and any ammo at all (even a torso-mounted Gauss), CASEd or not. Which is woefully common in canon designs.
Like the K-series Atlas. They have CASE, but that doesn't help their side torsos any. It's got two perfectly good arms, but puts the Gauss Rifle in its torso. I know the Sphere likes punching stuff, but seriously? A 3/5 base move rate isn't going to get you anywhere fast enough to punch anything anyway, and having more than half of a side torso taken up by crit slots that will instantly destroy the 'Mech isn't exactly a bright idea.

edit: Incidentally, mechs like that Locust are the reason that BV exists. It's a 20-ton mech with a BV more typical of a mid-range medium and higher than a couple of the crappier heavies. Or a Charger. And it totally deserves it. It'll eat any canon 20-tonner I'm familiar with for lunch, and it really is a match for much heavier mechs... and not just the brain-damaged designs like the Charger*. If you're balancing things by straight-up tonnage, a few machines like that around will utterly destroy the balance.
And that's just Inner Sphere. Throw in the Clans, and you can't run by tonnage against a Clanner, or you die. (Unless you're horridly lucky or the Clanner is a complete idiot)

[9mm]

Like the K-series Atlas. They have CASE, but that doesn't help their side torsos any. It's got two perfectly good arms, but puts the Gauss Rifle in its torso. I know the Sphere likes punching stuff, but seriously? A 3/5 base move rate isn't going to get you anywhere fast enough to punch anything anyway, and having more than half of a side torso taken up by crit slots that will instantly destroy the 'Mech isn't exactly a bright idea.


That Guasse was taking the place of the old AC/20, which is why it was in the torso. The 3050 upgrades are a cavalcade of bad design choices, which makes sense in Universe; the Great Houses just got their hands on all kinds of tech, but had no real knowledge on how to USE it yet.

[Mando Knight]

That Guasse was taking the place of the old AC/20, which is why it was in the torso. The 3050 upgrades are a cavalcade of bad design choices, which makes sense in Universe; the Great Houses just got their hands on all kinds of tech, but had no real knowledge on how to USE it yet.

Well, yeah, when you consider that the Gauss is essentially just an AC/20 replacement, then it makes sense. But I can't help but feel that there's entire engineering companies double-facepalming at the Combine's insistence of putting a big explodey gun next to an exceptionally vulnerable engine just to save on redesign/testing time.

[John Campbell]

Like the K-series Atlas. They have CASE, but that doesn't help their side torsos any. It's got two perfectly good arms, but puts the Gauss Rifle in its torso. I know the Sphere likes punching stuff, but seriously? A 3/5 base move rate isn't going to get you anywhere fast enough to punch anything anyway, and having more than half of a side torso taken up by crit slots that will instantly destroy the 'Mech isn't exactly a bright idea.

I'm not going to quibble with the placement of the Gauss on the AS7-K... it's obviously replacing the AC/20 on the AS7-D, which was torso mounted.

But the other half of the problem is the XL engine, and there's no excuse for that. Not in the Atlas, which has as its primary claim to fame the amount of beating it can just shrug off. Especially not when it's got 20 single heat sinks, and an engine big enough that there's absolutely no downside to using DHS instead. Keep the standard engine, swap the 20 SHS for 10(20) DHS, and you've got the same performance and saved a half-ton more than the XL saves and freed up 14 critical slots... six from the XL and eight from HS because you can hide them all in the engine now. And you no longer have the mech-killing vulnerability of XL engine in the side torsos. And you've incidentally cut the price of the mech roughly in half.

Oh, and you've got enough free crit slots now that you can put in Endo Steel and save another five tons for more or better weapons or whatnot (there's room for two more DHS hidden in the engine, and it could use them to handle those heat-pig lasers), and still have a few crit slots left to put them in.

TR:3050 was pretty much an object lesson in how not to upgrade a mech with recovered tech.

[Mando Knight]

But the other half of the problem is the XL engine, and there's no excuse for that. Not in the Atlas, which has as its primary claim to fame the amount of beating it can just shrug off. Especially not when it's got 20 single heat sinks, and an engine big enough that there's absolutely no downside to using DHS instead. Keep the standard engine, swap the 20 SHS for 10(20) DHS, and you've got the same performance and saved a half-ton more than the XL saves and freed up 14 critical slots... six from the XL and eight from HS because you can hide them all in the engine now. And you no longer have the mech-killing vulnerability of XL engine in the side torsos. And you've incidentally cut the price of the mech roughly in half.
Hadn't even thought about it from that angle. In that case, the explosion wouldn't touch the engine even if the CT was stripped bare, since the CASE would actually do something.

[mangosta71]

It's also true that, prior to 3050 in the IS, an ammunition explosion would destroy the Mech anyway. But still, the lack of common sense is appalling. I have no idea why anyone decided that the Atlas needed to save weight on the engine in the first place. By the time you get past mediums, you're not saving enough weight to make the Mech faster or better armored enough to offset the increased vulnerability of an IS XL engine. The guys that design Mechs are supposed to be intelligent professionals, but they can't see design flaws that are immediately obvious to untrained high school boys.

[9mm]

The thing everyone is forgetting is the upgrade in 3050 litteraly changed the Atlas's role on the battlefield, It went from the 9 hex bubble of doom personified to a long range powerhouse. Given it's massive armor, to be able to stand that far back, deliver that kind of throw weight, and not be a missile boat was completely new to the Inner Sphere. If the Gausse was in the position that it threatened to explode something had gone very, very wrong. as for why they didn't upgrade the heatsinks? no idea.

[9mm]

The thing everyone is forgetting is the upgrade in 3050 litteraly changed the Atlas's role on the battlefield, It went from the 9 hex bubble of doom personified to a long range powerhouse. Given it's massive armor, to be able to stand that far back, deliver that kind of throw weight, and not be a missile boat was completely new to the Inner Sphere. If the Gausse was in the position that it threatened to explode something had gone very, very wrong. as for why they didn't upgrade the heatsinks? no idea.

[Mando Knight]

True... I guess it's also easy to forget that a lot of these redesigns were developed (in-universe) before the Clans came in and threw out the Sphere's playbook.

[RandomLunatic]

as for why they didn't upgrade the heatsinks? no idea.

The explanation for that is that in the 40s and 50s, the Combine had a very limited supply of DHSes. Which were then wasted on the Maulers. Which is why actually viable designs like the AS7-K, the PNT-10K, and the Hatamoto-*s are stuck with singles.

[Mutazoia]

It's also true that, prior to 3050 in the IS, an ammunition explosion would destroy the Mech anyway. But still, the lack of common sense is appalling. I have no idea why anyone decided that the Atlas needed to save weight on the engine in the first place. By the time you get past mediums, you're not saving enough weight to make the Mech faster or better armored enough to offset the increased vulnerability of an IS XL engine. The guys that design Mechs are supposed to be intelligent professionals, but they can't see design flaws that are immediately obvious to untrained high school boys.

I always treated this like guy's buying clothes for girls. They get what THEY think looks good. The only reason the girl wears it is because it was a present...mostly it stays in the back of the closet.

I take it as read that some time in history, some heir to a major house fancied himself an engineer and drafted the thing up and the engineers/builders just went with it because the brat was a paying customer. The fact that it soaked up damage like a sponge just made it catch on.

[Swordguy]

The explanation for that is that in the 40s and 50s, the Combine had a very limited supply of DHSes. Which were then wasted on the Maulers. Which is why actually viable designs like the AS7-K, the PNT-10K, and the Hatamoto-*s are stuck with singles.

They actually went to the DCMS's Areospace arm...which of the Inner Sphere powers at this time period, is actually by far the most badass (up until the FWL starts getting all the WarShips). All of the important Combine areospace fighters and most of their DropShips get full DHS refits, IIRC.

As a secondary point, refitting a Mech equipped with SHS is NOT a trivial thing, in-universe. It's far easier to throw DHS production into new-build Mechs designed to use them rather than take the time to retrofit them into existing frames.

And the 3050 Mechs are supposed to pretty much universally suck. It's intentional. Remember the whole "designed in-universe" thing? These are Mechs that are essentially designed and built in under a year to take advantage of the field refit kits and lostech being thrown around like mad during the Clan Invasion. Rather than take the time to design and test stuff out and find something that works, the Successor States basically threw advanced technology onto Mechs and threw them out in the field hoping that some of them would work out well against the Clans. A crappy advanced-tech Mech now was better than a great advanced-tech Mech later.

Heck, there's in-universe documents saying exactly how stupid a lot of the 3050 refits were. Once the immediate threat had passed and we move on to TROs 3055, 58, and 60, we start to see a lot more sensible designs come out as the Successor States have time to better understand their new technology.

[Mando Knight]

Let's be honest: they don't know what would happen. Just throwing science at the wall to see what sticks.

[mangosta71]

As a secondary point, refitting a Mech equipped with SHS is NOT a trivial thing, in-universe. It's far easier to throw DHS production into new-build Mechs designed to use them rather than take the time to retrofit them into existing frames.
Is it less trivial than refitting an existing Mech with a new engine? Because it seems to me that the engine replacement would be more difficult. I imagine that retooling the internal structure for CASE would be more difficult than switching the type of heat sinks the chassis carries, too.

As for the Mauler, that design is just plain awful. Scrap that PoS and use the pieces to build something useful.

[9mm]

Is it less trivial than refitting an existing Mech with a new engine? Because it seems to me that the engine replacement would be more difficult. I imagine that retooling the internal structure for CASE would be more difficult than switching the type of heat sinks the chassis carries, too.

As for the Mauler, that design is just plain awful. Scrap that PoS and use the pieces to build something useful.

oh come'on you love those 4 AC 2s.

Ironicly, the Mauler is a design that gets better the older it gets; AC 2s packing armor piercing ammo are hilariously effective.

[Mando Knight]

I imagine that retooling the internal structure for CASE would be more difficult than switching the type of heat sinks the chassis carries, too.

I don't think so. CASE is a cellular system... all they'd have to do to for it is open up some space around and redesign the ammunition compartments (or design a CASE sleeve for the Gauss rifle, as the case may be). DHS are a completely different coolant system from SHS, and require specialized materials and such... remember that Inner Sphere DHS that aren't integrated into the engine are three times as bulky as singles are.

[John Campbell]

There weren't any rules for it at the time, but under the current StratOps customization rules (which, in this case, largely just explicitly codified a combination of fluff and common sense), upgrading from SHS to DHS is a Class D (Maintenance) refit. Downgrading from a standard engine to an XL is a Class F (Factory) refit, the hardest change possible. Adding CASE is a Class E (Factory) refit... a little easier, but it still requires major facilities.

So what they actually did to the Atlas wasn't just worse than giving it DHS, or vastly more expensive, it was more difficult too.

Upgrading standard IS to Endo Steel is also a Class F refit. Upgrading standard armor to Ferro-Fibrous is a much easier Class C. This is pretty much the only reason to ever put FF on a mech instead of ES. (In addition to is fine, if you've got the crit slots to burn.)

edit: Customization, of course, is not quite the same thing as a true redesign, but I figure they're close enough to be used for a basis of comparison. And a fair few of the TR:3050 designs were basically standard customization packages, due to loss of the manufacturing facilities for the designs during the Succession Wars.

[mangosta71]

Wasn't even aware of the actual rules surrounding customization, but I figured it made sense. CASE isn't just a "sleeve" around the ammo. They have to completely change the internal configuration of the location. Compartmentalizing the torso would involve redoing all of the various support structures and myomer bundles inside.

We got onto this topic discussing the Atlas specifically. So, upgrading an older model to the 7 series would require sending the Mech back to the factory. At that point, they may as well build a new Mech from scratch. The proposal to leave the engine as is and convert the heat sinks to doubles is cheaper, easier (can be done in the field), results in a tougher Mech, and has greater weight savings. And I've got to believe that a heat sink, even a double heat sink, is easier and less time-consuming to build than an engine.

[Mutazoia]

Wasn't even aware of the actual rules surrounding customization, but I figured it made sense. CASE isn't just a "sleeve" around the ammo. They have to completely change the internal configuration of the location. Compartmentalizing the torso would involve redoing all of the various support structures and myomer bundles inside.

We got onto this topic discussing the Atlas specifically. So, upgrading an older model to the 7 series would require sending the Mech back to the factory. At that point, they may as well build a new Mech from scratch. The proposal to leave the engine as is and convert the heat sinks to doubles is cheaper, easier (can be done in the field), results in a tougher Mech, and has greater weight savings. And I've got to believe that a heat sink, even a double heat sink, is easier and less time-consuming to build than an engine.

Well when the IS got the old Star League tech they didn't really understand it any more (which is why it was lost tech) and the Clans popped out of nowhere without giving them time to research it. So I'm sure it was easier at the time to shoe horn some new tech in as the Mech's were coming off the assembly line and press them in to the field with out worrying too much about the design aesthetics, and worry about proper Mech design later. This would let them field test the operating parameters of the new tech under real combat condidions, which would be invaluable information when designing a new Mech based completely on that technology. Plus, it takes time to fully redesign anything, and if you need that thing NOW it's faster and easier to retrofit your current production line while you have the boys in the back room working on designing the new stuff.

[gbprime]

Wasn't even aware of the actual rules surrounding customization, but I figured it made sense.

Well that's what common sense is FOR. You have a battlemech, you want to upgrade it... so you replace heat sinks and weapons with better ones and upgrade the armor.

Anything more than that is going to be more complicated and carry either a massive price tag or a greater chance of failure. Replace the mech's skeleton? Wedge in an engine that takes twice as much internal space? Compare that to the much easier trade of auto mechanics... while you can drop in a larger engine, it's an effort. An engine with a totally different technology like hydrogen fuel cells, that's even more work. But replacing a car's frame? That's called building a new car.

Sure, endo steel is usually a better buy for the weight than Ferro Fibrous is, but when you're retrofitting, it's the armor that's easy to change.

[Spamotron]

I'm not so sure Endo Steel is always better than ferro fibrous. At least better that Light Ferro Fibrous. I've been tooling around with custom mech designs a lot lately and often find I need an extra half a ton to a ton to install CASE or Guardian ECM but can't get 14 crit slots to spare. I can usually get 7 though.

I consider ECM mandatory for a Jihad campaign just because of how deadly C3i is unchecked.

[9mm]

I'm not so sure Endo Steel is always better than ferro fibrous. At least better that Light Ferro Fibrous. I've been tooling around with custom mech designs a lot lately and often find I need an extra half a ton to a ton to install CASE or Guardian ECM but can't get 14 crit slots to spare. I can usually get 7 though.

I consider ECM mandatory for a Jihad campaign just because of how deadly C3i is unchecked.

It's a balancing act. When I said the Mauler gets better the more ancient the design becomes, I wasn't joking. Old 3025 mechs are just so much more DURABLE than Jihad designs; but they don't have the same firepower. Primitive tech did not just become popular because it filled a need at the time, it surprisingly WORKED against top-of the line woblie mechs that would fall over if brushed with a feather duster.

[John Campbell]

I'm not so sure Endo Steel is always better than ferro fibrous. At least better that Light Ferro Fibrous. I've been tooling around with custom mech designs a lot lately and often find I need an extra half a ton to a ton to install CASE or Guardian ECM but can't get 14 crit slots to spare. I can usually get 7 though.
Endo Steel is always better than standard Ferro-Fibrous. Endo Steel saves 50% off the weight of the internal structure, which is 10% of the mech tonnage, so 5% of the overall tonnage of the mech.

Ferro-Fibrous is a little trickier to figure savings for, but, because of the 2xIS limit on armor, the most standard armor you can put on a mech is about 20% of its overall tonnage, give or take a ton or so. Ferro-Fibrous saves 12% off that, so roughly 2.5% of the overall mech tonnage, or about half the savings of Endo Steel, for the same investment of critical slots. And that's not straight-up savings like Endo Steel, but an upper bound... mechs carrying less than max armor will save even less weight from Ferro-Fibrous.

You should basically only ever use standard FF if the mech already has Endo Steel, or if you can't put Endo Steel in for whatever reason... you're doing a field refit and don't have the facilities to completely rebuild the mech so you can replace its skeleton, or it's a non-mech unit that just can't use Endo Steel. (And it's theoretically possible to put so much armor on a tank that the FF would be more efficient anyway, but if you find yourself in that boat, you should probably reconsider how much armor your tank really needs. I'm a big fan of armor - it's one of the most effective ways to use tonnage - but there's a limit. There's especially a limit on units as easy to through-armor kill as tanks.) Or maybe you've got the capacity to fabricate Ferro-Fibrous, but don't have the ability to make Endo Steel. (The Taurian Concordat was facing that situation in the '50s, IIRC.)

Light Ferro-Fibrous gives you only half the savings, but you can cram it into machines that you can't get Endo Steel or standard FF into. If you can get the Endo Steel in, it beats Light FF even more handily than it does standard FF, but if you can't... well, Light FF is better than nothing.

Heavy Ferro-Fibrous, on the other hand, is almost completely pointless for mechs. It's more slot-efficient than the other FF types, but its savings still don't quite match Endo Steel's, and it's even bulkier, so if you can get Heavy FF in, you can use Endo Steel instead. You can use Endo Steel and Light FF instead, for even more savings. If you've got 35 crit slots to burn, go with both Endo Steel and Heavy FF, but... And by the time Heavy FF makes its appearance, doing field refits on older mechs isn't so much an issue.

[mangosta71]

oh come'on you love those 4 AC 2s.

Ironicly, the Mauler is a design that gets better the older it gets; AC 2s packing armor piercing ammo are hilariously effective.
It's still slow, severely under-armored, lacks the heat capacity to use its primary weapons with any regularity, and has the increased vulnerability of an XL engine. I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would willingly field one of those deathtraps. Nor can I imagine a more appropriate paint scheme than a bullseye.

[Shyftir]

In MW4: They are pretty dang good. But that's because you can rip out the tink-tink guns drop in a couple LBX/Ultra AC10s and layer on more armor.

[John Campbell]

Under real Battletech rules, fixing the Mauler without just turning it into a completely different mech is... difficult. There's too much stuff wrong with it, and it's already too over-engineered for simple tweaking to squeeze much more out of it. Swapping the FF for Endo Steel gains a few tons, which can beef the armor up a little, but not enough to give it the armor it really should have (especially with how slow it is), or get rid of the XL, and while it desperately needs the extra heat sinks that tonnage could go to, there aren't enough free critical slots to put them in...

I designed a variant once that replaced the AC/2s with a pair of Light Gausses, to keep the extreme range (and then some) but give it a little more firepower, but it still basically sucked. Still XL-powered, and still dog slow despite that, still frighteningly under-armored, still not nearly enough heat capacity for its guns and no weapons sets that make any sense, still full of explody stuff that CASE doesn't help with because of the XL...

[mangosta71]

Taking out two of the ACs (with the accompanying ton of ammo) allows you to convert the engine to a normal, convert to endo steel and normal armor, add 5.5 more tons of armor (so you're just half a ton short of the maximum it can carry - adequate protection for a long range support Mech), and add 5 more heat sinks. By my count, that brings us up to 50 total critical slots occupied, so we'll have to remove the lower arm actuators. Mount the lasers and ACs in the arms (similar to the configuration of the Rifleman), and it can competently fill an anti-air role as well.

That's some seriously expensive and time-consuming refitting. But it's now effective in two roles and has a chance of surviving the battle.

[Swordguy]

The Mauler is one of those unfortunate specialty Mechs that seems like a good idea in theory and never really "gets" it.

The DCMS has a whole lot of Mechs that are reasonably fast for their weight (Dragon, Grand Dragon, Quickdraw) and/or heavily armored for their weight (Panther, etc). They've got a goodly number of "Mechs of the line" - that is, Mechs that can close with the enemy in the "standard" playstyle that BattleTech supports, where both players move indirectly towards the center of the map and end up brawling it out at 0-6 hexes after 3-5 turns of fire.

The Mauler isn't designed to do that. The Mauler is designed to sit back at 20 hexes to its target, stationary, never getting closer than that, and provide long-range support fire. It's a fire-support platform, like a Yeoman or Salamander or Naginata or Vanquisher, that can't efficiently fire indirectly. It has no business being within 10 hexes of ANY enemy Mech until the very end of the battle when you're just mopping up. For that role, its armor and speed are fine, because it's really more of a mobile gun turret than anything else. The AC/2s are an unfortunate consequence of what was available for long-range fire support when the Mech was designed and what would fit in an XL-engine'd torso. On the bright side, they can fire every single round, along with the LRMs, and 1 of the large lasers, and the Mech won't care about heat in the slightest. No, it's not doing much damage, but honestly, neither do many of the really long-range fire-support Mechs until 3058 when we start seeing multi-Gauss Rifle loadouts as a matter of course on assault designs. Again, it's unfair to judge the Mauler by the standards of stuff designed years later.

What also hurts the Mauler is its inability to mount fire-control electronics such as C3i. The WOB Vanquisher doesn't do all that much more damage at range than the Mauler and it's highly-regarded as a fire-support platform...but that's because it mounts the C3i that allows it to hit on VERY low TNs at 21 hex ranges. The Mauler was designed before the Inner Sphere really had a handle on their C3 doctrine, and it suffers as a result.

Still, it's a perfectly usable design, if not remotely optimal. You need to be playing on a large map surface (WAY more than the normal 1x2 or 2x2 setup that a CBT.com poll revealed compose something like 90% of BattleTech games), and you need to have the good discipline to keep your Mauler(s) (preferably 3 of them and a close-range "bodyguard") well back from the fight, in a good firing position, and leave it there. Only move if the front line of the fight moves. Advanced ammo for the AC/2s is great as well, but since it wasn't around when the Mauler gets used, it's not really something you should count on when using one.

[John Campbell]

My best fix for the thing is pulling the lot of the AC/2s out and replacing them with another pair of LRM 15s and a couple more tons of ammo. Combine with swapping the Ferro-Fibrous for Endo Steel (Why did they put FF on a new-build design?), and this frees up a vast amount of tonnage, which can be used to de-XL the engine, max out the armor, and add a couple more heat sinks.

With 13(26) HS, it's got ample heat capacity to put sixty missiles downrange every turn until it shoots the bins dry. (12 shots per tube should be enough for most fights.) Or it can use the ER LLs in tandem even while running. It's still slow, but, eh, it's a fire support mech. And a 90-tonner... if it wants to be faster than 3/5, it should be lighter. (75-85 tons is the sweet spot for 4/6.) And it's actually got the armor to take return fire even though it's just standing around being an easy target. Without the XL, if something does get through to the LRM ammo, the CASE will actually help, and not only will it survive, the half-a-mech that's left will be still combat-effective. It'll have just enough heat sinks left to use its two remaining LRM racks and remaining laser...

(Variation: Swap the ER LLs for standard LLs, drop two heat sinks, and use the tonnage for either more LRM ammo or a pair of medium lasers. The range on the ERs is nice if you run out of LRM ammo, but until that point, they're mostly only going to be used inside LRM minimum, where a standard LL is just as good and a lot more heat-efficient. The former variant makes running out of LRM ammo less likely and so reduces the odds that you'll need the ER, while the latter variant makes for a nice dual-bracket mech. Missiles down to 5-7 hexes, lasers inside that, and just enough HS to cover either weapons set.)

BV: 1649, almost 400 points higher than the MAL-1R Mauler's.
Price: 9,484,800 C-Bills, just a hair over half of the MAL-1R Mauler's price tag. (This is why I'm dubious of any in-universe economic argument that ends with, "... so we'll put an XL in it.")

But it's not really a Mauler anymore. It's just another missile boat.

[Spamotron]

I posted earlier that I'm messing around with custom mechs. Now I want to start fiddling with the advanced experimental equipment in the Tactical Handbook.

I just want to know is there anything that's a subtle trap like the NARC missile beacon? Or anything considered outright broken that will get me smacked for fielding? Earlier someone posted that he considered Steak LRMs to be cheesy as hell.

[Swordguy]

I posted earlier that I'm messing around with custom mechs. Now I want to start fiddling with the advanced experimental equipment in the Tactical Handbook.

I just want to know is there anything that's a subtle trap like the NARC missile beacon? Or anything considered outright broken that will get me smacked for fielding? Earlier someone posted that he considered Steak LRMs to be cheesy as hell.

Stay away from Tandem-charge SRMs. Most of the rest is fine, though it becomes broken when used in particular ways. A MASC-equipped 5/8/8-ton Mech with TSM, a Mace, IJJs, a huge number of small-caliber lasers to manage heat, and a 7 Gunnery/0 Piloting Warrior is immensely broken on small map setups (2x2 or less).

[mangosta71]

You'd probably get smacked for fielding a force that consists of Savanna Masters refitted to carry TAG and a bunch of Arrow IV units...

[John Campbell]

I usually just pretend that that book never happened. The not-broken stuff - and a lot of the broken stuff, fixed - got reprinted in Maximum Tech and later books anyway. If it never got reprinted, it'll either get you smacked, or sucks too much to bother with. Usually the latter. Unless you really, really like range, at the expense of all else.

[RandomLunatic]

It is terrible. Like John says, the good stuff was salvaged in later books like Maxium Tech.

My favorite thing in the book is the Inner Sphere SSRM-6, for the sole reason that it takes up 2.5 critical slots. Which tells you everything you need about the quality of the editing and playtesting.

[Spamotron]

Oh the book I have is the 2008 printing of Tactical Operations. I miss-printed.

[Seatbelt]

My friend is suddenly interested in Battletech. But he has this idea in his head of using a bunch of power armor and some light/medium mech support.

1)Is this a viable strategy?
2)Even if it's not what would he need to be able to do it and not get completely destroyed?

[mangosta71]

Elementals are pretty awesome. I once took out a Warhammer with nothing but a Point. If you use the right tactics, (hit-and-run/ambush) power armor could work pretty well.

You could also introduce to him the idea of ProtoMechs. Those little buggers are pure, concentrated evil.

[Mando Knight]

My friend is suddenly interested in Battletech. But he has this idea in his head of using a bunch of power armor and some light/medium mech support.

1)Is this a viable strategy?
2)Even if it's not what would he need to be able to do it and not get completely destroyed?

You'll be playing a lot of 3050 and later, but it's viable. Especially if you like to play by tonnage and let him pick Clan stuff (Elementals are superior battle armor, and light/medium 'Mechs are where the Clan's weight savers are really noticeable).

[Swordguy]

Power armor can be extremely nasty, but it's more of an area-denial weapon than anything else. You figure out where your enemy wants to be, and plop a few points of Battle Armor down on top of it. This includes things like cities in general. You also need some way to get around the immobility of battle armor; BA that moves more than 3 hexes/round is fairly rare. VTOLs are a good choice, especially if you've got jump-capable BA.

And a star of Corona Battle Armor dug-in in a city is ridiculously difficult to kill - that's 25 Clan Medium Pulse Lasers shooting back at you.

As for you, the answer to Battle Armor is artillery or high-explosive bombs. Don't try to kill them with Mechs, just flatten the entire hex they occupy. Their low movement makes it fairly easy to predict where they'll be when your ordnance lands.

[Shyftir]

I believe this (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Mercer_Ravannion) character's life/tactical doctrine applies to this disscussion about using lots of smaller 'mechs a.k.a. "Charge of the Horde" tactic.

[Seatbelt]

On a completely different track, what's the best way to combat a lance of heavy and assault mechs? Last year at Gencon my buddy picked up a lance of mechs based completely on how cool they looked. He ended up with a Turkina, a Madcat Mk2, a Thor/Summoner and a Longbow. His lightest mech is the Thor.

In contrast I picked up the promotional mech pack that came with a discount for buying the core rulebooks.
http://ironwindmetals.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=16_136&products_id=6291

In our second game ever we played 3 of my mechs vs his Madcat and a truly terrible Thor variant and the Madcat almost singlehandedly destroyed my mechs (granted I couldn't seem to do anything but strip his armor while he domed an almost completely unscathed mech). My roommate just bought himself a point of elementals and 2 lances worth of medium and heavy mechs. So I'm seriously outclassed and looking for suggestions.

[mangosta71]

Orbital bombardment.

[big teej]

Orbital bombardment.

twice, it's the only way to be sure.

on a related note,
I don't suppose any mechwarriors in the playground live in the Wingate/charlotte/monroe vicinity in the event that I suddenly find myself being able to afford to pick up a few mechs?
you know, I can't help but wonder, how hard is it to financially support TWO wargame hobbies? I already play warhammer, and a crack habit is cheaper than that.

[The Glyphstone]

What's the heaviest ground vehicle in BT, and does it even begin to approach its worth in tonnage or BV? I'm remembering the Legion tanks fom Mechcommander 2.

[FelixG]

What's the heaviest ground vehicle in BT, and does it even begin to approach its worth in tonnage or BV? I'm remembering the Legion tanks fom Mechcommander 2.

There are some ground vehicles that weigh in at several thousand tons...but those are some rather silly mobile structures from the newer line of books.

I never remember such things in any of the fiction I read, but hey, whatever :smallconfused:

other than those I think the biggest (legal) vehicle is around 200 tons

[mangosta71]

By the construction rules that I'm familiar with, maximum tonnage of a ground vehicle varies with the chassis. Hovertanks can be up to 50, wheeled vehicles up to 80, and tracked up to 100. Naval vessels can be up to 300 tons, though hydrofoils can only get up to 150?

[9mm]

What's the heaviest ground vehicle in BT, and does it even begin to approach its worth in tonnage or BV? I'm remembering the Legion tanks fom Mechcommander 2.

There is a small tank called the Mars you might want to consider, (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Mars_(Combat_Vehicle)) maybe also the Burke, (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Burke) or the Marksman. (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marksman_M1)

[Seatbelt]

So when creating a custom load-out for a mech, I can't seem to find rules for which mech has what kind of slots, the difference between an omi mech and a regular one, etc. Common sense tells me that the rack of missiles on my mini can't hold laser cannons. But I'm not sure the game has any restrictions like that?

[John Campbell]

There aren't any "kinds" of slots. There are just critical slots. Most locations contain 12; head and legs contain 6. Some of those locations will have stuff pre-allocated in them... sensors, life support, and cockpit take up all but one slot in the head; engine and gyro normally take up all but two slots in the CT; actuators take up the top four slots in each limb (though you can remove the hand and lower arm actuator from arms if you want, which regains you up to two slots in each arm, at the cost of the arms being less useful as arms).

Various pieces of equipment have different weights and critical-slot sizes. As long as you've got the tonnage, and have free slots in the location that you're putting something in, you're golden.

If you're customizing a mech - as opposed to building a new design - it's easier to swap things that have the same weight and size. Swapping out an LRM 15 (7 tons and 3 critical slots) for a PPC (7 tons and 3 critical slots) is easier and faster than swapping out an LRM 15 for an LRM 10 and two medium lasers (7 tons and 4 critical slots). But you can still do the latter, if you have the extra critical slot that you'll need. You don't even need to put the stuff into the location that you took things out of, if you've got critical slots elsewhere that you'd rather use... it's just easier and faster to make the modification if you're putting stuff in where you took it out, and it's the same size and weight as what you took out.

The advantage of omnimechs is that customization is easier. Rather than having permanently allocated equipment that has to be taken out and the mech frame modified so that other things will fit in, they just have generic pod space... free tonnage and free slots in each location. If it fits in your pod space, just stick it in and go. This takes minutes rather than the days that it takes to modify a regular battlemech.

And for new-build mechs, it's not a concern. If you've got enough tonnage to carry your equipment, and enough critical slots in the locations you want stuff in, that's all that matters.


And Battletech isn't Warhammer. It doesn't matter what your mini looks like. It doesn't matter if you even have a mini. It's always nice if you've got a mini that matches the kind of mech you're driving, and even nicer if it's been customized to match the particular model and painted up in correct unit colors. But it isn't necessary. As long as everyone knows what it's supposed to be and can tell which way it's facing, you're good to go.

I've done major battles in Battletech using a mix of minis - most but not all of them at least the correct type of mech - the cardboard counters from the original boxed set, pieces of paper with top-down views of the mech drawn on them, and a few pieces of paper with just a name and an arrow. This worked perfectly well, though we had to be careful about leaving the windows open or some of the mechs would blow around. (Sticky-Tac on them solved that.)

If your mini is the right type, but has an LRM 15 in each arm where the record sheet says it's got PPCs, you're well ahead of the accuracy that's actually required of you. Depending on the kind of game you're playing, it may be appropriate to tell your opponent that he's facing a CPLT-K2 Catapult rather than the CPLT-C1 that it looks like. But other times, it may be appropriate to let him find out the hard way, either by taking the time to do an active sensor scan of it, or just by eating some PPC fire.

(Finding out the hard way that the Charger you're facing is a 1A5 rather than a 1A1 isn't a lot of fun. I just assume that all Chargers are 1A5s... that way, finding out that I'm wrong is a relief rather than a brief moment of terror cut short by a hail of AC/20 shells and SRMs.)

[mangosta71]

As stated, the board game does NOT follow the outfitting rules of MW4. There's no such thing as a slot that you can only put a ballistic weapon, or a missile launcher, or an energy weapon into.

The total number of critical slots available in a Mech is 47-51, depending on how many actuators you're willing to take out of the arms. You may not always be able to use them all depending on your loadout, though.

[Seatbelt]

Ok cool. That was the impression I had been getting, but I wanted to be sure.

[Seatbelt]

LRM 15 ammo says "8" in Solaris Skunkwerks. Does that mean each ton of ammo only holds 8 missiles, or each ton of ammo holds 5 shots worth of 15 missiles?

[Mando Knight]

LRM 15 ammo says "8" in Solaris Skunkwerks. Does that mean each ton of ammo only holds 8 missiles, or each ton of ammo holds 5 shots worth of 15 missiles?

Each ton of ammunition contains sufficient ammo to be fired out of that weapon that many times. A LRM 15 has 8 shots/ton, meaning it carries 120 missiles (other LRM payloads also carry 120 missiles, so a LRM 10 has 12 shots and a LRM 20 has 6). However, if a weapon is capable of firing multiple shots per turn (i.e. the Ultra Autocannon), it expends multiple rounds' worth of ammo, since it's firing that much faster than normal.

Do note the severity of ammunition hits: without CASE II, if a critical hit smashes any ammo bin other than one that's nearly depleted, you can go ahead and mark off that body slot: there's no way even a 100-tonner tanking a through-armor critical can take it. Never mount machine gun ammo on a no-CASE 'Mech that you want to salvage later: one crit on arm-mounted machine gun ammo would slag an Atlas's center torso.

[Spamotron]

Edit: Nevermind the latest page wouldn't show up for me until I posted.

[Seatbelt]

So for a 55 ton mech sporting 2 LRM15s, what is an appropriate amount of ammo? Presently I have 2 tons of ammo per launcher, which nets me 16 shots per launcher. Its all CASEd on the left torso.

[John Campbell]

I find that less than 10 shots per weapon is manifestly inadequate. 10 is usually enough, but there'll be fights where you run out of ammo. 12 is pretty comfortable for most fights, but a few more won't hurt, especially for an LRM boat that should start firing its missiles in the first turn or two of the fight, and keep firing them every turn until the enemy's dead or it is. There's generally no point in carrying more than 20 shots per weapon. Even if you're planning on fighting through multiple battles without an opportunity to reload between... your armor will give out before you shoot your bins dry.

So, yeah, 16's a good number.

[mangosta71]

I generally like my LRM boats to stock 15-18 shots per launcher. I designed an 80-ton Mech with 4 LRM-20s, each slaved to an Artemis FCS, with 3 tons of swarm ammo per rack to fill my fire support needs (Clan tech, of course - no way to do it with IS). That Mech by itself was just about all the fire support I needed for a trinary in an engagement against a full battalion. Sweet memories of slaughter...

[Seatbelt]

I'm going to play against my buddy with the assault/heavy lance this weekend. So I'm playing around with stuff. C3i, LRM boats.

I have a 55 ton Osprey with 2 LRM15 Artemis racks and 2 medium lasers, a 65 ton TDR-10M Thunderbolt with all kinds of long ranged energy, a 65 ton Karhu with mad speed and jump jets and a mix of long and short range high damage energy weapons..

but I'm at a loss as to what to do with my 75 ton PRF-1R Prefect. His role is basically to run in and get pounded to slag/distract the enemy assault mechs while my long range contingent tries to bring down/gimp something. I really want to load him up with autocannons but I'm afraid that since I'm going to throw him in to the fray so quickly the armor will get stripped and the ammo bins will pop him like a christmas tree. Does anyone have a suggestion for what to do here? This is the heaviest mech I have and we're very much anti-proxy in my gaming circle, so this is what I get to use. We're both going to expand our stable of mechs to be a little more fair but in the mean time..

On a related note an AC-20 takes *a lot* of crit slots. But autocannons are not listed in my Total Warfare book. What happens if it takes damage? Or for that matter what happens when any weapon thats not a Gauss rifle takes damage?

[Swordguy]

I'm going to play against my buddy with the assault/heavy lance this weekend. So I'm playing around with stuff. C3i, LRM boats.

I have a 55 ton Osprey with 2 LRM15 Artemis racks and 2 medium lasers, a 65 ton TDR-10M Thunderbolt with all kinds of long ranged energy, a 65 ton Karhu with mad speed and jump jets and a mix of long and short range high damage energy weapons..

but I'm at a loss as to what to do with my 75 ton PRF-1R Prefect. His role is basically to run in and get pounded to slag/distract the enemy assault mechs while my long range contingent tries to bring down/gimp something. I really want to load him up with autocannons but I'm afraid that since I'm going to throw him in to the fray so quickly the armor will get stripped and the ammo bins will pop him like a christmas tree. Does anyone have a suggestion for what to do here? This is the heaviest mech I have and we're very much anti-proxy in my gaming circle, so this is what I get to use. We're both going to expand our stable of mechs to be a little more fair but in the mean time..

On a related note an AC-20 takes *a lot* of crit slots. But autocannons are not listed in my Total Warfare book. What happens if it takes damage? Or for that matter what happens when any weapon thats not a Gauss rifle takes damage?

That's actually pretty much exactly what a C3 spotter is intended to do - run up close, keep moving around at point-blank range as long as possible. Either the OPFOR shoots at the spotter (in which case, they aren't doing real damage to the Mechs that are your heavy hitters), or they shoot at your heavy hitters and ignore the Mech jumping into their back arcs and spotting for highly-accurate C3 fire. Good C3 spotters are fast for their weight, carry max armor, little ammo, and have jump capacity.

Aside from Gauss Weapons (which explode), a weapon that is struck by fire via critical hit simply ceases to function. Standard Autocannons dont' have special rules, so they aren't listed under the "Other Combat Weapons and Equipment" section on TW pages 129-143. Their combat stats are on the master tables in the back, and their construction rules are found in TechManual.

[mangosta71]

I'm a fan of large numbers of medium pulse lasers for point-blank work.

[Seatbelt]

Aside from Gauss Weapons (which explode), a weapon that is struck by fire via critical hit simply ceases to function.


So then when would you want to use something like an autocannon? I understand they have very low heat and very high damage but they have so many crit slots it seems extremely likely that it's going to break during a fight.

[mangosta71]

It's better to have the weapon itself take a hit than the ammo bin - that puts the weapon out of commission anyway and blows half your Mech away besides (assuming you have CASE - if not, it's an instant KO).

The AC/2 was sort of useful with 3025 tech because of the extreme range. The AC/5's range made it a natural low-heat companion to the PPC, as the AC/10 fit with the large laser. The AC/20 was really only useful for the massive single-shot damage potential as far as I'm concerned - I only designed one Mech to carry it before I got into Clan invasion tech levels because I was unimpressed with its performance on the battlefield - I could get more damage (and longer range) from a smaller weight/crit investment.

I typically don't field ACs on most of my Mechs because, in addition to being ammo hogs (at least, the ones with reasonable damage potential are, which ties up even more tonnage and crit slots for the ammo) and tying up a lot of crit slots, they're also heavy. They really shine on vehicles IMO - weapons mounted on vehicles only take 1 slot no matter how many they would take in a Mech, and vehicles ignore heat generated by non-energy weapons. I did design a Clan tech variant of the King Crab that rocks a pair of Ultra AC/20s, though. Might be the only Mech I ever designed that could dish out over 100 points of damage in a single round. But I didn't think that the benefits outweighed the drawbacks, so I rarely fielded it even when I was playing regularly.

[Mando Knight]

Aside from Gauss Weapons (which explode), a weapon that is struck by fire via critical hit simply ceases to function.
There are "Expanded Critical" rules in Tactical Operations if you feel like playing under the Advanced Rules, though. They generally don't make the weapon explode unless you try firing it when it's got an ammo feed problem or something, though.

So then when would you want to use something like an autocannon? I understand they have very low heat and very high damage but they have so many crit slots it seems extremely likely that it's going to break during a fight.
Standard autocannons, after 3050, are pretty much obsolete. Fortunately for ballistics fans, that's when you start seeing Gauss Rifles and the LB-X and Ultra autocannon variants.

LB-X is a long-ranged version of the standard autocannon, and can fire cluster ammo to scratch up a 'Mech's innards after blasting its armor open with the slugs. Ultra ACs can spin up and fire at twice the rate of the other AC models, meaning that an Ultra 20 has a damage potential of 40/round (though it devours ammo at twice the speed when doing so) instead of the other AC/20 models' flat 20/round. The Ultras are longer-ranged than their standard counterparts, but shorter than the LB-X. (How's that for short ranged shotguns?)

[tyckspoon]

So then when would you want to use something like an autocannon? I understand they have very low heat and very high damage but they have so many crit slots it seems extremely likely that it's going to break during a fight.

It's basically for mech designs that got heat-capped before they ran out of crit space. That doesn't happen so much with more advanced technology- double heat sinks go a long way to reduce heat concerns- but it is/was something you had to balance pretty carefully when you only got 10 heat dissipation built in. For the more modern AC variants, LB-X with Cluster ammo are excellent crit-seekers and anti-vehicle weapons (to-hit bonus plus many individual hits; vehicles tend to be highly armored, but the on-chart crits mean you can mission-kill them pretty easily without necessarily actually getting through the armor if you have a lot of ping hits) and Ultra and/or RAC versions can put out a scary amount of damage from a single weapon slot.

Although I still find the AC/10 versions are still the only ones usually worth considering, for the balance of range and damage output. /2 and /5 don't threaten enough, /20 is just too freaking huge and is competing with something like a Streak SRM 6 for close-in crit hunting or maybe an ATM/MRM box for 'oh god don't let that thing hit me.'

[Gnoman]

20 in a single location is huge. Lights and mediums pretty much don't have the armour to take that, and even heavies and assaults can only take one or two hits. Add that every time it hits, it's a guaranteed PSR, and the AC/20 is, and deserves to be, very dangerous.

[tyckspoon]

20 in a single location is huge. Lights and mediums pretty much don't have the armour to take that, and even heavies and assaults can only take one or two hits. Add that every time it hits, it's a guaranteed PSR, and the AC/20 is, and deserves to be, very dangerous.

Depends on your tolerance for risk/reward, really. I should probably note that I tend to play with default 4/5 pilots, which means an AC/20 is a pretty poor option, because you generally don't get favorable shots even against big slow mechs. So you're weighing that AC/20 and its mere 5 shots/ton of ammo against a bank of 3 or 4 lasers, or a few SRM racks, or some other multi-weapon setup you can easily fit in the huge amount of space and weight the AC/20 eats. I generally prefer consistency, so I'll take the multiple weapons just about every time- it doesn't have the raw knockout power, but it's also far less subject to the vagaries of chance causing that mech to achieve absolutely nothing.

If your games/scenario/campaign development hands you a dude with a really low gunnery skill, then yeah, shoot your heart out, the /20 is a much better weapon. If he can ever chase down a target he'll score some pretty awesome kills with that big 20-point damage chunk.

[Gnoman]

Even with a 4/5 pilot, the concentation of the damage is extremely powerful. Any time you can open up armor that easily, you're at an advantage, as having a hole in the armor means more crits, and crits decide games.

[mangosta71]

Bear in mind that, with a 4/5 pilot, you've got less than a 50% chance to hit even at point-blank range unless both Mechs are practically standing still. Each ton of ammo will therefore net you 2 hits. Sure, it's quite a bit of damage to a single location, but unless they both hit the same spot it won't breach the armor by itself anyway on a target that's worth shooting the bloody thing at - as you mentioned, lights and mediums are generally fragile enough that you wouldn't want to waste a shot at them anyway even if you could hit one with it.

[John Campbell]

There are a lot of mechs that can't take an AC/20 hit anywhere without armor penetration. This includes every light, most mediums, and a fair few heavy mechs. There are many more that can take them in a few places, but have lightly armored locations that an AC/20 shot will penetrate. This includes a lot of heavies and a disturbing number of assaults... neither the VTR-9S Victor nor the CP 10-Z Cyclops can take a single hit from their own main gun anywhere but the CT without the armor being stripped. And an AC/20 to the head is a one-shot kill against every mech in the game.

The AC/20 is a niche weapon, but it's really good in its niche. For raw damage output, medium lasers and SRMs operate over the same range and are significantly more efficient. And I'm a huge fan of medium lasers, but... if you want to put big frickin' holes in things: AC/20, accept no substitutes.

Ideally, you want to pair the AC/20 up with the array of MLs or SRMs, either on the same mech, like the CGR-1A5 Charger, or just by backing your Hunchback up with a WTH-2 Whitworth or a Javelin or something, so you can follow the big hole-punching AC/20 shell up with a spread of crit-finding light hits to exploit that hole.

The really nice thing about the LB20-X is that it combines both of these functions into a single gun. Lead off with slugs, and once you've got a hole or two punched in their armor and their squishy innards are showing, switch to Cluster rounds and sandblast them to death.

edit: Oh, yeah, and if you're going to fixate on ammo consumption... the AC/20's damage output per ton of ammo is exactly the same as every other autocannon's, except the AC/2, which is worse. It just does it faster. And autocannons do more damage per ton of ammo than missile racks, except for Streak 2s and 4s, which can eke out a tie.

[Gnoman]

SRM-2s and -s have 100 missiles for two damage/missile per ton, but the damage is reduced by the missile table. Odddly, -6s have less potential damage/ton, having only 90 missiles/ton.

[The_JJ]

Respect the AC-20. It does less damage over all but I'll take 5 damage spread over every possible hit location over a 20 hit to CT. Or any T. Or the legs. Or the head... or even the arms.

It's just bad news when it hits, see?

[Mando Knight]

Respect the AC-20. It does less damage over all but I'll take 5 damage spread over every possible hit location over a 20 hit to CT. Or any T. Or the legs. Or the head... or even the arms.

It's just bad news when it hits, see?

Especially since it's one of the big-hit guns. It, along with Gauss Rifles (standard and Heavy) and the Clans' ERPPC and Large Heavy Laser, is a scary-death-weapon: it's bad news when it hits at all, but the 1/36 chance to tear off a 'Mech's head in one shot is rather scary. AC/10s and IS PPCs (as well as Clan Large lasers) are similar, but can't quite rip off a 'Mech's head, leaving it rather vulnerable to cluster shots.

[John Campbell]

SRM-2s and -s have 100 missiles for two damage/missile per ton, but the damage is reduced by the missile table.
Yeah, I think I screwed up my multiplication. Sorry; I was on my way out the door when I made that edit.

Anyway... all ACs have 100 points of damage/ton, except for the AC/2, which has inexplicably only 90. All LRM racks have a potential 120 damage/ton, but actually average something more like 76. SRM racks have a potential 200 damage/ton, except for the 6-pack, which is 180, but average somewhere in the 120-140 range, depending on the size.

Streak racks are a straight up 200 (or 180 for the 6), not variable due to missile charts or, unlike every other weapon, even missed shots.

Of course, that number mostly just determines just how dead you are when your ammo kills you. I really, really dislike having ammo inside my mechs. CASE makes ammunition explosions theoretically survivable, if you weren't foolish enough to get an XL engine, but even then having your mech cut in half isn't a lot of fun.

Given my druthers, practically everything I use would be pure-energy loadout. For all I've been talking up the utility of the AC/20, my standard in-your-face C3 spotter unit's weapons loadout is two PPCs (which I think I'm going to switch for a Heavy PPC and a Light PPC, now that I've discovered them, for the greater flexibility in heat production and head-capping gun) and six MLs. And TSM for punching the heads off things. Not a round of ammo in sight. (Well, there is once the master unit back on the ridgeline gets going with its Gausses... Gauss ammo doesn't explode, though, and the mech can survive one of the guns themselves exploding. Light engine, though... it can't take both.)


Odddly, -6s have less potential damage/ton, having only 90 missiles/ton.
16.666... is a really awkward number for shots/ton.


Especially since it's one of the big-hit guns. It, along with Gauss Rifles (standard and Heavy) and the Clans' ERPPC and Large Heavy Laser, is a scary-death-weapon: it's bad news when it hits at all, but the 1/36 chance to tear off a 'Mech's head in one shot is rather scary. AC/10s and IS PPCs (as well as Clan Large lasers) are similar, but can't quite rip off a 'Mech's head, leaving it rather vulnerable to cluster shots.
AC/10s and PPCs won't rip off a full-armored head, but they will penetrate armor and provide a crit chance on a full-armored head. A cockpit hit will kill a mech just as surely as blowing its entire head off.

(My merc unit picked up an almost-intact Grasshopper that way on our last contract. And an otherwise-unscathed Warhammer by blowing its head off with an AC/20.)

Add the Inner Sphere Heavy PPC to the list of L2 headcappers, too.

[The_JJ]

Me, I love the MG boats. Piranhas make me smile.

[Mando Knight]

Me, I love the MG boats. Piranhas make me smile.

Yeah, but they carry a ridiculously large explosion hazard. If it's not CASEd or sufficiently depleted, a single critical on a machine gun ammo slot is guaranteed to turn the 'Mech into nigh-unsalvageable scrap. Fortunately, a single half-ton of the stuff is more than enough ammo for its original purpose (gunning down unaugmented grunts or providing scratch damage on any 'Mech in melee range), so it's relatively unlikely the opponent will hit the crit slot. If you need more MG ammo than that, you're probably chewing through it fast enough that you may even empty a bin before it becomes a problem.

The Piranha is more like a LB 20-X machine than it is a machine gunner... though the MGs have more weapon redundancy than the 20-X, and the ludicrous array is essentially an infantry instakill. It's probably the closest thing I've seen the Clans get to a melee 'Mech, as well.

[Spamotron]

What's the general consensus on XL gyros? The battle value calculator in the Tech Manual doesn't consider them to reduce survivability enough to penalize BV in any meaningful fashion the way XL Engines do. On lighter mechs they often save more weight than Ferro Fibrous armor while only using two additional critical spaces as opposed to fourteen. On the surface it seems installing them is a no-brainer for non assaults.

[Gnoman]

Unlike XL engines, they don't extend the gyro beyond the CTR. XL engines add enough engine crits to the side torso that destroyong either side will destroy the mech.

[IthilanorStPete]

Hello there! I've recently gotten into Battletech thanks to a friend who picked up a boxed set at a garage sale. We've been playing with the Battletech Master Rules, Revised (01707), which I believe is the edition before Total Warfare? (How much has changed between these) We've played a few games, and it's been a good deal of fun. I'm still getting familiar with the rules and all the various mechs.

I've read through this thread, and it's been very informative, so please keep discussing and helping out a newbie! Is there anything particular the veteran Battletech players think I should know?

[The_JJ]

Play with Piranhas and the Fire Moth D. Forest map, double blind rules, start fires. :smallcool:

(Note: Don't actually do this.)

Anyway... yeah. The SA forums actually have a really fun 'Let's Play' going on in a sort of alternate universe. It's amusing, to say the least.

[9mm]

Hello there! I've recently gotten into Battletech thanks to a friend who picked up a boxed set at a garage sale. We've been playing with the Battletech Master Rules, Revised (01707), which I believe is the edition before Total Warfare? (How much has changed between these) We've played a few games, and it's been a good deal of fun. I'm still getting familiar with the rules and all the various mechs.

I've read through this thread, and it's been very informative, so please keep discussing and helping out a newbie! Is there anything particular the veteran Battletech players think I should know?

BMR has most of the basics covered, however it's a bit light on the rules for, at the time, new elements like Power Armor, and I think on map artillery can still end up bombarding itself. The big advantage of Total Warfare though, is the nearly completely up date weapons and tech, with only a few bits of experimental tech missing.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

XL Engines (for IS anyways), are a mixed bag. On the one hand, halving your engine weight is a godsend, but your mech blowing up when you lose a torso is bad.

Personally, I put XL engines in mechs that I hope won't be mixing it up too badly, or who desperately need that extra tonnage/speed. This means light mechs, and long-range fire support mechs, primarily.

Light mechs need every blasted ton they can get. And let's face it, if something DOES core a side torso, odds are it's not going to survive anyways.

Long ranged fire support mechs, at least when I build 'em, tend to use C3 and Semi-Guided missiles (set up with a 'spotter mech' with TAG) and sit back at near maximum range, preferably behind something blocking LoS. With the combination of C3 and the semi-guided + tag, you don't even need to see your target to have pathetically low numbers needed to hit. In such cases, if something gets to them, you've already screwed up.

I do like IS Light engines. It's only got 2 crit slots per torso, which means it's not auto-lose. BUT, it's .75 weight, rather than half. The extra survivability is generally worth the tonnage, in my opinion.

OFC, if you're going Clan, the whole discussion is moot. But for the few, the proud, it's an interesting topic of discussion.

[Swordguy]

Hello there! I've recently gotten into Battletech thanks to a friend who picked up a boxed set at a garage sale. We've been playing with the Battletech Master Rules, Revised (01707), which I believe is the edition before Total Warfare? (How much has changed between these) We've played a few games, and it's been a good deal of fun. I'm still getting familiar with the rules and all the various mechs.

I've read through this thread, and it's been very informative, so please keep discussing and helping out a newbie! Is there anything particular the veteran Battletech players think I should know?


Greetings! I think I'm the token Catalyst Demo Agent on the boards here, so let me welcome you into the fold of Giant Stompy Robot Fighting Action!

In regards to rules differences between editions of BattleTech, one of the nice things about this game is that earlier rulesets are largely compatible. A Mech designed in 1986 is going to be just as valid a battlefield unit as one designed yesterday (with the occasional exception being a single point of armor somewhere on the Mech - armor used to round up, now it rounds down). Likewise, tactics that worked on the battlefield in 1986 will in alsmot every case work on the battlefield today, making allowances for the march of technology in the CBT universe.

Honestly, the biggest difference in the TW ruleset affect non-Mech units, so if you're just playing with aforementioned Giant Stompy Robots, you can move from TW to BMR and back with near-impunity. The three biggest differences in the rulesets are as follows:

1) In BMR, partial cover gives you a +3 bonus to be hit, but you take any fire that hits you on the punch location table, while in TW it's only a +1, but you roll on the full-body hit location table and ignore any leg hits (they hit whatever cover you're hiding behind).
2) When using a targeting computer, you can't make aimed shots with rapid-fire weapons (notably pulse lasers). Pulse Lasers and TComps DO still stack their to-hit bonuses, however (for a total of a -3 to hit bonus).
3) Some unit types are no longer considered "valid" units for unorganized tournament play (having been moved to Tactical Operations). The ones that matter the most are mines and artillery.

Aside from those, it really is a bunch of fiddly little detail things, or stuff that doesn't directly affect Mechs (infantry gets a bunch of changes, for example).

If you're looking at where to start now that you've got a ruleset, I recommend picking up a copy of Technical Readout:3039 and beginning play with Introductory Technology (what BMR called "level 1"). It's oldtech - single heat sinks, basic lasers and autocannons and so forth. Why I recommend starting there is twofold. First, there's less stuff to distract you from learning the mechanics of actually playing the game; very few weapons at that level had special rules, while almost all of them do in Level 2/Tournament-level play (pulse laser to-hit bonus, cluster ammo, streak missiles, TAG, NARC, ECM, etc, etc, etc). Secondly, by learning the game under those limitations, you're not going to take newtech for granted when you do start playing that stuff. Suddenly being able to dissipate 20 heat instead of 10 for free each turn is HUGE, for example, or being able to make a Mech routinely jump at 150% of its walking speed and only build half heat is far more awesome to behold when you've been working under Level 1 rules.

Finally, have fun and ALWAYS communicate with your players. BattleTech can be played on a WIDE variety or "power levels" and customization or campaign options. CGL presents the framework; it's up to you and your group to hash out how exactly you want to play. As the cliche goes: it's your game.

[IthilanorStPete]

In regards to rules differences between editions of BattleTech, one of the nice things about this game is that earlier rulesets are largely compatible. A Mech designed in 1986 is going to be just as valid a battlefield unit as one designed yesterday (with the occasional exception being a single point of armor somewhere on the Mech - armor used to round up, now it rounds down). Likewise, tactics that worked on the battlefield in 1986 will in alsmot every case work on the battlefield today, making allowances for the march of technology in the CBT universe.

Honestly, the biggest difference in the TW ruleset affect non-Mech units, so if you're just playing with aforementioned Giant Stompy Robots, you can move from TW to BMR and back with near-impunity. The three biggest differences in the rulesets are as follows:

1) In BMR, partial cover gives you a +3 bonus to be hit, but you take any fire that hits you on the punch location table, while in TW it's only a +1, but you roll on the full-body hit location table and ignore any leg hits (they hit whatever cover you're hiding behind).
2) When using a targeting computer, you can't make aimed shots with rapid-fire weapons (notably pulse lasers). Pulse Lasers and TComps DO still stack their to-hit bonuses, however (for a total of a -3 to hit bonus).
3) Some unit types are no longer considered "valid" units for unorganized tournament play (having been moved to Tactical Operations). The ones that matter the most are mines and artillery.

Well, this is all good to know. Thanks for the info!


If you're looking at where to start now that you've got a ruleset, I recommend picking up a copy of Technical Readout:3039 and beginning play with Introductory Technology (what BMR called "level 1"). It's oldtech - single heat sinks, basic lasers and autocannons and so forth. Why I recommend starting there is twofold. First, there's less stuff to distract you from learning the mechanics of actually playing the game; very few weapons at that level had special rules, while almost all of them do in Level 2/Tournament-level play (pulse laser to-hit bonus, cluster ammo, streak missiles, TAG, NARC, ECM, etc, etc, etc). Secondly, by learning the game under those limitations, you're not going to take newtech for granted when you do start playing that stuff. Suddenly being able to dissipate 20 heat instead of 10 for free each turn is HUGE, for example, or being able to make a Mech routinely jump at 150% of its walking speed and only build half heat is far more awesome to behold when you've been working under Level 1 rules.

Oh, we already have gone beyond the Level 1 stuff - we have TR 3025 and 3050, and have been playing with mechs out of those, as well as custom mechs. I've played a good few matches, going up to 4v4 scale.

[Provengreil]

Play with Piranhas and the Fire Moth D. Forest map, double blind rules, start fires. :smallcool:

(Note: Don't actually do this.)

Anyway... yeah. The SA forums actually have a really fun 'Let's Play' going on in a sort of alternate universe. It's amusing, to say the least.

I did that once in the megamek program! it broke.

[Provengreil]

Actually a hit or two to non cased ammo would work just as well as getting 3 successive engine hits, and has a higher probability... if some one is stupid or cocky enough not to case their ammo

well, what about an XL engine? even if it's a standard engine and the mech survives the hit, ammobooms are usually mission kills, taking the mech out to such a degree that only blind luck can help him at that point. you're looking at lost crits, concentrated damage on the CT due to damage flow, warrior hits, the works. what if the mech falls over, blasted off a hill? even cased ammo explosions may well mean nothing more than that the pilot himself lives to fight another day.

[mangosta71]

It means there's enough left of the Mech to be salvaged, at the very least.

[RandomLunatic]

Is there anything out there that offers an explanation of why the Clanners disdain physical combat? It is not like they do not know how-armed and unarmed melee is frequent method of dispute resolution in the Warrior caste, and it seems inconsistant with thier oft-demonstrated "victory or death" attitude.


Their commanding officer had ordered Ter Roshak's unit to stay alive as long as possible, and to keep on shooting the whole time. If they ran out of ammo, they were to use knives. If they lost their knives, they were to go after the nearest enemy with thier bare hands. If their hands were broken, they must kick the enemy with their feet. If their feet were shot off, they must crawl to the enemy warriors and in some other way try to kill them. If they could not crawl, they must fire into the nearest brush. If they could not move, they must simply wait to die. If they could not die, then there must be something wrong with their attitude.

So why do the rules abruptly change when they mount up?

[Mando Knight]

Is there anything out there that offers an explanation of why the Clanners disdain physical combat? It is not like they do not know how-armed and unarmed melee is frequent method of dispute resolution in the Warrior caste, and it seems inconsistant with thier oft-demonstrated "victory or death" attitude.



So why do the rules abruptly change when they mount up?

Clanners disdain physical 'Mech combat because that's what Kerensky taught them. In some ways, it makes sense: gunning down your opponent before he can reach you and staying out of the way of a Spheroid's raging fists is rather effective. Especially when your engineers have developed the best ranged weapons in the galaxy.

[John Campbell]

Like everything else about Clan "honor", it's a cynical bid to give playing to their strengths rather than the Inner Sphere's an air of moral superiority.

[MeeposFire]

Physical combat can be nasty. It is also a way to try to force clan players to not do an effective tactic (physical combat at close range) to slightly offset to the tiniest degree the power advantage that clanners have. To make it make sense they claim it is about honor.

[John Campbell]

Thing is, physical combat is one of the very few areas where Inner Sphere mechs can match or exceed Clan capabilities. Fighting at close range also nullifies some of the Clan ranged weapon cheese. So disdaining physical combat isn't offsetting any of their advantages... it's encouraging them to stay out at range where they can exploit all their advantages to the maximum rather than getting into a hand-to-hand brawl where their precious Dire Wolf is on an even footing with an Inner Sphere Atlas, or maybe even outmatched by some TSM monstrosity.

And by spinning it as the proper and honorable way for a true mechwarrior to fight, maybe they can get the Spheroids to buy it, too, and not press the rare Inner Sphere advantage. It worked disturbingly well for their, "Hey, wouldn't it be nice if the Inner Sphere would throw away their numerical advantage and everything they've learned about tactics in three hundred years of war and engage our individually superior mechs in a series of one-on-one duels," initiative...

You notice they don't have any problem with hand-to-hand combat when their guys are half again the size of their Inner Sphere counterparts and wrapped in powered armor to boot...

[RandomLunatic]

Your theory depends on the assumption the Inner Sphere troops ever bought into zellbrigen, which, barring a few instances with the Draconis Combine, they did not.

[Gnoman]

IIRC, one of the main reasons that Kerensky instituted the idea was to keep combat less personal, thus keeping the clans from developing the petty personal feuds that would eventually turn the Inner Sphere into a running sore.

[MeeposFire]

Less personal? Outside of maybe the Combine the clans seem to have more personal attacks than anybody. Everything is personal to them heck they have circle of equals to handle the constant personal problems that come up in the clans. At times it is alright to kill somebody for a personal slight. That would be looked on unkindly in many inner sphere realms (well officially anyway). If anything the clans survived because they made things more personal. By making warriors fight each other in personal duels they limit damage to the clans themselves.

[Reverent-One]

In regards to rules differences between editions of BattleTech, one of the nice things about this game is that earlier rulesets are largely compatible. A Mech designed in 1986 is going to be just as valid a battlefield unit as one designed yesterday (with the occasional exception being a single point of armor somewhere on the Mech - armor used to round up, now it rounds down). Likewise, tactics that worked on the battlefield in 1986 will in alsmot every case work on the battlefield today, making allowances for the march of technology in the CBT universe.

Honestly, the biggest difference in the TW ruleset affect non-Mech units, so if you're just playing with aforementioned Giant Stompy Robots, you can move from TW to BMR and back with near-impunity. The three biggest differences in the rulesets are as follows:

1) In BMR, partial cover gives you a +3 bonus to be hit, but you take any fire that hits you on the punch location table, while in TW it's only a +1, but you roll on the full-body hit location table and ignore any leg hits (they hit whatever cover you're hiding behind).
2) When using a targeting computer, you can't make aimed shots with rapid-fire weapons (notably pulse lasers). Pulse Lasers and TComps DO still stack their to-hit bonuses, however (for a total of a -3 to hit bonus).
3) Some unit types are no longer considered "valid" units for unorganized tournament play (having been moved to Tactical Operations). The ones that matter the most are mines and artillery.

Aside from those, it really is a bunch of fiddly little detail things, or stuff that doesn't directly affect Mechs (infantry gets a bunch of changes, for example).


Huh, I was actually coming in to ask about the changes in Total Warfare, since I'm going to Gencon and am planning on participating in some Battletech games. This is good to know. And I am correct in understanding that megamek uses the current ruleset as well?

[Swordguy]

Huh, I was actually coming in to ask about the changes in Total Warfare, since I'm going to Gencon and am planning on participating in some Battletech games. This is good to know. And I am correct in understanding that megamek uses the current ruleset as well?

What are you playing in? I ask because I'll be running the Trial of Bloodright this year, and while I'm normally quite active in running Grinders and the Canon events, this year I'm going to be almost entirely consumed in running Leviathans (http://monstersinthesky.com/) - a game of flying WW1-style Battleships. Look for the guy in a German naval uniform and a nifty hat!

And yes, at this time, MegaMek has been updated with the current rules to the best of my knowledge. I say that, granted, not having touched it in almost 3 years.

[Reverent-One]

What are you playing in? I ask because I'll be running the Trial of Bloodright this year, and while I'm normally quite active in running Grinders and the Canon events, this year I'm going to be almost entirely consumed in running Leviathans (http://monstersinthesky.com/) - a game of flying WW1-style Battleships. Look for the guy in a German naval uniform and a nifty hat!


Trial of Bloodright for sure I'll be at. A keep what you kill with the chance for a bloodname? I'm going, no doubt. Also likely going to hit up a lance tactics session as well, maybe War of Reaving too.

[wuwuwu]

So I got the 25th anniversary pack yesterday, played a few games with my brother. It was pretty fun, but we haven't played with heat rules or internal structure yet (which lead to his Awesome using all 3 PPCs in one turn, headshotting my Atlas and destroying it :smallsigh:)

I was reading those in the introductory book today, as well as looking at the movement rules. One thing I don't get is:

It shows a diagram of a 'Mech moving 3 different paths out of depth 2 water. 1 uses 1 movement to get to shallower water, then starts jumping (if I read the section right), but another path uses 4 movement to get to shallower water, and then moves into heavy forest.

Why does it use 4 to move from Depth 2 to Depth 1 in only one case? I might've misread something, but I looked over it 4-5 times and couldn't figure out what's up. I'm pretty sure it said that 'Mechs cannot jump out of Depth 2 water, so there goes that explanation... Edit: Okay, so it's Depth 1 water, and it uses jump jets that aren't submerged. So I think I get it now. It costs 4 for path IV's first move because: 1 to turn facing, 1 to move into the hex, +1 from Depth 1 water (no level change), but I can't find where the last 1 MP comes from still?

Any help?

Also, while I'm here: I fell in LOVE with the Thunder Stallion when I was first researching the game, and built a Hell's Horses Star based around it. Keeping in mind I barely know the introductory rules, how does this list look? Is it keeping in line with the fluff of Hell's Horses, and would it be effective in actual game play?


Thunder Stallion
Balius (Alt. A)
Orc x 5
Epona Pursuit Tank x 2
Athena Battle Tank (I think that is it's name?) x 2

[Seatbelt]

What are you playing in? I ask because I'll be running the Trial of Bloodright this year, and while I'm normally quite active in running Grinders and the Canon events, this year I'm going to be almost entirely consumed in running Leviathans (http://monstersinthesky.com/) - a game of flying WW1-style Battleships. Look for the guy in a German naval uniform and a nifty hat!

And yes, at this time, MegaMek has been updated with the current rules to the best of my knowledge. I say that, granted, not having touched it in almost 3 years.

Dude I saw you around.

[shadowolf]

It shows a diagram of a 'Mech moving 3 different paths out of depth 2 water. 1 uses 1 movement to get to shallower water, then starts jumping (if I read the section right), but another path uses 4 movement to get to shallower water, and then moves into heavy forest.

Why does it use 4 to move from Depth 2 to Depth 1 in only one case? I might've misread something, but I looked over it 4-5 times and couldn't figure out what's up. I'm pretty sure it said that 'Mechs cannot jump out of Depth 2 water, so there goes that explanation... Edit: Okay, so it's Depth 1 water, and it uses jump jets that aren't submerged. So I think I get it now. It costs 4 for path IV's first move because: 1 to turn facing, 1 to move into the hex, +1 from Depth 1 water (no level change), but I can't find where the last 1 MP comes from still?

Any help?



Are looking at the diagram on page 54?

[Sahaar]

Hey I dunno if this has been mentioned earlier, but what would everyone think about a MechWarrior FFRP?

We could be an Inner Sphere lance during the Clan Wars :P

[wuwuwu]

Are looking at the diagram on page 54?

In my introductory rule book, it is on page 26. If I had a scanner, I'd scan it as a visual aide.

[Chells]

How tough would it be to jump into this game cold? I was just talking to friend about running a mech game using skype or some other remote tool since my players are a couple states apart from each other. I was hoping to find a simple system to run a trio of mech pilots through a couple role-playing senerios. Is there an easy place to start with Battletech or am I better of with another system that does not have a 1/4 century of history behind it?

[Hawriel]

battletech would play just fine over the net.

Try megamek for a full rules game. Free to download.

Also RPtools maptools has a hex grid. just make a map and plop it in. The token maker can be used to make mech tokens.

[Reverent-One]

Hey I dunno if this has been mentioned earlier, but what would everyone think about a MechWarrior FFRP?

We could be an Inner Sphere lance during the Clan Wars :P

See, I'd be more interested in some sort of campaign using the actual ruleset, played over Megamek or something, than something free form.

[mangosta71]

There's also an official ruleset for RP in the BT universe called MechWarrior. It's actually one of the better systems I've seen for modeling damage to different parts of a character's body.

[The Glyphstone]

There's also an official ruleset for RP in the BT universe called MechWarrior. It's actually one of the better systems I've seen for modeling damage to different parts of a character's body.

Better than Dwarf Fortress?:smallbiggrin::smallcool:

[Rockphed]

Better than Dwarf Fortress?:smallbiggrin::smallcool:

Doubtful, but it can probably be done by hand without spending an hour calculating each attack.

[Hawriel]

There's also an official ruleset for RP in the BT universe called MechWarrior. It's actually one of the better systems I've seen for modeling damage to different parts of a character's body.

A Time of War is the current Battletech RPG book. It is also written so you can blend RPG rules into standard board game rules.

[wuwuwu]

Can somebody clarify something about destruction for me? I know there are salvage rules, so this is probably cleared up in a "real"/full rulebook, but:

If a part (let's say Left Torso) is destroyed (0 armor and 0 Internal Structure), does that mean all weapons/jumpjets/whatever in that part are destroyed as well? Or are those only destroyed when you score critical hits on them (making them immune to destruction when you reduce the Armor/IS of a location to 0)?

I'm assuming they are destroyed when their location is destroyed, but I could be wrong. It would be weird to be able to use Left Torso mounted weapons/jumpjets when you don't have a Left Torso, though.

[Mando Knight]

Can somebody clarify something about destruction for me? I know there are salvage rules, so this is probably cleared up in a "real"/full rulebook, but:

If a part (let's say Left Torso) is destroyed (0 armor and 0 Internal Structure), does that mean all weapons/jumpjets/whatever in that part are destroyed as well? Or are those only destroyed when you score critical hits on them (making them immune to destruction when you reduce the Armor/IS of a location to 0)?

I'm assuming they are destroyed when their location is destroyed, but I could be wrong. It would be weird to be able to use Left Torso mounted weapons/jumpjets when you don't have a Left Torso, though.
For salvage purposes, the parts themselves may still be at least salvageable (see Strategic Operations, page 175 and following for salvage/repair rules). However, when a body slot is destroyed, everything connected to that section functions as if destroyed, since that section lost the structural integrity needed to function. Lose a side torso? You lose not only that side torso, but also the corresponding arm and leg.

[Sahaar]

But let's say you took it anyway. Can you repair it and make it work again?

[wuwuwu]

For salvage purposes, the parts themselves may still be at least salvageable (see Strategic Operations, page 175 and following for salvage/repair rules). However, when a body slot is destroyed, everything connected to that section functions as if destroyed, since that section lost the structural integrity needed to function. Lose a side torso? You lose not only that side torso, but also the corresponding arm and leg.

Ahh, thank you. I really need to pick up one of the more advanced rulebooks, this introductory ruleset is wearing thin already :smallbiggrin:

On a side note, any way for me to get more longevity out of my 'Mech's record sheets? Filling in the dots and then erasing them after battles doesn't seem the best way, and I don't have a scanner/printer so I guess my real question is:

Is there a program to use to keep track of all that stuff? I have Skunkwerks but that's for building them (unless I'm missing functionality!) or will I have to be buying new record sheets every couple of games?

[tyckspoon]

Get the sheets for your favorite mech(s) laminated and use wet/dry erase markers or grease pencils on it. Otherwise, no, you're just going to burn a lot of record sheets.

[wuwuwu]

Get the sheets for your favorite mech(s) laminated and use wet/dry erase markers or grease pencils on it. Otherwise, no, you're just going to burn a lot of record sheets.

GENIUS!!!

Although, the only place I know of with lamination machines is the middle school I went to. I guess those clear plastic paper covers will do (not as impressive, and I'd have to tear the record sheets out of the book, but will work).

Thank you!

[tyckspoon]

GENIUS!!!

Although, the only place I know of with lamination machines is the middle school I went to. I guess those clear plastic paper covers will do (not as impressive, and I'd have to tear the record sheets out of the book, but will work).

Thank you!

Ah. In that case- put a copy of the Skunkworks file for whatever mechs on a USB stick, take it to a Kinko's or similar copy-shop (I know Staples and some of the other office supply stores run one too) and run off a few sheets (or get somebody you know who owns a printer to let you do it.) You can have the same places laminate them, but the report covers will probably work too, or you can get press-seal cold lamination packets that you basically just wrap the paper in and put a book on top of. Don't know how the pricing on that compares to having it hot-sealed by a copy store.

[Mando Knight]

But let's say you took it anyway. Can you repair it and make it work again?

That's what Strategic Operations' Salvage and Repair rules are for: determining if you can salvage the items and then if they are salvaged, what you need to do to get them at least working again. 'Mech technicians are generally fairly comfortable with jury-rigging what they can't outright repair (especially in the IS, where they had to do so more often than not, particularly when they're trying to patch up Clan/LosTech), though if the CT is completely cooked, the 'Mech itself is beyond repair.

[wuwuwu]

Ah. In that case- put a copy of the Skunkworks file for whatever mechs on a USB stick, take it to a Kinko's or similar copy-shop (I know Staples and some of the other office supply stores run one too) and run off a few sheets (or get somebody you know who owns a printer to let you do it.) You can have the same places laminate them, but the report covers will probably work too, or you can get press-seal cold lamination packets that you basically just wrap the paper in and put a book on top of. Don't know how the pricing on that compares to having it hot-sealed by a copy store.

I'll have to look into where the nearest copy-shop is, then.

Also, I just remembered one more question. Does damage from kicks transfer? It only comes up because last night, I had a Dervish kick a Spider so hard, not only was the leg ruined but the center torso apparently exploded as well, which doesn't seem right.

I've always imagined 'Mechs as kicking outward, rather than upward, meaning in order to hit the torso the Dervish would have had to kicked far higher than the leg.

Of course, I could just be trying too hard to mix fluff and mechanics, and shouldn't think this hard about it :smalltongue:

[Hawriel]

yes kick damage transfers.

[mangosta71]

All damage transfers. Though the damage should have gone through the side torso before hitting the CT (unless that's changed in the 10 or so years it's been since the edition I have came out).

Lose a side torso? You lose not only that side torso, but also the corresponding arm and leg.
This is an example of the rules changing. Back when I was playing, the leg still functioned after losing the side torso.

[wuwuwu]

All damage transfers. Though the damage should have gone through the side torso before hitting the CT (unless that's changed in the 10 or so years it's been since the edition I have came out).

This is an example of the rules changing. Back when I was playing, the leg still functioned after losing the side torso.

His side had previously been ripped off by a max range AC 20 from my Hunchback :smallcool:

But thanks. Good to know. Still kind've trying to figure out exactly what happened there fluffwise, but knowing it's solid in the rules is good enough!

[RandomLunatic]

Can somebody clarify something about destruction for me? I know there are salvage rules, so this is probably cleared up in a "real"/full rulebook, but:

If a part (let's say Left Torso) is destroyed (0 armor and 0 Internal Structure), does that mean all weapons/jumpjets/whatever in that part are destroyed as well? Or are those only destroyed when you score critical hits on them (making them immune to destruction when you reduce the Armor/IS of a location to 0)?

I'm assuming they are destroyed when their location is destroyed, but I could be wrong. It would be weird to be able to use Left Torso mounted weapons/jumpjets when you don't have a Left Torso, though.
I cannot speak for Strategic Operations, but BMR:R has anything that had all of its critical slots crossed off (including being in a cored-out location) only being salvagable on a straight 2d6 roll of 10+.


This is an example of the rules changing. Back when I was playing, the leg still functioned after losing the side torso.
My copy of Total Warfare only says arm, right at the bottom of page 123.

[The_JJ]

My copy of Total Warfare only says arm, right at the bottom of page 123.

That was my understanding.

[Mando Knight]

My copy of Total Warfare only says arm, right at the bottom of page 123.
I stand corrected, then. When I was looking up the rules on salvage, I think I dropped the ball when I was skimming over the bit where it mentions that a Quad's foreleg is considered blown off since it has no arms, also subconsciously reversing the damage transfer at the same time.

As to kick damage transferring, think of it as a kick sufficiently powerful that it tears the parts holding it to the torso (and the parts connected to those parts) loose. I mean, we're talking twelve, fifteen meter tall semi-humanoid war machines. Breaking one of its legs is gonna hurt.

[Sahaar]

As to kick damage transferring, think of it as a kick sufficiently powerful that it tears the parts holding it to the torso (and the parts connected to those parts) loose. I mean, we're talking twelve, fifteen meter tall semi-humanoid war machines. Breaking one of its legs is gonna hurt.


I agree. It wouldn't surprise me if a missile or laser or some other weapon damaged the weapon system's connection to the pilot's computer if hit in a certain place.

[The Glyphstone]

Or just a meta-Chuck-Norris-esque level of force....you punch their arm so hard the shockwave travels down their veins and makes their heart explode.

[Sahaar]

or that :smallyuk:


Also, could somebody tell me why skunkworks won't work on my computer?

I've got the latest version of Java, I've got the SSW sitting on my desktop and it doesn't work!

It puts up the little logo and says loading, then the logo dissapears and nothing else happens. What's wrong?

[Provengreil]

Ahh, thank you. I really need to pick up one of the more advanced rulebooks, this introductory ruleset is wearing thin already :smallbiggrin:

On a side note, any way for me to get more longevity out of my 'Mech's record sheets? Filling in the dots and then erasing them after battles doesn't seem the best way, and I don't have a scanner/printer so I guess my real question is:

Is there a program to use to keep track of all that stuff? I have Skunkwerks but that's for building them (unless I'm missing functionality!) or will I have to be buying new record sheets every couple of games?

I used a shorthand method where i just tallied damage per location on a separate sheet of paper. looked a bit like this:

head(9 armor)-lll

CT(34 armor)-lllll lllll lll

etc. I marked off ammo and stuff in a separate location, and so on. saved a lot of printer ink, and you don't care about disposal. it lets you keep one record sheet, which you need, through many games.

Also, for the salvage thing, every piece of equipment with all it's critical slots crossed off gets a 2d6 roll. on a 10+, it can be salvaged. otherwise, it's just too far gone. this includes things in a cored out location, but i think anything destroyed via ammo explosion or artillery is always unsalvageable.

[John Campbell]

There are three levels of "destruction": destroyed, truly destroyed, and completely destroyed.

"Destroyed" is anything that renders the unit non-functional. Destroyed units are no longer combat-effective, but can be repaired and returned to service or stripped for parts.

"Truly destroyed" means that the unit is irreparably destroyed. For mechs, this means that the center torso lost all of its IS boxes. You can salvage parts off a truly destroyed unit, but you can't repair it and return it to service.

"Completely destroyed" means that there isn't even anything left to salvage. It generally happens when the unit was destroyed by an AoE weapon (artillery, nuke, etc.) or unCASEd ammo explosion.

[Misfit702]

Hey gang, I was wondering if I could get some input on a very good light mech. You see, my GM is the kinda guy who likes to throw us into crazy one sided fights (for him) and my pilot I play died last week from a head shot. I guess he couldn't eject in time. Anyhow, I've got this new pilot who is a born mercenary, grew up mercenary and entered the Solaris VII games. Hes got a Vehicle trait of 2 and a custom vehicle trait of 3. I'm hoping there's a really decent light mech out there that might last on the battlefield for more than one session. I had a Talon he picked for me last time. It seemed decent with a PPC and 2 med lasers with double heat sinks. Keep in mind I also realize that head shots are a thing of bad luck and given the chance to play that same battle again it could go an entirely different direction. Thanks in advance for any input.

[Mando Knight]

You're playing post 3050, right? See if you can score a Clan 'Mech. They generally have better longevity than IS 'Mechs on a one-to-one basis, partly because their XL engines are smaller than the IS versions, and their lasers are generally more powerful without drawing more heat (compared to the IS's ER counterparts).

Adder (Puma) and Cougar are two good Jade Falcon 35-ton 'Mechs. They're slower than the Talon, but should otherwise be tougher.

OTOH, try to upgrade your weight class ASAP. Lights are fine, but if you're looking for PC survivability, having more guns and more armor (except on the head, where even Assault 'Mechs cap out at 9/3 armor/structure) is the way to go. Also look for insta-headcap-weapons and cluster fire. Gauss Rifles, AC/20s, Clan ERPPCs, etc. blow the head clean off if you roll boxcars on hit location. Missiles and LB-X autocannon can pepper a 'Mech... batter the pilot with multiple shots to the head, slam into critical systems that had their armor blasted off by the bigger weapons...

[Provengreil]

dude, really? if he could score a clan mech, he'd probably in the clans, not being a merc. so if we ignore the advice that amounts to "play a wizard," you could try out a wolfhound. it's a 3050 mech, 35 tons, 120 armor points. It has no jumping ability, but it packs double heat sinks and 5 lasers, one of which is large, so you might be able to do well with it.

[Philistine]

If you're limited to Lights, the Talon is pretty good. It's at the heavy end of the weight category, meaning it's about as tough as can be expected (well, apart from the XL engine). It's fast enough to give opponents significantly worse modifiers to attack it than it incurs for its attacks on them. And it's got a long-range energy weapon, and enough heat sinks to use it.

Clan tech is indeed t3h h4x, but most of it ratchets up your offense rather than directly improving your survivability. The only real way to boost that is to move up to heavier weight categories - and even then, headshots will still ruin your day.

[Misfit702]

Cool! Thanks for the info gang. Yeah all Clan stuff is off limits. I managed to get into a AF1 Arctic Fox this time around. It has a nice variety of weapons in range and firepower. Sickly kittens hanging on the back of my armor to protect me though...We will see how it goes :smallsmile:

[wuwuwu]

Technical Readout's give fluff and record sheets for a bunch of 'Mechs, right?
I'm assuming it gives fluff about what faction uses what 'Mechs?
I want to get 3025 (it seems to be the only one with Jenner and Hunchback?) to build an Inner Sphere lance for Davion or Steiner and want everything to be appropriate and flavorful, but 3025 seems fairly out of date. Would it be better to get 3085?

Does it really matter?

[mangosta71]

I've never seen actual record sheets in a TR. You could generate a record sheet for any Omni from the information in a TR, but the entries for non-Omnis don't lay out the entire crit table. The major thing there is that you'll have to guess where heat sinks that aren't packed into the engine go.

On another note, the Jenner and Hunchback both appear in the 3050 TR. That's a little better than the 3025, right?

[The Glyphstone]

Swordguy, any internal FASA tidbits/rumors about the legal limbo state of the Mechwarrior game reboot? What with your...connections...

[Spamotron]

Technical Readout's give fluff and record sheets for a bunch of 'Mechs, right?
I'm assuming it gives fluff about what faction uses what 'Mechs?
I want to get 3025 (it seems to be the only one with Jenner and Hunchback?) to build an Inner Sphere lance for Davion or Steiner and want everything to be appropriate and flavorful, but 3025 seems fairly out of date. Would it be better to get 3085?

Does it really matter?

The Sarna Battletech Wiki sorts mechs by sub-categories including factions.

For example here is the Federated Suns battlemech page: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Category:Federated_Suns_BattleMechs

Each individual mech page has a References list at the bottom that includes the Tech Manual and hence year it was available.

[John Campbell]

On another note, the Jenner and Hunchback both appear in the 3050 TR. That's a little better than the 3025, right?

The HBK-5M Hunchback in TR:3050 is not better than the 3025 HBK-4G base model... or any of the other 3025 variants. Whether the 3050 JR7-K Jenner is better than the 3025 JR7-D is disputable... the 3025 JR7-F variant is better than either, in any case.

Many of the recovered-tech overhauls given to the mechs in TR:3050 are... not ideal. This may have been a deliberate reflection of in-universe incompetence. The HBK-5M Hunchback, though, is one of a handful that transcends "not ideal" for the lofty heights of, "No, seriously, what were you thinking?!?"

They double-heat-sinked it. They replaced the small laser in the head with a small pulse laser. And they added CASE. Those are all well and good, and the last actually fixes a real problem with the old HBK-4G. But, when they put in the DHS, they didn't remove the extras, and the HBK-4G was a pretty cool-running mech to begin with. With double heat sinks, you've got a mech that can alpha strike and run after taking two engine hits and only gain 1 heat. That's kind of excessive heatsinkery, but not really a problem in and of itself. Where it becomes a problem is, because they didn't take out the extra heat sinks, and because they upgraded the pointless afterthought gun to something only slightly less pointless rather than just taking it out, the tonnage to get the CASE in there (and to upgrade the small laser) came out of the AC/20 ammo bin, which was never any too big to begin with... I've shot my 4G's ten-round bin dry in more than one fight. Upshot is, it gets five shots with its main gun - which is the thing that makes the Hunchback a terror weapon rather than something light mechs laugh at - and then it's done. Might as well go home; its two medium lasers aren't worth keeping it on the field for.

The Jenner, on the other hand... its overhaul basically trades a point of armor for CASE. I'd usually consider that a net win, but... CASE isn't really all that valuable on a mech that's that fragile to begin with, and that single point of armor makes the difference between the CT armor being able to stop a PPC or two ML hits, and not. And it doesn't take the obvious step to address the Jenner's real, big, and obvious heat problem, and only makes its pathetically light armor worse. The JR7-F addresses both of those problems and fixes the explody-ammo problem in one swoop just by taking off the weapon with the explody ammo, which it hasn't got the heat sinks to use anyway, and using the tonnage for armor.

[Swordguy]

Swordguy, any internal FASA tidbits/rumors about the legal limbo state of the Mechwarrior game reboot? What with your...connections...

Dude, NDA's...

[The Glyphstone]

Dude, NDA's...

Does "it's still stuck" or "problems solved" count as breaking the NDA?

[mangosta71]

The HBK-4M Hunchback in TR:3050 is not better than the 3025 HBK-4G base model... or any of the other 3025 variants. Whether the 3050 JR7-K Jenner is better than the 3025 JR7-D is disputable... the 3025 JR7-F variant is better than either, in any case.

Many of the recovered-tech overhauls given to the mechs in TR:3050 are... not ideal. This may have been a deliberate reflection of in-universe incompetence. The HBK-5M Hunchback, though, is one of a handful that transcends "not ideal" for the lofty heights of, "No, seriously, what were you thinking?!?"

They double-heat-sinked it. They replaced the small laser in the head with a small pulse laser. And they added CASE. Those are all well and good, and the last actually fixes a real problem with the old HBK-4G. But, when they put in the DHS, they didn't remove the extras, and the HBK-4G was a pretty cool-running mech to begin with. With double heat sinks, you've got a mech that can alpha strike and run after taking two engine hits and only gain 1 heat. That's kind of excessive heatsinkery, but not really a problem in and of itself. Where it becomes a problem is, because they didn't take out the extra heat sinks, and because they upgraded the pointless afterthought gun to something only slightly less pointless rather than just taking it out, the tonnage to get the CASE in there (and to upgrade the small laser) came out of the AC/20 ammo bin, which was never any too big to begin with... I've shot my 4G's ten-round bin dry in more than one fight. Upshot is, it gets five shots with its main gun - which is the thing that makes the Hunchback a terror weapon rather than something light mechs laugh at - and then it's done. Might as well go home; its two medium lasers aren't worth keeping it on the field for.
Yeah, I didn't actually read the entries before I posted that - just checked to see that they were there. I actually read the fluff on the Hunchback after. It seems to me that a better modification would have been to simply remove the small laser entirely to free weight for CASE. And yes, if I was customizing one for myself, I would strip out those 3 extra heat sinks and slap on another pair of medium lasers and bring the ammo capacity up to 3 tons. Final loadout: 10 total double heat sinks, AC/20 with 15 shots (with CASE), 4 medium lasers. That would be an upgrade.

The Jenner, on the other hand... its overhaul basically trades a point of armor for CASE. I'd usually consider that a net win, but... CASE isn't really all that valuable on a mech that's that fragile to begin with, and that single point of armor makes the difference between the CT armor being able to stop a PPC or two ML hits, and not. And it doesn't take the obvious step to address the Jenner's real, big, and obvious heat problem, and only makes its pathetically light armor worse. The JR7-F addresses both of those problems and fixes the explody-ammo problem in one swoop just by taking off the weapon with the explody ammo, which it hasn't got the heat sinks to use anyway, and using the tonnage for armor.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of ammo-consuming weapons on lights. They just don't have enough weight for heat to be a serious problem with double heat sinks. Load 'em up with energy weapons. Don't remember enough about the Jenner off the top of my head to say how I'd fix it in detail, but the missile launcher would definitely be out.

[Swordguy]

Does "it's still stuck" or "problems solved" count as breaking the NDA?

Pretty much anything aside from "it's still in development and NOT canceled" would count.

However, I can also give you this link from Brian Enkman, the lead developer for Mech5: http://twitter.com/#!/bryanekman/status/78115516572639232

Which is a fairly strong indicator that it's still on track, yes?

[The Glyphstone]

It's more than anything else for a year or so, so that's good enough.

[wuwuwu]

Thanks for the replies, guys! I especially like the SARNA link, how didn't I find that before! (I think in the back of my mind I knew about it, because I'm pretty sure I used a similar list to figure out what Clans used what).

And good to know the 2050 designs aren't superior, but one thing...


The Jenner, on the other hand... its overhaul basically trades a point of armor for CASE. I'd usually consider that a net win, but... CASE isn't really all that valuable on a mech that's that fragile to begin with, and that single point of armor makes the difference between the CT armor being able to stop a PPC or two ML hits, and not.

Does this mean that using my Jenner to draw fire while the Hunchback sneaks into position is...a bad idea? My Jenner has been taking the most damage every fight (and surviving), because my brother ALWAYS falls for it's "obvious charge out of the woods with hunchback right behind it" technique :smalltongue:
So did MegaMek's bots, actually.

[Mando Knight]

Does this mean that using my Jenner to draw fire while the Hunchback sneaks into position is...a bad idea?

Not necessarily. It is pointless, however, to protect a Jenner from an ammo explosion when it's so fragile anyway and only has one ammunition system. The Ferro-Fibrous armor and otherwise fairly open body helps the K to still actually be a straight upgrade of the D, though.

[mangosta71]

You can use it that way as long as you're using its mobility to make it nearly impossible to hit. Bear in mind that a smart/patient player will ignore it once the Hunchback makes an appearance. And if your opponent has access to Clan pulse lasers, the Jenner is likely to bite it before the Hunchback gets into the fight. Especially if they're slaved to a targeting computer.

[Mando Knight]

If you're fighting an enemy with access to Clan Pulse Lasers and Targeting Computers, you probably need to re-think using a Jenner/Hunchback combo anyway.

[mangosta71]

Well, he referenced the 3085 TR. I didn't realize that the universe had progressed that far since I stopped following it. (I quit reading the novels around the Twilight of the Clans saga.) Of course, it's also possible that that was a typo and he meant 3058...

Either way, in that time period Clan tech is around and available.

[Mando Knight]

Having access to 3085 tech and using 3085 tech are two different things. If you're using only 3025/3038 machines and your opponent is bringing out Clan tech, you'd better be using BV, 2 Lances to the Star, or some other balancing method, since straight up tonnage will usually murder you.

If you're using C3-equipped versions of the Jenner and Hunchback, though, you've probably got a good enough tech level to risk going by straight tonnage.

[Rockphed]

Pretty much anything aside from "it's still in development and NOT canceled" would count.

However, I can also give you this link from Brian Enkman, the lead developer for Mech5: http://twitter.com/#!/bryanekman/status/78115516572639232

Which is a fairly strong indicator that it's still on track, yes?

Good to know. I just hope that I have a stable job by the time it comes out. Also that it doesn't turn into the next Duke Nukem Forever.

I wonder if the other side in this whole legal mess would respond favorably to trial by combat? I remain confident that a series of matches across all the mechwarrior games would produce favorable results. Or be instructive evidence to present in court. I have seen a couple things noting that the developer of minecraft challenged bethesda to a duel* for the right to use "Scrolls" as a title for a game.

*Specifically it will be something like 3 deathmatches in quake 3.

[big teej]

so... seeing this thread kick back up has also rekindled my interest in playing...


sadly, I still can't get megamek to work on my computer (any idea what I'm doing wrong?)


anywho, on top of this, I was wondering if I could cram this many weapons into an atlas.

1 AC10 on each arm
1 gauss rifle in left torso
1 SRM in right torso
4 MPL in center torso

and if that's not as outrageous a loadout as I think it is, I'd like to stow a second gauss rifle in the left torso.

the plan for this little avatar of death being

-sight enemy-
fire off the ACs to get their attention (and put the fear of god in them if I hit)
fire of the SRMs to exploit any gaps I've made in the armor
fire off the gauss rifle to punch MORE holes in the baddie.
and if they get to close, MPL the hell out of them.

:smallbiggrin:I like the mental image at least, which sounds like a great place to start.

[MeeposFire]

so... seeing this thread kick back up has also rekindled my interest in playing...


sadly, I still can't get megamek to work on my computer (any idea what I'm doing wrong?)


anywho, on top of this, I was wondering if I could cram this many weapons into an atlas.

1 AC10 on each arm
1 gauss rifle in left torso
1 SRM in right torso
4 MPL in center torso

and if that's not as outrageous a loadout as I think it is, I'd like to stow a second gauss rifle in the left torso.

the plan for this little avatar of death being

-sight enemy-
fire off the ACs to get their attention (and put the fear of god in them if I hit)
fire of the SRMs to exploit any gaps I've made in the armor
fire off the gauss rifle to punch MORE holes in the baddie.
and if they get to close, MPL the hell out of them.

:smallbiggrin:I like the mental image at least, which sounds like a great place to start.

I think you can though two of those lasers will need to not be in the center torso (I believe there are only two free criticals in the center chest). You should probably make those LBX ACs.

[tyckspoon]

-snip-

You can just about do this if you don't mind being very low-mobility; you can shove all of that in (except the 2nd Gauss rifle- for that one, either something else has to go to free up the tonnage, or you have to settle for being basically stationary) on a 100-ton frame with 2/3 movement and somewhat decent survivability, since you can pull it off with a standard fusion engine. The downside is all the ammo and dangerous crit locations you'll have around; suffering anything in your torsos is very likely to blow them up. (I took the lower arms off the frame and just put the lasers out on the arms with the autocannons; gives much more freedom in targeting them.)

Edit: Clan base can do double gauss, double LB-X ACs, 3 MPL. 2 tons of ammo for the gausses, 1 ton of slug and cluster ammo for the AC (I'd probably trade out one of the pulse lasers here for extra ammo if you're expecting to use this in larger fights or extended campaigns) at a 3/5/3 move. SRM is unnecessary, Cluster LBX ammo serves the hole-seeker function.

[big teej]

well, my understanding (derived utterly from this thread) is that the Atlas is one of those mechs that makes everyone sit up and take notice as soon as it appears, due to its status as -ahem- "a 9 hex bubble of DOOOOOOM"

and being immensly surivable.

as for the weapons, the 2nd gauss woulda been nice, but it's certainly not necessary. and 2 MPLs are just fine.


I don't mind being slow, and I"m not toooooooo worried about ammo explosions (yet)

but it sounds like the design is fairly workable, which makes me happy.


(yet) because I'm gonna play it until I'm satisfied with the mental image it generates regardless of it's longevity :smallredface:


EDIT:
I know I've asked this before, but I don't have a clue where in the thread I asked, or remember what the answers were.


but I would like to have 2 questions (re) answered

question 1: what mechs have reputations as "bubbles of doom" and/or making other players take notice AS SOON as they appear on the battlefield.

question 2: what mechs have a reputation for being nigh impossible to kill?
EXAMPLE MECH: Puma

[Rockphed]

I don't mind being slow, and I"m not toooooooo worried about ammo explosions (yet)

Ammo explosions accounted for almost all the deaths in my brother's experiments with megamek. I think the rest were from kicks.

[big teej]

Ammo explosions accounted for almost all the deaths in my brother's experiments with megamek. I think the rest were from kicks.

I know how dangerous ammo explosions are...

but as I said, until I get my fill of the concept, I'm pretty okay with piloting a time bomb.


just one question, do I have the tonnage to spare for CASE for all that ammo? I'd even be willing to drop all the pulse lasers for it if necessary.

[Mando Knight]

and being immensly surivable.
So long as it's not one of the ones with explosives put right next to an IS XL engine... (i.e. the AS7-K and its derivatives)

question 1: what mechs have reputations as "bubbles of doom" and/or making other players take notice AS SOON as they appear on the battlefield.
- Anything above your weight class that's punching at or above its weight class... to a point. Heavies aren't entirely frightened by a lone Assault, but a tough Medium could scare off scouting-based Lights.
- Anything Clan Tech where you're dealing with mostly IS opponents. With Clan Tech as a norm, Mad Cats are fairly versatile war machines...

Actually, Heavies and Assaults in general are things to watch out for, as well as a few powerful Mediums.

[big teej]

So long as it's not one of the ones with explosives put right next to an IS XL engine... (i.e. the AS7-K and its derivatives)

- Anything above your weight class that's punching at or above its weight class... to a point. Heavies aren't entirely frightened by a lone Assault, but a tough Medium could scare off scouting-based Lights.
- Anything Clan Tech where you're dealing with mostly IS opponents. With Clan Tech as a norm, Mad Cats are fairly versatile war machines...

Actually, Heavies and Assaults in general are things to watch out for, as well as a few powerful Mediums.


allow me to rephrase the question then.


"what mechs consistently punch above their weight class?"

[tyckspoon]

allow me to rephrase the question then.


"what mechs consistently punch above their weight class?"

Almost anything with a non-idiotic layout, really; optimizing a Mech is not exactly *hard*. Medium mechs sporting head-capper weapons (Gauss if you can jam one in, AC 20, Clan ERPPC) is probably the most notable, IMO, as those weapons tend to do disproportionate damage to the armor of that weight class, plus the usual dread of staring down something that can one-shot any mech you care to field with a lucky hit-chart roll.

[Swordguy]

allow me to rephrase the question then.


"what mechs consistently punch above their weight class?"

Something interesting I noted with my play group a while back is that, regardless of the specific weapon mix, there's a tonnage-to-damage ratio in BattleTech that's actually fairly constant.

For Introductory Inner Sphere-tech, a Mech should about be able to do 0.3-0.45 points of damage for every ton that it weighs on a given turn. This kind of handwaves the range bands and heat levels, but it works out. A 70t Warhammer can do 20 points of damage (a 0.29 ratio) with its PPCs, and that ratio improves to about 0.54 as it closes distance. The Warhammer is noted for it's close-in firepower, so being above the ratio curve works out, and it's just about right on the lower end at long distance. Meanwhile, the famously undergunned Shadow Hawk can throw, at most, 19 points of damage downrange (and usually more like 11, given range bands and missile clusters). At best, it's got a 0.35 damage-to-weight ratio, but under realistic conditions, the ratio for only 11 points of damage drops to a 0.20 ratio. Thus, the Mech is undergunned. This holds true across the weight classes: an Atlas who hits with an AC/20, 12 missiles of an LRM-20, and 2 medium lasers is putting out a 0.42 damage ratio, while a Wasp hitting with one SRM and the Medium Laser is at a 0.35 ratio.

Then we look at other tech levels. A Clan Mech should be able to put out about 0.55-0.85 damage-to-tonnage (the Timber Wolf Prime is a 0.77, the Adder is 0.86, the known undergunned Summoner Prime is a 0.47). The really scary Clan stuff puts out damage at a 1.0 or better ratio; the Kraken 3 can put out a 0.64 ratio most of the time but can jump up to a 1.2 ratio, and the Kodiak can, on an Alpha Strike, put out a 1.06 ratio and tends to hover round a 0.8 ratio most of the time.


(For reference, I don't calculate advanced Inner Sphere Tech because it changes so dammed rapidly. A ratio in 3051 that's pretty good may be crap in 3080.)

So what does this have to do with your question? Find a Mech that's at the top end of the damage-to-tonnage ratio in its class, and you'll find a Mech that punches above its weight. Its not "always" true (the Hunchback is kind of the ur-example here, with only a middling ratio...but 20 damage concentrated in a location against 3 of the 4 weight classes in the game is brutal), but its true often enough to be something to look for. One of the ultimate "fight above your weight" Mechs? Go look at the Stormcrow B. It's got a ratio of 1.49 (82 potential damage vs 55 tons).

[big teej]

great answers swordguy


however, nobody has addressed my other question

"what mechs have a reputation for being nigh impossible to destroy? ala The Puma"

.... I get so sick of running into pumas.
it soaks up AC, gauss rounds, pulse lasers, everything.... all the while standing there and zapping you with that PPC

grrrr....

/mechwarrior 3 rant.

[The Glyphstone]

Urbanmechs? They're so useless, no one would bother shooting at them anyways, or want to scratch their paint meleeing the thing.:smallbiggrin:

[RandomLunatic]

so... seeing this thread kick back up has also rekindled my interest in playing...


sadly, I still can't get megamek to work on my computer (any idea what I'm doing wrong?)


anywho, on top of this, I was wondering if I could cram this many weapons into an atlas.

1 AC10 on each arm
1 gauss rifle in left torso
1 SRM in right torso
4 MPL in center torso

and if that's not as outrageous a loadout as I think it is, I'd like to stow a second gauss rifle in the left torso.

the plan for this little avatar of death being

-sight enemy-
fire off the ACs to get their attention (and put the fear of god in them if I hit)
fire of the SRMs to exploit any gaps I've made in the armor
fire off the gauss rifle to punch MORE holes in the baddie.
and if they get to close, MPL the hell out of them.

:smallbiggrin:I like the mental image at least, which sounds like a great place to start.

You can do-2x LB-10X with 40 shots, Gauss with 16 rounds, SRM-6 with 15 reloads, and four MPLs-with a 3/5 movement curve and max armor. The downside is you have to accept an XL engine to do it, and you will have no CASE, meaning you are probably going to get blown to smithereens pretty quick. You also have heat issues with the standard 10 DHSs.

Trading the lasers out for a pair of ER mediums not only frees up enough mass to install CASE, but upgrade to a Light engine for far more survivability.

But we can do better. Swapping the LB-Xs and ammo for PPCs nets you the same punch and range while freeing up huge amounts of space and weight. Plug in Endo Steel internal structure and we can upgrade to SRMs to Streaks, get the full battery of four pulse lasers, a flamer for the inner arsonist and PBI disposal, an ER Small laser to cover the rear, 2 extra heat sinks to handle it all, and a Guardian ECM suite because. Oh, and you can finally go back to a Standard engine for the unstoppability we all expect from an Atlas.

Finally, trading off the SRMs, ECM, the flamer and all the lasers except the small can get you that second gauss rifle, another ton of ammo. You will have serious issues with minimum range, but you have two gausses and two PPCs-if the enemy is consistantly getting within 3hexes of you, you are doing something wrong.:smallamused:

[big teej]

Urbanmechs? They're so useless, no one would bother shooting at them anyways, or want to scratch their paint meleeing the thing.:smallbiggrin:

not quite as helpful as I was hoping glyphstone :smalltongue:

excellent point though.

those are the turrets with legs right?


EDIT: bloody ninjas!


You can do-2x LB-10X with 40 shots, Gauss with 16 rounds, SRM-6 with 15 reloads, and four MPLs-with a 3/5 movement curve and max armor. The downside is you have to accept an XL engine to do it, and you will have no CASE, meaning you are probably going to get blown to smithereens pretty quick. You also have heat issues with the standard 10 DHSs.

Trading the lasers out for a pair of ER mediums not only frees up enough mass to install CASE, but upgrade to a Light engine for far more survivability.


I’m willing to give up the lasers entirely actually, the major things I’m after are the AC 10s, the gauss, and the SRM


.

But we can do better. Swapping the LB-Xs and ammo for PPCs nets you the same punch and range while freeing up huge amounts of space and weight

But not the same visual! :smalltongue:




But we can do better. Swapping the LB-Xs and ammo for PPCs nets you the same punch and range while freeing up huge amounts of space and weight. Plug in Endo Steel internal structure and we can upgrade to SRMs to Streaks, get the full battery of four pulse lasers, a flamer for the inner arsonist and PBI disposal, an ER Small laser to cover the rear, 2 extra heat sinks to handle it all, and a Guardian ECM suite because. Oh, and you can finally go back to a Standard engine for the unstoppability we all expect from an Atlas.


PPCs – meh
Endo-steel – always a fan
Streaks – hit or miss for me. Then again I don’t know what the advantage of streak of norm is.
4 pulse lasers – excellent
Flamer - I have no inner arsonist, and I doubt I’m going to be dealing with PBI anytime soon
Rear coverage –again, meh, I don’t see a single small laser being enough, so why dedicate tonnage to it at all?
Extra heat sinks – excellent
Guardian ECM – dunno what the in-game effect is…. Sooo “meh” :smalltongue:
Standard engine – excellent
Unstoppable giant stompy shooty death machine – give me the keys and let me at it!



Finally, trading off the SRMs, ECM, the flamer and all the lasers except the small can get you that second gauss rifle, another ton of ammo. You will have serious issues with minimum range, but you have two gausses and two PPCs-if the enemy is consistantly getting within 3hexes of you, you are doing something wrong.:smallamused:

Hello variant design. :smallbiggrin:

[tyckspoon]

great answers swordguy


however, nobody has addressed my other question

"what mechs have a reputation for being nigh impossible to destroy? ala The Puma"


I'm bad at remembering specific mech layouts, but generally what you're looking for is:

On the upper end of its weight class (carries more armor)
Has the full allotment of armor-tonnage its size can carry
Mostly or entirely energy-based weapons (no ammo to blow up on a lucky crit roll, worst that will usually happen to these designs is a lost heat sink or jump jet)
Uses a standard engine, entirely contained in the center torso. (Clan XL or IS Light engines with only two engine crits in the left/right torso are somewhat acceptable, but can be crippled by losing a side depending on how hot they run.)

A mech with that kind of design goal can only be put down by complete Center Torso destruction, pilot death, or mission-killed by leg+arm removal. Depending on where you put the weapons you can have a mech that has both arms and side torsos fully blown off and is still a potential threat (although with the limited space in the CT and head, it'll probably be most dangerous by kicking things.. unless you have one of the really weird layouts with weapons in the legs.)

Edit: See the Hunchback -P models, also known as 'holy crap lasers.' The layout could be better balanced, but you can pop both arms and one torso off that thing without greatly reducing its threat. As long as its the left torso. It's pretty screwed if you manage to cluster on the right.

[Swordguy]

"what mechs have a reputation for being nigh impossible to destroy?

1) Great Turtle. Accept no substitutes. 40 tons of Hardened Armor and can soak a Gauss Rifle to the face.

2) Any of a variety of "zombies". The usual definition of a Zombie Mech is one that packs a standard engine and little to no ammunition at all. Basically, to kill it, you have to core out the center torso or blow off the head. Good examples are the Grasshopper (which a lot of people overlook, since it's a 70ton Mech with pretty much only 1 large laser and 4 mediums) and the Clan Stooping Hawk with an ER Large laser in both the head and center torso (so as long as the Mech is still alive, it can keep shooting back at you). The old Thunderbolt also has a reputation for durability, but that's mainly because its armor was way thicker than most other Mechs at the time. It's a 65-tonner with 13.5 tons of armor...the Warhammer has only 10 and the Marauder 11.5. Heck, it outarmors several contemporary assault Mechs (Zeus, Victor, Charger, Cyclops)! The thing about the Thud, though, it that its reputation is somewhat undeserved, in that it carries a lot of ammo. If you can get through the hide, it's easy meat, unlike the Grasshopper, which has only a single solitary ammo crit to take advantage of.

[tyckspoon]

Streaks – hit or miss for me. Then again I don’t know what the advantage of streak of norm is.
Guardian ECM – dunno what the in-game effect is…. Sooo “meh” :smalltongue:
Standard engine – excellent


Streaks are one of those techs that you'll swear are cheating if you're used to playing lower tech/rules levels. They either lock on (ie, you rolled high enough to hit) or they don't fire at all, saving you the heat and ammo cost. As if that weren't nice enough, every single Streak missile hits- you still roll individual hit locations for them, but you don't have to roll the missile table to see how many actual hits you scored. With Streaks available, I personally don't find normal SRMs worth using at all- either find the space to make it a Streak, or strip it for some other benefit.

ECM.. IIRC, it removes the Artemis bonus on the missile-hit table, prevents NARC signalling if anybody ever bothers to try and use it, and breaks C3 networks in its area. Busting up C3 is the main reason to have it around, IMO, although breaking Artemis can save you some pain as well.

[Mando Knight]

1) Great Turtle. Accept no substitutes. 40 tons of Hardened Armor and can soak a Gauss Rifle to the face.
...Good gravy. Forty tons of Hardened Armor?! That's like... a diamond. In a rock. That's wrapped in steel and then covered in chobham armor.

ECM.. IIRC, it removes the Artemis bonus on the missile-hit table, prevents NARC signalling if anybody ever bothers to try and use it, and breaks C3 networks in its area. Busting up C3 is the main reason to have it around, IMO, although breaking Artemis can save you some pain as well.
If you're playing with Advanced rules, it also can be switched to generate Ghost targets or to ECCM mode to jam enemy ECM. Also an advanced/experimental item, Angel ECM set in normal mode can jam even Streak missiles, or can be set to effectively operate as two ECM devices in different modes.

[big teej]

1) Great Turtle. Accept no substitutes. 40 tons of Hardened Armor and can soak a Gauss Rifle to the face.

2) Any of a variety of "zombies". The usual definition of a Zombie Mech is one that packs a standard engine and little to no ammunition at all. Basically, to kill it, you have to core out the center torso or blow off the head. Good examples are the Grasshopper (which a lot of people overlook, since it's a 70ton Mech with pretty much only 1 large laser and 4 mediums) and the Clan Stooping Hawk with an ER Large laser in both the head and center torso (so as long as the Mech is still alive, it can keep shooting back at you). The old Thunderbolt also has a reputation for durability, but that's mainly because its armor was way thicker than most other Mechs at the time. It's a 65-tonner with 13.5 tons of armor...the Warhammer has only 10 and the Marauder 11.5. Heck, it outarmors several contemporary assault Mechs (Zeus, Victor, Charger, Cyclops)! The thing about the Thud, though, it that its reputation is somewhat undeserved, in that it carries a lot of ammo. If you can get through the hide, it's easy meat, unlike the Grasshopper, which has only a single solitary ammo crit to take advantage of.

the great turtle hmm???

tell me more about this wonderous machine

I think I'll be adding the Grasshopper and the Stooping Hawk to my list of "get these first"

and the thunderbolt seems to be worth the ammo risk to me.



Streaks are one of those techs that you'll swear are cheating if you're used to playing lower tech/rules levels. They either lock on (ie, you rolled high enough to hit) or they don't fire at all, saving you the heat and ammo cost. As if that weren't nice enough, every single Streak missile hits- you still roll individual hit locations for them, but you don't have to roll the missile table to see how many actual hits you scored. With Streaks available, I personally don't find normal SRMs worth using at all- either find the space to make it a Streak, or strip it for some other benefit.

ECM.. IIRC, it removes the Artemis bonus on the missile-hit table, prevents NARC signalling if anybody ever bothers to try and use it, and breaks C3 networks in its area. Busting up C3 is the main reason to have it around, IMO, although breaking Artemis can save you some pain as well.

that....

that's actually really good.

RE: ECM - ah... but what benefit do c3 networks give? I know artemis is a FCS that gives bonus to hit, and I know NARC beacons are basically "get stuck with it and you begin living on borrowed time" though I'd be curious how they work specifically.

while we're on the topic of c3s
whats a c3 slave and why is this superior to a normal one?


and beagle probes

EDIT:
again with the ninjas!


...Good gravy. Forty tons of Hardened Armor?! That's like... a diamond. In a rock. That's wrapped in steel and then covered in chobham armor.

If you're playing with Advanced rules, it also can be switched to generate Ghost targets or to ECCM mode to jam enemy ECM. Also an advanced/experimental item, Angel ECM set in normal mode can jam even Streak missiles, or can be set to effectively operate as two ECM devices in different modes.

well.... this sounds promising.

and I don't plan on using advanced rules for awhile.


also, new question.

if, by some miracle, I was able to get my hands on allllll the old battle tech/mechwarrior novels
and read them.

would I be able to consider myself "knowledgeable" or at least "educated" on cannon timeline?

or are battletech/mechwarrior novels kinda like warhammer and the universe is big enough that you can kinda do whatever?

[mangosta71]

For the firepower discussion, I designed and have fielded a Clan version of the King Crab that puts out 92 points of damage per round. It can alpha strike and run without building up any heat. As for damage-to-weight ratios, the Fire Moth D can push out 1.85:1 on an alpha strike.

Anyway, teej, a PPC mount can be built to look like an autocannon. The only defining aesthetic of an AC is the barrel. Look at a Warhammer's arms sometime. Or the PPC barrels sticking out of an Awesome's torso (that's another of those "damn near impossible to kill" Mechs that you were looking for examples of).

C3 computers are complicated. Complicated enough that many tournaments ban their use because they slow down gameplay so much. A C3 master computer allows you to network the targeting systems of the Mech with up to 3 other Mechs that have C3 slave units (so, a whole lance is connected). You can extend the network to an entire company if all the Mechs are equipped with C3 units - the company commander would need a pair of master computers, the other lance commanders would each need a master computer, and the other 9 Mechs in the company would each need a slave unit. It's not that slave units are superior, it's just that you only need one Mech with a master unit per lance.

Here's where it bogs down play: Networked Mechs can fire at targets as if they're shooting from the location of any other Mech in the network. This means that you might be calculating to-hit rolls from as many as a dozen different hexes per Mech.

As for Beagle Probes, along with other forms of active radar, they're really most useful in double-blind scenarios. They allow you to detect units that you can't see. They also defeat camouflage.

[Mando Knight]

RE: ECM - ah... but what benefit do c3 networks give? I know artemis is a FCS that gives bonus to hit, and I know NARC beacons are basically "get stuck with it and you begin living on borrowed time" though I'd be curious how they work specifically.

while we're on the topic of c3s
whats a c3 slave and why is this superior to a normal one?


and beagle probes
C³ is an advanced targeting computer/comms network that lets 'Mechs connected to the same C³ network share targeting data... effectively letting a 'Mech shoot using the shortest-range modifiers rather than its own. A Master is heavier and larger, and is needed to run the Slave units. Alternatively, a network of just Masters can be created, but the additional Masters function only as Slave units on their own unless they're commanding their own Slave units (or other Masters). A maximum of 12 C³ computers can be linked into one super-network, and each Master can only directly control up to 3 other C³ computers.

The ComGuard and Word of Blake factions also may field C³I, which is different from an all-Master configuration in that these computers can run without a designated Master unit, letting the network be a bit more amorphous. In return, however, a C³I network is limited to six units... conveniently enough the size of a ComGuard Level 1 combat group (their analogue to the IS's Lances or the Clans' Stars).

Beagle Active Probes (Clans drop the Beagle from the name) are scouting devices. They're utterly useless unless you're playing with hiding units, in which case an Active Probe will find them even if they're still lying low. The system has its limitations, though... it's jammed by ECM and can't find conventional infantry (which can be a devastating flaw in a hidden units situation, since the infantry could sneak up and rip a 'Mech to shreds if the player knows what he's doing and rolls well enough).

For the specific rules, go get Total Warfare. These and more devices are found on pages 129-143 in that book.

[big teej]

awesome advice..


awesome advice


thanks for explaining that stuff guys

RE: awesomes - definitly gonna be added to my "get it first" list.

RE: rulebooks - until I have a job and people to play with, I don't plan on spending a dime on the game. which unfortunately relegates me to bugging you guys here.


and those PDFs/Online stuff posted up earlier in the thread, but I don't have time to read those right now. :smalltongue:

[Swordguy]

C3 is...complicated. To explain without diagrams, I'm going to convert hexes into inches so you can more easily track this. 1 hex=1". This way you can lay it all out on a table.

The C3 Lance consists of a Victor, an Archer, a Marauder, and a Grasshopper (pedants: no, I don't care about canon configurations right now - I'm going with easy-to-type names). The Victor as a C3 Master system, all others have C3 slaves.

Their target is a Wolverine.

-The Victor is 10" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its PPC.
-The Archer is 8" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its LRMs indirectly.
-The Marauder is 19" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its 2 PPCs and AC/5.
-The Grasshopper is 2" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire it's large laser.

Because the Grasshopper is only 2" away from the Wolverine, and because all of its lancemates are linked into the C3 network, fire is resolves as follows:

-The Victor's AC/10 counts as being only 2" away from the Wolverine, but suffers no minimum range penalties, as the 'actual' range of the weapon is still 8" (not the 3" that would incur a minimum range modifier)
-The Archer can fire indirectly the the Wolverine as long as another Mech is willing to spot for it, but its indirect attacks count as being at range 8" because indirect LRM attacks gain no benefit from C3.
-The Marauder is treated as though it is only 2" away from the Wolverine, but since the 'actual' range is still 19", it is out of the range of its PPCs (18"). It can still fire its AC/5 as though it were at only 2" range.
-The Grasshopper can fire its weapons as normal, with no additional penalty for spotting with its C3 network. If it chose to spot for the Archer, that would gain no benefit from the C3 network and follow the normal Indirect Fire Rules.


That's C3 gameplay in a nutshell; although once you add in ECM systems and such it becomes even more complicated, though quite useful in practice. Note the C3i (Improved C3) CAN, in fact, affect Indirect Fire attacks in certain circumstances. Finally, C3 networks must be set up a certain way. Short version: for every 3 Slave Units there is one Master unit (must all be on different chassis), for a C3 group of 4 units. 3 Such units can be connected together (so that the other 11 Mechs use the same range as the one closest unit to the target) via a dedicated additional Master system on a single Unit. You cannot link more than 12 units together with a C3 network. Finally, destroying the Master computers can break up the network. If the Victor in the example above took a critical hit that destroyed the C3 Master Computer it mounted, the entire network described would collapse. However, if that C3 lance was part of a larger, company-sized unit, the other 8 Mechs in the system could still function as a single C3 network.

It's actually more complicated than this, but I'm not even going to TRY to explain some of the more advanced C3 routing options without diagrams.

[big teej]

C3 is...complicated. To explain without diagrams, I'm going to convert hexes into inches so you can more easily track this. 1 hex=1". This way you can lay it all out on a table.

The C3 Lance consists of a Victor, an Archer, a Marauder, and a Grasshopper (pedants: no, I don't care about canon configurations right now - I'm going with easy-to-type names). The Victor as a C3 Master system, all others have C3 slaves.

Their target is a Wolverine.

-The Victor is 10" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its PPC.
-The Archer is 8" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its LRMs indirectly.
-The Marauder is 19" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire its 2 PPCs and AC/5.
-The Grasshopper is 2" away from the Wolverine and wants to fire it's large laser.

Because the Grasshopper is only 2" away from the Wolverine, and because all of its lancemates are linked into the C3 network, fire is resolves as follows:

-The Victor's AC/10 counts as being only 2" away from the Wolverine, but suffers no minimum range penalties, as the 'actual' range of the weapon is still 8" (not the 3" that would incur a minimum range modifier)
-The Archer can fire indirectly the the Wolverine as long as another Mech is willing to spot for it, but its indirect attacks count as being at range 8" because indirect LRM attacks gain no benefit from C3.
-The Marauder is treated as though it is only 2" away from the Wolverine, but since the 'actual' range is still 19", it is out of the range of its PPCs (18"). It can still fire its AC/5 as though it were at only 2" range.
-The Grasshopper can fire its weapons as normal, with no additional penalty for spotting with its C3 network. If it chose to spot for the Archer, that would gain no benefit from the C3 network and follow the normal Indirect Fire Rules.


That's C3 gameplay in a nutshell; although once you add in ECM systems and such it becomes even more complicated, though quite useful in practice. Note the C3i (Improved C3) CAN, in fact, affect Indirect Fire attacks in certain circumstances. Finally, C3 networks must be set up a certain way. Short version: for every 3 Slave Units there is one Master unit (must all be on different chassis), for a C3 group of 4 units. 3 Such units can be connected together (so that the other 11 Mechs use the same range as the one closest unit to the target) via a dedicated additional Master system on a single Unit. You cannot link more than 12 units together with a C3 network. Finally, destroying the Master computers can break up the network. If the Victor in the example above took a critical hit that destroyed the C3 Master Computer it mounted, the entire network described would collapse. However, if that C3 lance was part of a larger, company-sized unit, the other 8 Mechs in the system could still function as a single C3 network.

It's actually more complicated than this, but I'm not even going to TRY to explain some of the more advanced C3 routing options without diagrams.

that was a more than sufficient explanation swordguy

I'm on the verge of falling unconscious and that still made perfect sense.

[Mando Knight]

Also note that C³ variants are incompatible with each other. You can't put a C³I or Boosted C³ (an experimental variant that's immune to standard ECM) on a standard C³ network, or vice versa. In-universe, it's because they alter the transmission bandwidths and data packages, etc. between the different models. Rules-wise, it's (probably) to avoid headaches from trying to figure out exactly how your weird mutant C³ network operates.

[big teej]

is it wierd that I wanna cram a gauss rifle into any given mech?


I know that wouldn't help some mechs at all...


but I like those things.

[mangosta71]

Gauss rifles are the only ballistic weapons I incorporate into my designs with any regularity. It's nice to be able to reach out and touch someone with a headcapper.

[Provengreil]

is it wierd that I wanna cram a gauss rifle into any given mech?


I know that wouldn't help some mechs at all...


but I like those things.

no, i want to as well. big physical cannons hocking off a full ton of armor with good range is totally worth doing and visually pleasing.

[big teej]

no, i want to as well. big physical cannons hocking off a full ton of armor with good range is totally worth doing and visually pleasing.

aye :smallcool:

that and I believe I've picked up on a reliable go-to strategy when it comes to mech design.

step 1, sight enemy
step 2, hit enemy with "big weapon" (gauss, ACs, etc.)
step 3, unleash missle cloud (CRITFINDERS!)
????
Profit!

and I must admit, the visual image of the above plan is...
appealing :smallbiggrin:

[Philistine]

is it wierd that I wanna cram a gauss rifle into any given mech?


I know that wouldn't help some mechs at all...


but I like those things.

At 35 tons, I believe the smallest Inner Sphere mech to sport a Gauss rifle is the Hollander (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hollander); the Clans manage to squeeze one into a 30t machine for the Kit Fox-A and -H variants (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Kit_Fox_(Uller)).


Gauss rifles are the only ballistic weapons I incorporate into my designs with any regularity. It's nice to be able to reach out and touch someone with a headcapper.
The LB 10-X autocannon has its uses, too. It's superior to the baseline AC/10 in weight, bulk, heat generation, and range, and Cluster rounds both improve accuracy and allow your can opener to go all crit fisher once you've opened up the target's armor (meaning you could skip the missile battery if you wanted). Last but not least: Cluster rounds are downright nasty against aerospace units and vehicles, if those are in play.

As an additional alternative, the Rotary AC/5 and AC/2 become relevant if you're playing at a late enough tech level. The RAC/5 can slot in for any AC/10, and the RAC/2 for any AC/5. They're lacking in hole-punching ability compared to the bigger guns, but you get good damage potential plus decent crit fishing, and very granular control over heat buildup and ammunition expenditure.

[big teej]

so at this point.... I've created a (rather large) list of mechs that I hope to have at some point.

and given a rough average of about 13 dollars a model... that gets expensive fast.


so I'm curious, how much have you all invested in battletech models?

I imagine alot less than warhammer :smalltongue:

[Swordguy]

so I'm curious, how much have you all invested in battletech models?

I imagine alot less than warhammer :smalltongue:

Erm...probably not. For the various GW games, I've got:

1 2000 pt IG army (3 LRs, 1 Valk, a bunch of infantry=approx $550 US)
1 1500 pt Bretonnian army (45 knights and some bowmen=approx $575 US)
1 2000-pt Dwarf army (mostly plastics from starter sets, estimate approx $350 US)
5 or 6 Mordheim Warbands at about $100 each (average)

So, rounding up...maybe $2000 US in GW stuff I've got sitting around. $3500-4000 if we include War of the Ring stuff.

For Mechs...we'll look back on page 3 or so of this thread. That giant post of pics? That's about 1/6th of my collection. Checking my Excel file, as of July, I own:

827 Mechs
14 LAMs
183 tanks
48 bases of infantry
18 bases of power armor infantry
88 WarShips
12 DropShips (fleet scale)
3 DropShips (Map Scale)
1 DropShip (Mech scale)
51 Areospace Fighters
22 3-plane Areospace Fighter Squadron stands

That's 1,267 individual items. Average the cost at $10 per item, and I've got 12 GRAND in BattleTech stuff sitting around. To be fair, I've been playing since 1986 (got the 2e boxed set for Christmas when I was 6 years old) and I've been collecting minis since 1988. Add to that working for a year at Ironwind Metals (and the attendant "buy at 'weight of metal' price" policy) and it's not all that impressive. It's only a rate of buying about 55 items a year...it's just that I've done it for 23 years.

[Misfit702]

Can armor either external or internal suffer critical hits or do you roll again if that area is scored?

[RandomLunatic]

If you mean the critical slots devoted to Ferro-Fibrous or other advanced armors, the answer is no. Slots given over to armor, Endo Steel internals, and CASE cannot be critically hit, and and crits rolled against these things should be re-rolled.

[big teej]

Erm...probably not. For the various GW games, I've got:

1 2000 pt IG army (3 LRs, 1 Valk, a bunch of infantry=approx $550 US)
1 1500 pt Bretonnian army (45 knights and some bowmen=approx $575 US)
1 2000-pt Dwarf army (mostly plastics from starter sets, estimate approx $350 US)
5 or 6 Mordheim Warbands at about $100 each (average)

So, rounding up...maybe $2000 US in GW stuff I've got sitting around. $3500-4000 if we include War of the Ring stuff.

For Mechs...we'll look back on page 3 or so of this thread. That giant post of pics? That's about 1/6th of my collection. Checking my Excel file, as of July, I own:

827 Mechs
14 LAMs
183 tanks
48 bases of infantry
18 bases of power armor infantry
88 WarShips
12 DropShips (fleet scale)
3 DropShips (Map Scale)
1 DropShip (Mech scale)
51 Areospace Fighters
22 3-plane Areospace Fighter Squadron stands

That's 1,267 individual items. Average the cost at $10 per item, and I've got 12 GRAND in BattleTech stuff sitting around. To be fair, I've been playing since 1986 (got the 2e boxed set for Christmas when I was 6 years old) and I've been collecting minis since 1988. Add to that working for a year at Ironwind Metals (and the attendant "buy at 'weight of metal' price" policy) and it's not all that impressive. It's only a rate of buying about 55 items a year...it's just that I've done it for 23 years.

O.O =O :smalleek:

which begs the question, what's the most of your collection you've ever had a chance to field at once?


and how much more effective (if any) are combined arms forces as opposed to purely mech-based forces?

[Mando Knight]

and how much more effective (if any) are combined arms forces as opposed to purely mech-based forces?

It depends on the conditions. A lot.

Air support can be a significant factor, Infantry can be devastating if kitted out properly and in position, Combat Vehicles can provide quick and cheap strike or fire support forces...

If you're not sure what to equip yourself with, I'd go with BattleMechs, preferably Omnis, since you have fewer weaknesses and generally better survivability per unit. If you know what you're doing, though, a mixed force will catch an unprepared enemy off-guard and should be able to cover its own weaknesses as well as any 'Mech force.

By battle value, you should end up with fairly evenly matched forces. If you go by C-Bill cost, though, fielding a mixed force will probably be cheaper for isolated fights. ('Mechs may come out ahead again if you factor in campaign durability, though)

[Rockphed]

I think there are some hover tanks that can move 10 without running, and 15 with. I could be wrong, but that is vaguely what I remember. They can make a VERY nice "hey, look, I am behind you now" force. Also, most vehicles ignore heat, so you can pack a vehicle with flamers and keep that awesome from firing its PPCs as often as it would like. Or pack PPCs on your vehicles and watch your opponent curse their running, firing PPCs like mad, hides.

On the other hand, the vehicle hit table is horrendously bad. Pretty much any damage will take them out, either by destroying them, making them immobile, or by killing their weapons. Also, vehicles have a hard time navigating forests. Also, if you move your hover tanks too fast and have them turn too often, they need piloting rolls to not swerve off course. If off course is a cliff, they end up dead.

In short, vehicles can either be fun and somewhat useful, or they can be so much ablative armor. The choice is yours.

[Philistine]

Vehicles can also be a low-cost (well, relative to a battlemech) way to cover very specialized niches, like air defense and artillery - support roles don't always benefit from being put on a mech chassis.

[The Glyphstone]

Vehicles can also be a low-cost (well, relative to a battlemech) way to cover very specialized niches, like air defense and artillery - support roles don't always benefit from being put on a mech chassis.

But taking an Atlas with twin Long Toms was so much fun in MechCommander...:smallfrown:

[Fendalus]

Also, most vehicles ignore heat, so you can pack a vehicle with flamers and keep that awesome from firing its PPCs as often as it would like. Or pack PPCs on your vehicles and watch your opponent curse their running, firing PPCs like mad, hides.

Vehicles handle heat in a very specific way: If a weapon isn't an energy weapon (AC/10, LRM 5, Gauss rifle, Arrow IV artillery, etc...) then the weapon needs no heat sinks. If a weapon IS an energy weapon, you need to add enough Single Heat Sinks to the design to handle it's heat (So a PPC has to add 10 tons of Heat sinks on top of it's own tonnage). If they're using an ICE engine (Internal Combustion Engine: Because Fusion costs money), you get no integrated heat sinks and you also need to get power amplifiers for the weapon. If you're using a Fusion engine, you're lucky, as you get your first 10 heat sinks free and you don't need to get power amplifiers.

This is all in the vehicle design/refiting/etc step. In battle, Vehicles do not track heat (hence needing enough Single Heat Sinks to handle an alpha strike of all their energy weapons, as otherwise Vehicles with energy weapons would be really powerful for their tonnage).

So putting PPCs on a tank isn't always the best idea (in fact, an LB-10X is generally a better idea if you don't have a fusion engine. Multi-mode shooting, same range, same damage, weighs 13 tons with 20 turns of ammo vs 18ish for a PPC.)

[9mm]

Vehicles handle heat in a very specific way: If a weapon isn't an energy weapon (AC/10, LRM 5, Gauss rifle, Arrow IV artillery, etc...) then the weapon needs no heat sinks. If a weapon IS an energy weapon, you need to add enough Single Heat Sinks to the design to handle it's heat (So a PPC has to add 10 tons of Heat sinks on top of it's own tonnage). If they're using an ICE engine (Internal Combustion Engine: Because Fusion costs money), you get no integrated heat sinks and you also need to get power amplifiers for the weapon. If you're using a Fusion engine, you're lucky, as you get your first 10 heat sinks free and you don't need to get power amplifiers.

This is all in the vehicle design/refiting/etc step. In battle, Vehicles do not track heat (hence needing enough Single Heat Sinks to handle an alpha strike of all their energy weapons, as otherwise Vehicles with energy weapons would be really powerful for their tonnage).

So putting PPCs on a tank isn't always the best idea (in fact, an LB-10X is generally a better idea if you don't have a fusion engine. Multi-mode shooting, same range, same damage, weighs 13 tons with 20 turns of ammo vs 18ish for a PPC.)
also flamers and infernos do... Interesting things to the crew.

[Rockphed]

Vehicles handle heat in a very specific way: If a weapon isn't an energy weapon (AC/10, LRM 5, Gauss rifle, Arrow IV artillery, etc...) then the weapon needs no heat sinks. If a weapon IS an energy weapon, you need to add enough Single Heat Sinks to the design to handle it's heat (So a PPC has to add 10 tons of Heat sinks on top of it's own tonnage). If they're using an ICE engine (Internal Combustion Engine: Because Fusion costs money), you get no integrated heat sinks and you also need to get power amplifiers for the weapon. If you're using a Fusion engine, you're lucky, as you get your first 10 heat sinks free and you don't need to get power amplifiers.

This is all in the vehicle design/refiting/etc step. In battle, Vehicles do not track heat (hence needing enough Single Heat Sinks to handle an alpha strike of all their energy weapons, as otherwise Vehicles with energy weapons would be really powerful for their tonnage).

So putting PPCs on a tank isn't always the best idea (in fact, an LB-10X is generally a better idea if you don't have a fusion engine. Multi-mode shooting, same range, same damage, weighs 13 tons with 20 turns of ammo vs 18ish for a PPC.)

I didn't know that. Good thing to learn, though. So vehicles, as a general rule, are better off mounting missiles and ballistics than lasers? Or is it just that if you don't have any reason to have a fusion engine you should probably stick to balistics and missiles?

[Gnoman]

A fair summation. However, because of the way mechs handle equipment, vees have a second advantage. See, vees don't use critical slots, so they're more able to maximize tonnage. This is especially useful with weapons like the AC/20 that take up a lot of slots, and at higher tonnages where fitting the weapons a unit can carry by wieght is difficult.

[John Campbell]

Well, it depends on other design factors, especially what type of engine you're using.

Energy weapons are typically more weight-efficient than ballistic weapons, at the cost of being much less heat-efficient. Energy weapon heat is a bigger concern for tanks, because of their requirement that they be able to dissipate all of it, and because they can't use DHS.

If the tank has an IC engine, it doesn't get the free base HS either, and it needs power amps for its energy weapons. This means, if you've got an ICE tank, don't put energy weapons on it. Just... don't. Whatever you're trying to do, there's a better way to do it.

With a fusion engine, it gets more complicated, though. Energy weapons are still more weight-efficient than ballistics, and you do still get 10 points of heat dissipation for free with your engine. Ballistics don't use that at all, so you can still exploit the better energy-weapon weight-efficiency at least up to 10 heat worth, if not higher... the Schrek is a perfectly good tank with 30 heat worth of PPCs, and still slightly better than an AC/10 version of it would be. (But only slightly... an LB-10X version would probably be better than the PPC version.)

What you can't do is the trick that mechs use to make PPC/ML boats so frightening, which is to basically make the heat sinks do double duty. They can cover the PPCs, or they can cover the MLs, and you never fire both at once unless you want to melt your mech down. On tanks, the heat sinks are required to cover all the energy weapons, whether you're going to use them together or not, so where a mech can carry a PPC and three MLs and get by with 10 HS - and use less tonnage, have more range and better close-range firepower, and no ammo concerns compared to a mech with an AC/10 - a tank with the same weapons loadout has to have the 19 HS to cover all its energy guns... and the AC/10 starts looking more attractive. Even if you've got a fusion engine and the HS that come with it.

[Gnoman]

Of course, most official vehicles (not all, of course) are ICE because most fusion engines go into mechs.

[Mando Knight]

Of course, most official vehicles (not all, of course) are ICE because most fusion engines go into mechs.

Unless they're energy-weapon machines, like the Myrmidon, where they'll more likely be fusion powered for the reason Campbell outlined above. They might not be the most optimized Vs, but then again, since when have official configurations been optimal? (No, don't count the Timber or Dire Wolves. Even I can improve on them, and they're my favorites. Though the double HAG 40 Dire Wolf D configuration looks pretty sweet until you take out its main guns (good thing its cluster hits are grouped, otherwise you'd be rolling forever...), and the Hohiro and C variants are pretty good-looking...)

[mangosta71]

Yeah, a lot of the "official" vehicles use ICEs, but in the actual world it makes a little sense for the manufacturers to reduce costs and a fusion reactor is much more expensive than an ICE. Just about every fan-designed vehicle (where cost isn't an issue) runs an XL fusion engine. It's not like a vehicle is going to survive an engagement anyway, so you may as well get the biggest alpha strike you can and not worry about survivability.

[Mando Knight]

but in the actual world it makes a little sense for the manufacturers to reduce costs
Wait, what? What weird world do you live in? Clients are always begging the manufacturer to reduce costs. It's why we don't have laser-planes and fleets of supersonic airliners and what not.

In-game it makes less sense to reduce costs (since you're not actually paying C-Bills), but from the manufacturer's perspective, you have to balance performance and cost to where the client will be most willing to buy the product.

[Gnoman]

The main issue is that, until late in the BT setting, fusion engines are extremely rare. Thus they are rarely used for the more fragile vehicles.

[Philistine]

Wait, what? What weird world do you live in? Clients are always begging the manufacturer to reduce costs. It's why we don't have laser-planes and fleets of supersonic airliners and what not.

In-game it makes less sense to reduce costs (since you're not actually paying C-Bills), but from the manufacturer's perspective, you have to balance performance and cost to where the client will be most willing to buy the product.
It "makes a little sense," he said - the connotation is rather different from "makes little sense" alone. I understood that post to mean that yes, economy is a factor IRL, whereas in-game it sometimes (often?) is not. That'd be the reason commenting on fan-designed vehicles with extremely pricey engines.

[Mando Knight]

It "makes a little sense," he said - the connotation is rather different from "makes little sense" alone.

Derp, you're right. >_<

I must've skipped over the "a" there. :smallsigh:

[John Campbell]

Wait, what? What weird world do you live in? Clients are always begging the manufacturer to reduce costs. It's why we don't have laser-planes and fleets of supersonic airliners and what not.

In-game it makes less sense to reduce costs (since you're not actually paying C-Bills), but from the manufacturer's perspective, you have to balance performance and cost to where the client will be most willing to buy the product.

Depends on the game. I tend to play Succession Wars-era merc games, and C-Bill cost and availability, both for purchase and repair, are very much factors.

The advantage of tanks in that sort of scenario is that they're cheap and readily available. You can get most of the capabilities of a mech, and in some roles even more, for a fraction the price, and you can get it by putting in an order with your local manufacturer's rep and having it shipped to your door, factory fresh (and some assembly required, if you're buying from Quikscell), rather than having to scrounge around the battlefields and repair facilities, hoping you can find someone willing to part with what you want, in good enough shape that you can make it work.

The disadvantage is that they're a nasty combination of fragile and unrepairable. Where you can often scrape a "destroyed" mech off the field, do some reasonably affordable repairs on it, and put it back into service, a tank that gets much more than scuffed up a little is usually irreparably destroyed, and can only be replaced.

XL vehicles throw away that advantage, and greatly exacerbate that disadvantage. An XL-powered heavy tank can easily cost more than a good assault mech (because good assault mechs, by definition, do not have XL engines), and is a lot more prone to taking damage that requires you to buy a new XL-powered heavy tank that costs more than a good assault mech. And it's probably less capable than that assault mech, to boot.

An ICE tank, on the other hand... sure, they're even less capable than a similar XL or even standard fusion tank, but they're also way, way cheaper. When it inevitably takes a through-armor crit to its ammo or some such and explodes, it'll cost you half as much to replace as the fusion tank will when it inevitably explodes, and like a quarter to a fifth what an exploded XL tank will cost you. And while an ICE tank is less capable than an XL tank, a lance of them, which you can easily buy for what an XL tank will cost you, will eat that XL tank for lunch. And if one of them explodes for no particular reason, as vehicles are wont to do, well, heck, you've still got three tanks left...

[Rockphed]

The more I hear about the rules of battletech, the more I have to laugh at how absurd it is to think of tanks as inevitable casualties.

When I have a stable budget again, I will begin acquiring battletech rulebooks.

[Provengreil]

The more I hear about the rules of battletech, the more I have to laugh at how absurd it is to think of tanks as inevitable casualties.

When I have a stable budget again, I will begin acquiring battletech rulebooks.

yeah, the only question is whether or not an explosion will be involved. my favorite tanks are the saladin assault tanks; very fast skimmers that pack AC 20s, but they're really cheap so you can fill spare budgets with them.

[Rockphed]

yeah, the only question is whether or not an explosion will be involved. my favorite tanks are the saladin assault tanks; very fast skimmers that pack AC 20s, but they're really cheap so you can fill spare budgets with them.

How much does CASE help tanks in battletech? I know it can save mechs on occasion, but does it ever make a tank less dead than without case(though in universe it probably would make the crew less dead).

[Provengreil]

How much does CASE help tanks in battletech? I know it can save mechs on occasion, but does it ever make a tank less dead than without case(though in universe it probably would make the crew less dead).

No, it can't functionally help tanks. as for the crew in universe, probably not, because in universe the case design is not a system or an ammo sleeve or something but in fact a style of torso design that vents the force of an ammo explosion, at least as I understand it(someone feel free to call me an idiot if I'm wrong). the torso is still cored out, however, so i don't think the crew could survive either.

[mangosta71]

Per the BattleTech Compendium:

In vehicles, the CASE system blows out the rear armor; the vehicle itself is crippled, but the crew members and passengers survive the explosion.

[John Campbell]

How much does CASE help tanks in battletech? I know it can save mechs on occasion, but does it ever make a tank less dead than without case(though in universe it probably would make the crew less dead).
CASE on a tank means that the explosion blows out the back armor and IS rather than blowing the entire thing into chaff and confetti. Unlike mechs, vehicles can't survive the loss of a location, and, in fact, can't have lost locations repaired, so, unlike a well-designed mech, which can keep right on fighting after losing a side torso to an ammo explosion, the tank's still dead and unrepairable.

It does, however, knock the destruction level down from "completely destroyed" to "merely" "truly destroyed". You still can't repair it and put it back into service, but your crew gets to walk away, and you can salvage stuff, the weapons in particular (which often represent half the price tag of an ICE tank) off the surviving portions of the wreck.

[Mando Knight]

because in universe the case design is not a system or an ammo sleeve or something but in fact a style of torso design that vents the force of an ammo explosion, at least as I understand it(someone feel free to call me an idiot if I'm wrong).

Actually, it is an ammo sleeve type system. It's in the name: Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/CASE). The sleeves, modified feeding mechanism, and explosion vents are why it's a torso component rather than an ammunition component.

[Rockphed]

Actually, it is an ammo sleeve type system. It's in the name: Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/CASE). The sleeves, modified feeding mechanism, and explosion vents are why it's a torso component rather than an ammunition component.

Am I correct in thinking that case can be used at any time period based on that article? I thought that it was one of the lostech things.

[Swordguy]

Am I correct in thinking that case can be used at any time period based on that article? I thought that it was one of the lostech things.

CASE is available for Inner Sphere units from 2476 to about the middle of the Second Succession War (2840-ish). It is then considered lostech until the information from the Gray Death Memory Core is disseminated across the various Successor States. That puts its reintroduction date in 3036 at the earliest (for the Draconis Combine) in "prototype" format, and basically everybody has it in regular production by the end of the Clan Invasion in 3052.



Sources: Techmanual, pg 210; Starterbook: Sword&Dragon, pg 57

[mangosta71]

And the Clans are smart enough to incorporate it into their designs as a matter of course. All Clan Mechs automatically have it in all locations, whereas IS Mechs have to spend weight and a crit slot, and then can only mount it in the torso.

[big teej]

so... I have a fairly extensive battlemech shopping list...

HOWEVER
it only contains actual mechs.

no aerospace fighters
no tanks
no infantry
no artillery
etc. etc. etc.


so now I'm trolling for suggestions for non-mech forces....

my preferred strategy would be for massive LRM barrages from (almost) off the grid, along with a fighter wing capable of downing problem mechs that are outside my hex-bubbles of doom.

translation:
aside from a mild commitment to LRM barrages, I don't have a clue what I'm doing, and am completely open to non-mech suggestions... have at it.

[mangosta71]

I'm starting with the assumption that you only have IS equipment available to you.

There's a tank, appropriately called LRM Carrier, that might do for you. 60 tons, cheap and easy to produce, should be readily available in any time period. It can't take a lot of damage, but your Mech forces should be screening it anyway. If you want long-range fire support from off the grid, there's the Long Tom, which is a wheeled vehicle that carries a Long Tom artillery piece.

As for aerospace fighters, I don't recall whether the Rapier design survived the Succession Wars, but it's a fairly fast and agile craft that mounts an AC/20 and a PPC for a pretty devastating alpha strike. I also seem to recall it being durable enough to live through a fair amount of return fire. There's also always the Stuka. I don't remember details about it, but it's big, tough, and well-armed.

[big teej]

that sounds like an excellent suggestion :smallbiggrin:

[Philistine]

The Battletech wiki (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page) that was linked a few pages ago has more than just mechs: the front page has a list of Unit Categories that includes air, armor, artillery, and more.

[Sahaar]

The Battletech wiki (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page) that was linked a few pages ago has more than just mechs: the front page has a list of Unit Categories that includes air, armor, artillery, and more.


I love that site. Go to it whenever you want to read up something on the fluff.



Has anybody seen that Battletech Sheet app? It's fairly new (released September 28th, 2011) and only has the mechs from 3075 so far, but it's a really great app. I've got it on my Itouch.

[GOTHIK]

The nearest thing to fluff regarding the Behemoth comes from the Star League Sourcebook (rarest BT book, bar none), and the TRO 3055 for the Clan Behemoth. It basically says that the Behemoth was a failed design from Stefan Amaris made to take on a whole company of enemy Mechs and win. It was "so heavy its leg actuators shut down".

The Clan version is 100 tons with 2 Large Pulses, 2 Gausses and a max-armor, 3/5/3 profile. However, most do not believe that this represents the Amaris version, because the Clans tend to cut weight down on their Mechs (the Shadow Hawk IIC, Griffin IIC, and so forth are all MUCH lighter than their IS Tech versions). Thus, I believe that the Clans cut down a "superheavy" Mech to a 100 ton frame (coincidentally solving the actuator issue).

Unfortunately, it's otherwise all guesswork. There's some experimental superheavy Mech rules out there by Mike Miller - one of the BT rules gurus. Using that, you can build a Behemoth at about 200 tons with a 2/3 movement profile, 30 tons of armor, quad sniper artillery guns, and a sextet of large lasers (3 in each arm) and the heat sinks to use either the artillery or the lasers. That's the "best guess" right now...but in the Dark Ages, we start seeng superheavy Mechs (the Ares), so CGL is eventually going to have to come up with rules for them. Hopefully then we'll get to the "official" statline. Someday...

What page is that info about the Behemoth on?
Thanks!

[mangosta71]

Odd. I can't see/find Swordguy's post that you're quoting there.

Anyhoo, the Clans are just as likely to increase a Mech's weight as they are to slash it. The IIC versions of the Marauder, Warhammer, Rifleman, and Phoenix Hawk are all heavier than the original designs (in the case of the Phoenix Hawk, by enough to go from the medium weight class to the assault).

Also, the Mech listed as Behemoth in the...is it the 3056 TR? Its name among the Clans is Stone Rhino. I can't find any indication that it's related to the original SL-era Mech - looks to me like the name is a coincidence.

[RandomLunatic]

Except the fluff in TRO 3055 explicitly states it is derived from the original Behemoth.

And of course the Clans would have renamed it-their hero worship of Kerensky means they vilify anything Amaris-related even more than the Spheroids do. Not enough to steal from him, apparantly...

[GOTHIK]

Jihad The Final Reckoning references the greater than 100 ton Behemoth as Amaris' Folly.

[Mo_the_Hawked]

I am just finding this thread now thats it's been necro'ed...suck. Also because I simply can't get this out of my head after


Need I remind you that Justin only ever saw actual, non-duel combat once in his career?
He was trained at the very highly respected Sakhara Academy. He won a Diamond Starburst on Spica, fought against a company Cicadas and then later faced his former command on Bethel.

Who never saw combat. At all.
This was in reference to Candace Liao, who was injured on Spica when Justin popped her mech. Untill then she was considered a skilled Mechwarrior.

There was another point about his Centurion (Yen-Lo-Wang) in regards to it outrunning scout mechs and yet being a 4/6 mech. The problem with this point is that that version of YLW was a 6/9 that had TSM that would boost his speed up to 12. As for weaponary it also had Guass Rifle.

I know entirely to much about the Allard-Liaos.

Also Swordguy, YOU NUKED MY KELL HOUNDS!! YOU @#$%!!!:smallfurious:

Boy do I hate WoB, even more now.

[mangosta71]

He was trained at the very highly respected Sakhara Academy.
Simulators. Not real combat.

He won a Diamond Starburst on Spica,
This is the only instance of non-duel combat I'm aware of in his career.

fought against a company Cicadas
During which he was off dueling Gray Noton.

and then later faced his former command on Bethel.
He only engaged one Mech (duel) during this action.

There was another point about his Centurion (Yen-Lo-Wang) in regards to it outrunning scout mechs and yet being a 4/6 mech. The problem with this point is that that version of YLW was a 6/9 that had TSM that would boost his speed up to 12. As for weaponary it also had Guass Rifle.
1) TSM only adds 1 point of speed - a 6/9 Mech would become 7/11.
2) Yen-Lo-Wang was not a 6/9 Mech - it was 4/6.

The weapons had been replaced with a Von Ryan Gauss Rifle in place of Autocannon and Spitfire Medium Pulse Lasers, two on arm, one on torso and one on back. Additionally Mech was refitted with new generation of Triple Strength Myomer which did not burn when exposed to gas, the Miata 200 extralight engine, and three additional, switchable Heat Sinks.
Emphasis mine.

So, no, it most emphatically could NOT outrun a scout Mech, let alone a Clan scout Mech. In fact, it couldn't outrun a Clan heavy, and not even all of their assaults.

[Philistine]

Eh. The outright rules bending in favor of Kai Allard-Liao is irksome, but he's not the worst example in the novels. Not even Aidan Pryde's last stand in Falcon Guard captures that prize.

No, the absolute worst was all the "Ultimate Warrior" nonsense in the Kell Hounds subplot of the Warrior trilogy, wherein a handful of pilots gained the ability to make their heavy- and assault-class 'Mechs completely vanish from sensors by an act of will. Sorry, but targeting computers don't care if you've found inner peace. 70- and 80-ton machines don't cease shaking the ground when they move just because you're okay with the knowledge that you're marching to your doom. And the magnetic bottle in your fusion plant doesn't suddenly disappear from MAD sensors just because you've embraced your destiny. (Well... I guess it can, if you shut it down or hit the self destruct. That's not quite the same thing, of course.)

[big teej]

Eh. The outright rules bending in favor of Kai Allard-Liao is irksome, but he's not the worst example in the novels. Not even Aidan Pryde's last stand in Falcon Guard captures that prize.

No, the absolute worst was all the "Ultimate Warrior" nonsense in the Kell Hounds subplot of the Warrior trilogy, wherein a handful of pilots gained the ability to make their heavy- and assault-class 'Mechs completely vanish from sensors by an act of will. Sorry, but targeting computers don't care if you've found inner peace. 70- and 80-ton machines don't cease shaking the ground when they move just because you're okay with the knowledge that you're marching to your doom. And the magnetic bottle in your fusion plant doesn't suddenly disappear from MAD sensors just because you've embraced your destiny. (Well... I guess it can, if you shut it down or hit the self destruct. That's not quite the same thing, of course.)

I demand more information over this insanity.... direct me too it. :smalltongue:
/imperious command.

[mangosta71]

The pilots that he is referencing are Yorinaga Kurita (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Yorinaga_Kurita), Patrick Kell (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Patrick_Kell), and Morgan Kell (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Morgan_Kell). The ability is known as "Phantom 'Mech" (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Phantom_%27Mech).

The relevant section (from the Yorinaga Kurita entry):

Yorinaga thought he crippled Morgan's 'Mech when it fell to one knee but after closing in to deliver the final blow Yorinaga found that he was unable to hit Kell's Archer because his sensors could not detect his opponent.

[big teej]

The pilots that he is referencing are Yorinaga Kurita (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Yorinaga_Kurita), Patrick Kell (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Patrick_Kell), and Morgan Kell (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Morgan_Kell). The ability is known as "Phantom 'Mech" (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Phantom_%27Mech).

The relevant section (from the Yorinaga Kurita entry):

-after reading the phantom mech entry-

this....

this is....

this is sodding ridiculous...

[Philistine]

Yes. Yes it is. I did try to warn you...

[Swordguy]

-after reading the phantom mech entry-

this....

this is....

this is sodding ridiculous...

To be totally fair, it was also VERY early on in the fiction, when the universe aesthetic wasn't nailed down yet. It's unfair to judge it against what has come since, only what was around then. And there wasn't much. In fact, you could argue the spirituality having game effects wasn't intended to be limited to this particular instance; Minobu Tetsuhara's zen affecting his archery and mech-piloting ability (somewhat passed down to his successor Michi Noketsuna. who would become an incarnation of The Bounty Hunter) was certainly in the same vein as the Phantom Mech Ability. Additionally, Aiden Pryde seemed to manifest something VERY similar to PMA during his last stand.

So semi-supernatural "stuff" was present across several of the early BattleTech novels. Yes, the universe has moved away from it, but judge it fairly.

.......................


As for rule-breaking, as has been said over and over (and over, and over...), the board game rules are an abstraction, and FAR more in the game universe is possible than what is allowed during the tabletop game. For example, "Yen-lo-Wang can't outrun scout Mechs". As long as we compare a 4/6 Centurion to a 6/9 scout mech on purely those terms, this is true. Now, compare the following units

4/6 Centurion
Pilot: Justin Allard
Skills
Pilot/Mech and Gunnery/Mech both at +5 (making him a 3/3 pilot in TW play)
Tactics/Mech +5
Leadership +5
Traits
Combat Sense (roll 3d6 for Init and take the best 2, reduce the effects of Surprise)
Special Pilot Abilities
Speed Demon (+1 Running MP)
Maneuvering Ace (May sideslip as a Quad mech)
Tactical Genius (reroll Initiative)

8/12 Cicada (the Liao Scout mech of choice, if the Warrior Trilogy is to be believed)
Pilot: Scary Liao Person
Pilot/Mech and Gunnery/mech both at +4 (a 4/4 pilot in TW play)
Tactics/Mech +3
Leadership +1
No Traits or SPAs as SLP is not a named character

So, Justin is moving 4/7, can sideslip around terrain, rolls 3d6+10 (dropping the lowest die) and with a free reroll every turn for initiative. SLP moves 6/9/6 and rolls 2d6+4 for initiative.

So what's going to happen here is that Justin is going to win initiative practically ALL the time. While he has less MP and will fall behind in a straight race across flat, level ground, as soon as we introduce terrain into the game, the situation changes. The Cicada will go first almost every turn, leaving Justin able to plot the most efficient course to catch up to the Cicada. it's not a guarantee, but it's not impossible to say that under these circumstances, the Centurion can catch up to the Cicada. And, of course, this gets even worse if we take another scout mech - such as the Flea - into consideration.

Lo! Rules which make it a possibility for a Centurion to catch a scout mech! They just aren't Total Warfare rules.

......................................

Finally, at Mo_the_Hawked

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n294/wolffe42/Display%20Minis/1327990423799.jpg

(Yes, that's the mini, and yes, that's the nuke template at the actual game where the Kell Hounds ate it. Nyah. :smalltongue: )

[Rockphed]

Finally, at Mo_the_Hawked

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n294/wolffe42/Display%20Minis/1327990423799.jpg

(Yes, that's the mini, and yes, that's the nuke template at the actual game where the Kell Hounds ate it. Nyah. :smalltongue: )

I just can't get over you putting nukes on a vehicle that, despite handling like a lead semi, tends to get pwned on a regular basis.

I think that such is the biggest failing of the Mechwarrior series. You get plenty of lead semi action, but it also goes by far too quickly. I don't ever feel like I am driving a lead semi on a collision course with death. Mostly I end up feeling like I am running full tilt through a ruby and emerald obstacle course.

[mangosta71]

As for rule-breaking, as has been said over and over (and over, and over...), the board game rules are an abstraction, and FAR more in the game universe is possible than what is allowed during the tabletop game. For example, "Yen-lo-Wang can't outrun scout Mechs". As long as we compare a 4/6 Centurion to a 6/9 scout mech on purely those terms, this is true. Now, compare the following units

4/6 Centurion
Pilot: Justin Allard
Skills
Pilot/Mech and Gunnery/Mech both at +5 (making him a 3/3 pilot in TW play)
Tactics/Mech +5
Leadership +5
Traits
Combat Sense (roll 3d6 for Init and take the best 2, reduce the effects of Surprise)
Special Pilot Abilities
Speed Demon (+1 Running MP)
Maneuvering Ace (May sideslip as a Quad mech)
Tactical Genius (reroll Initiative)

8/12 Cicada (the Liao Scout mech of choice, if the Warrior Trilogy is to be believed)
Pilot: Scary Liao Person
Pilot/Mech and Gunnery/mech both at +4 (a 4/4 pilot in TW play)
Tactics/Mech +3
Leadership +1
No Traits or SPAs as SLP is not a named character

So, Justin is moving 4/7, can sideslip around terrain, rolls 3d6+10 (dropping the lowest die) and with a free reroll every turn for initiative. SLP moves 6/9/6 and rolls 2d6+4 for initiative.

So what's going to happen here is that Justin is going to win initiative practically ALL the time. While he has less MP and will fall behind in a straight race across flat, level ground, as soon as we introduce terrain into the game, the situation changes. The Cicada will go first almost every turn, leaving Justin able to plot the most efficient course to catch up to the Cicada. it's not a guarantee, but it's not impossible to say that under these circumstances, the Centurion can catch up to the Cicada. And, of course, this gets even worse if we take another scout mech - such as the Flea - into consideration.

Lo! Rules which make it a possibility for a Centurion to catch a scout mech! They just aren't Total Warfare rules.
I find it absurd that a pilot can be such a Mary Sue so awesome that he can make a 'Mech run faster. Being better at sidestepping/negotiating terrain is one thing, but a Mech's speed is supposed to represent the physical limitations of the machine (look up operating Mechs in low gravity - moving at a speed higher than the 'Mech's normal run speed will destroy the 'Mech's legs because they're not built to withstand those forces). But even with 1 more MP at a run, and reduced movement cost for sidestepping, a Centurion, or even a Valkyrie, cannot run in circles faster than a Rifleman can turn in place.