Battletech: Re: 'City Archer'
hamil...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Star Captain Axly of Clan Wolf states:
> This seems like it would work rather well with 3025 tech. I think it
> might have some serious vulnerability when you use 3050. Multiple
> AMS systems are a hallmark of cityfighters on both sides with the
> new tech. Reason: SRMs are fairly impotent against such a 'Mech for
> at least 2 rounds. (Shperoid mileage may vary.) I would also advise
> shifting the CT(R) mediums to the arms. You are able to cover the
> rear hexes with at least two lasers by torso-twisting and using
> the arm-mounted weaponry. This allows a much better arc of fire
> than the rear-mounted, as you must fire only the rear-mounted
> weaponry when you choose to fire said weaponry (I may be reading
> that rule incorrectly, but that is what it seems to state)
The Star Captain is quite correct in stating that this mech would be at a
disadvantage in this new era of rediscovered technology.
What this Clan welp may not have realised is that this mech was fielded for
the time pre-War of 3039. I myself, prefer Battletech before the Clan invation
began. Back in the days when mechs overheated, when the Combine fought against
L.C's and Fedrats, and not some shot gun wedding union called the Fed. Com.,
and when a clan was something to do with the Kearny Highlanders. (Have a look
at my post called 'Battletech: The Great Debate')
Now as far as the rear mounted medium lasers go, I suppose this free birth pup
has never really seen an ARC-2R to no that is has two rear mounted mediums.
When I made the ARC-3K I wanted to change a good thing as little as possible
while turning it into something completely different. So the Diverse Optics
Mediums stay rear mounted.
Saiyonara,
Sho-sa Peter Hamilton, Comm. Comp. C, First Batt., 37th Dieron Regulars (3056)
Aka
Chu-sa Harry M. Kemp, Comm. 37th Dieron Regulars, DCMS, (3027)
Aka
Star Captain Sil Ward, Comm. 11th Wolf Guard, Delta Galaxy, (3056)
Yes, Star Captain Axley, I use clan when the mood strikes.
RedSwordTarga
(After I post something )
> The Star Captain is quite correct ..
Thank you, thank you.
> What this Clan welp may not have realised is that this mech was fielded for
>the time pre-War of 3039. I myself, prefer Battletech before the Clan invation
>began. Back in the days when mechs overheated, when the Combine fought against
>L.C's and Fedrats, and not some shot gun wedding union called the Fed. Com.,
>and when a clan was something to do with the Kearny Highlanders. (Have a look
>at my post called 'Battletech: The Great Debate')
I did point out that it would function well with 3025 technology.
As for your preference for that era - To each his/her own. I find 3025
games to take entirely too long unless played on the company level.
Otherwise, firepower to destroy a heavily armored 'Mech cannot be
mustered in any reasonable amount of playing time.
(As for my whelpness, at least I am not living in the past when
Kurita was a force to be reckoned with instead of a Clan doormat.)
> Now as far as the rear mounted medium lasers go, I suppose this free birth pup
>has never really seen an ARC-2R to no that is has two rear mounted mediums.
> When I made the ARC-3K I wanted to change a good thing as little as possible
>while turning it into something completely different. So the Diverse Optics
>Mediums stay rear mounted.
I have seen my share of Archers. The design concept of rear-mounted weaponry
is rather a waste of weight. Seldom will a 'Mech mount sufficient weaponry
to the rear to cause an opponent any great concern (Grand Crusaders excluded).
The hex row directly to the rear can be easily covered by arm-mounted weapons
and can be covered even better if one takes the trouble to design 'Mechs with
the lower arm actuator removed. Thus, the idea of pointing guns away from the
enemy does not make a lot of sense. Keeping a flawed design simply because it
comes from the FASA house of flawed 'Mech designs is doing your Mechwarriors
a great disservice.
Axly
********************************************************************************
* Axly * "Is Axly tough? Yes. Talented? Yes. Brave? Oh, certainly. *
* Red Sword * He is also erratic, irresponsible, accident-prone, and a *
* Targa * constant threat to public safety. The trick is to keep him *
* * pointed in the right direction. " *
* * -Niki *
********************************************************************************
Second Genyosha
>hamil...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>I did point out that it would function well with 3025 technology.
>As for your preference for that era - To each his/her own. I find 3025
>games to take entirely too long unless played on the company level.
>Otherwise, firepower to destroy a heavily armored 'Mech cannot be
>mustered in any reasonable amount of playing time.
>(As for my whelpness, at least I am not living in the past when
>Kurita was a force to be reckoned with instead of a Clan doormat.)
Battles with Clan tech is only a short time, due to the enormous amount of
firepower that the Clans have available. Masakari with 4 LgPLs' and that's
40 Points of Damage firing at -3 to hit without overheat! In 3025 the
damage is a lot smaller and heat is near always of concern.
Damage potentials are way up while armour stays constant. This is the
problem we face in Battletech. How you play "company level" is beyond me
as I tend to find that lance level actions are the best and the quickest :)
The issue of falling back to old tek (3025) is becoming more attractive
to a lot of players I know. Tried of the "Arms Race" they are just playing
the game. The tech advantage enjoyed by the Clans can get a bit much at times.
Which is why we play with certain "House rules" now.
#1 Clan forces can only use official Sheet meks form the sheetbooks.
Why? Because Clan meks don't need "tweeking", they are good enough
without it.
#2 Inner Sphere forces can use madeup meks pending approval from all sides.
Why? Cause the IS needs all the help it can get. BTW most of my designs
are used in my group :)
>> Now as far as the rear mounted medium lasers go, I suppose this free birth pup
>>has never really seen an ARC-2R to no that is has two rear mounted mediums.
>> When I made the ARC-3K I wanted to change a good thing as little as possible
>>while turning it into something completely different. So the Diverse Optics
>>Mediums stay rear mounted.
The arguement of "looking right" etc is one I support. Though the ARC-3K
would be better served if it had all it's mediums firing forward, it
wouldn't be an Archer then. More like a Crusader, maybe?
>I have seen my share of Archers. The design concept of rear-mounted weaponry
>is rather a waste of weight. Seldom will a 'Mech mount sufficient weaponry
>to the rear to cause an opponent any great concern (Grand Crusaders excluded).
>The hex row directly to the rear can be easily covered by arm-mounted weapons
>and can be covered even better if one takes the trouble to design 'Mechs with
>the lower arm actuator removed. Thus, the idea of pointing guns away from the
>enemy does not make a lot of sense. Keeping a flawed design simply because it
>comes from the FASA house of flawed 'Mech designs is doing your Mechwarriors
>a great disservice.
>Axly
I prefer to have arm mounted weapons even if my mek doesn't flip arms, since
then I can still torso twist and fire with the arm. Rear mounted weapons are
a waste of time, but the "look" isn't right in this case. Removing the LRM-10
in a Dragon would be better, but then it wouldn't be a Dragon then. This is a
matter of taste/style.
In fact the old tek (3025) Battlemaster is a prime case in point. There are
some very serious problems with this mek, check this out. The whole mek is
10 tons overweight and needs to go on a diet :)
Battlemaster 85 Tons - Battlemaster 75 Tons = Difference
IS 8.5 7.5 1.0
340 27.0 19.0 8.0
Gyro 4.0 3.0 1.0
-----
10.0
Now we can see that the 75 Ton version is as good as the 85 Ton original.
Yet we don't have 75 Ton Battlemasters do we. Slowing the speed to 3/5
would mean an additional 15 tons for the 85 Ton Battlemaster and 10 for the 75.
But with all the extra weapons and heatsinks we end up with a very different
mek and hence not a Battlemaster and we haven't even talked about the
rear-mounted mediums :)
When I make a mek I try to stay within the confines of the original design,
my Rifleman II upgraded the AC/5s to LB-10Xs and tried to look as much as
possible as a Rifleman. The Marauder II looks like a Marauder etc. So what
if FASA messes things up, we live with it.
Comments?
This has been....
Tony Taia (Sho-sa of the Second Genyosha)
TAI...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
3055-3067: So little time, so many Clan meks to kill! :) `|'Disclaimer!
**Noone knows what I know, so you know that what I know is only mine to know**
Zachary S Tseng
> In article <Bz0rz...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
> >hamil...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
(stuff, such as how nasty a warhawk omni w/4 lg pulse lasers can be, deleted)
>
> The issue of falling back to old tek (3025) is becoming more attractive
> to a lot of players I know. Tried of the "Arms Race" they are just playing
> the game. The tech advantage enjoyed by the Clans can get a bit much at times.
> Which is why we play with certain "House rules" now.
>
> #1 Clan forces can only use official Sheet meks form the sheetbooks.
> Why? Because Clan meks don't need "tweeking", they are good enough
> without it.
Nooooooooo!!! This rule completely defeats the purpose of Omnimech concept.
The basic idea of omni is that you can config them anyway you want to suit the
mission/ personal taste.
>
> #2 Inner Sphere forces can use madeup meks pending approval from all sides.
> Why? Cause the IS needs all the help it can get. BTW most of my designs
> are used in my group :)
Hmmm... The Clans really need help now; in particular, they needs lot of ECM
suites to be fit when fighting you mechs to counter all the C3 units you have
on your designs. You made some d*mn GOOD designs for the snakes, Tony. BTW,
can you send me the stats on the Crossbow? (the Arrow IV mech).
>
(stuff deleted)
> The arguement of "looking right" etc is one I support. Though the ARC-3K
Aye, aye.
> would be better served if it had all it's mediums firing forward, it
> wouldn't be an Archer then. More like a Crusader, maybe?
>
(lots of stuff deleted)
> In fact the old tek (3025) Battlemaster is a prime case in point. There are
> some very serious problems with this mek, check this out. The whole mek is
> 10 tons overweight and needs to go on a diet :)
>
> Battlemaster 85 Tons - Battlemaster 75 Tons = Difference
> IS 8.5 7.5 1.0
> 340 27.0 19.0 8.0
> Gyro 4.0 3.0 1.0
> -----
> 10.0
>
> Now we can see that the 75 Ton version is as good as the 85 Ton original.
> Yet we don't have 75 Ton Battlemasters do we. Slowing the speed to 3/5
> would mean an additional 15 tons for the 85 Ton Battlemaster and 10 for the 75.
> But with all the extra weapons and heatsinks we end up with a very different
> mek and hence not a Battlemaster and we haven't even talked about the
> rear-mounted mediums :)
Good point, Tony. One more point on the need of BM to go on a diet plan is
that the stock version is underarmored. The only important advantage for
current tonnage and FA$A blew it once again. So if one can get same
performance out of a 75-ton frame and still get about the same amount of
protection, why not make 75-ton BattleMasters?
> When I make a mek I try to stay within the confines of the original design,
> my Rifleman II upgraded the AC/5s to LB-10Xs and tried to look as much as
> possible as a Rifleman. The Marauder II looks like a Marauder etc. So what
> if FASA messes things up, we live with it.
>
> Comments?
Keep on the good works designing snake mechs, my Sigma Galaxy will be waiting
for the day in 3067.
>
> This has been....
> Tony Taia (Sho-sa of the Second Genyosha)
> TAI...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
> 3055-3067: So little time, so many Clan meks to kill! :) `|'Disclaimer!
> **Noone knows what I know, so you know that what I know is only mine to know**
Cheers,
Zachary Tseng
Khan, Clan Ghost Bear
Commander, Sigma Galaxy, Clan Ghost Bear
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
>In <1g6f3h...@golem.wcc.govt.nz> tai...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>> In article <Bz0rz...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
>> >hamil...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>
>>
>> #1 Clan forces can only use official Sheet meks form the sheetbooks.
>> Why? Because Clan meks don't need "tweeking", they are good enough
>> without it.
>
>Nooooooooo!!! This rule completely defeats the purpose of Omnimech concept.
>The basic idea of omni is that you can config them anyway you want to suit the
>mission/ personal taste.
_
/-\h, but the OmniPods are supposed to be "all the tweaking you'd
need." (:
>> In fact the old tek (3025) Battlemaster is a prime case in point. There are
>> some very serious problems with this mek, check this out. The whole mek is
>> 10 tons overweight and needs to go on a diet :)
>>
>> Battlemaster 85 Tons - Battlemaster 75 Tons = Difference
>> IS 8.5 7.5 1.0
>> 340 27.0 19.0 8.0
>> Gyro 4.0 3.0 1.0
>> -----
>> 10.0
>>
>Good point, Tony. One more point on the need of BM to go on a diet plan is
>that the stock version is underarmored. The only important advantage for
>current tonnage and FA$A blew it once again. So if one can get same
>performance out of a 75-ton frame and still get about the same amount of
>protection, why not make 75-ton BattleMasters?
_
/-\n 85-ton mech vs. a 75-ton mech with identical capabilities has
two main advantages:
1) Extra Internal Structure boxes
2) Extra physical attack damage points
][f you're not using tonnages to balance your forces the 85-ton
design would be more worthwhile to use. Otherwise, I think you'd be
better off spending the extra 10 tons somewhere else.
--
_______________________________________________________
/ -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex (: /
/ lun...@netcom.com GEnie: LUNATIC CI$: 76170,672 /
/______________________________________________________/
Carl Chavez
they're nearly PERFECT!!! Remember, nearly all designs are commissioned by
the military. Militaries through history are known for being impressed by the
mediocre...:)
Actually, one of the reasons why I have some problems with the 3055 update
is that it has quite a few good mechs in it. Of couse, I must always smile
when I see the 4/6 100 ton mechs (especially that really stupid on with the
axe! - the "Berzerker"?).
MATIS stephane
> Why do people complain so much about FASA's designs? They're not flawed,
> they're nearly PERFECT!!! Remember, nearly all designs are commissioned by
> the military. Militaries through history are known for being impressed by the
> mediocre...:)
How true. Especially since the old 3025 book showed decent in
technology and 3050 just show refit and 3055 show the first attempts at
new tech.
See me in 3067! :-)
> Actually, one of the reasons why I have some problems with the 3055 update
> is that it has quite a few good mechs in it. Of couse, I must always smile
> when I see the 4/6 100 ton mechs (especially that really stupid on with the
> axe! - the "Berzerker"?).
How do you like the Falconner ? 5/8/5 Gauss,ER PPC and meds.
Ok, I hate XL engines myself.
BTW I'm baised ... Brent my buddy designed it. :)
+---------------------------------+ ___ ___ ___
| Stephane I. Matis | / \_BATLLETECH /\__\ Viva NeXT!
| E-Mail : kgn...@cs.concordia.ca | \___/ \___/ \/__/ NeXTSTEP 3.0!
| "It Just Works..." - Steve Jobs | \___/
+---------------------------------+ Wolfnet Operative & NeXThead
ANDREW Morris
...
> In fact the old tek (3025) Battlemaster is a prime case in point. There are
>some very serious problems with this mek, check this out. The whole mek is
>10 tons overweight and needs to go on a diet :)
>Battlemaster 85 Tons - Battlemaster 75 Tons = Difference
>IS 8.5 7.5 1.0
>340 27.0 19.0 8.0
>Gyro 4.0 3.0 1.0
> -----
> 10.0
> Now we can see that the 75 Ton version is as good as the 85 Ton original.
>Yet we don't have 75 Ton Battlemasters do we. Slowing the speed to 3/5
>would mean an additional 15 tons for the 85 Ton Battlemaster and 10 for the 75.
>But with all the extra weapons and heatsinks we end up with a very different
>mek and hence not a Battlemaster and we haven't even talked about the
>rear-mounted mediums :)
But... If you played the OLD system strictly you would know that you
CAN'T change the specs of a mech. You need Star League technology to
do that. That's why repair facilities and mech factories are such
"great" targets for campaigns... Hell the way we played if you got
an arm shot off of something like a Victor, the chances are you're not
going to get one back on...
> When I make a mek I try to stay within the confines of the original design,
>my Rifleman II upgraded the AC/5s to LB-10Xs and tried to look as much as
>possible as a Rifleman. The Marauder II looks like a Marauder etc. So what
>if FASA messes things up, we live with it.
I thought that the origional designs that FASA had dreamed up were quite
realistic. All of the mechs had some sort of heat management involved
and the mechs were good at a specific role. For instance, Archers and
Crusaders are almost useless in the city, while a Hunchback or a Victor...
<EVIL GRIN>
If you can just run in, fire everything every turn then there is no
planning/resource management involved. Try a game with heat problems.
I've had players have more than one Crusade blow up underneath them because
they got too hot and all that ammo a Crusader carries doesn't like that...
Oh, and by the way - just my personal opinion: Rifleman(men?) bite! 2/4/2
for torso armor on the back!!?? Arrgh! The question I have what type
of idiot would want one? But then again, it's better than running around
with the infrantry... :-)
--
============================================================================
"Life's a Bitch and then you fly..." "Let's get dangerous!" - D. Duck
Andrew Morris (The Android) E-Mail : mor...@cs.ualberta.ca
Micheal Marks
A guy in our group has two of them, and we can't kill the damn things!
@$#@$@!
MDM, looking for a good Wraith-killer (besides Eric the Cleric)
--
"To be the man, you have to BEAT the man" Ric Flair, EX-REAL World's Champion
"I'm gonna hit ya, and you're gonna fall" Ren, and Nick to John K.
"Never underestimate the greed of the American public" Me
Micheal Marks: sa...@umcc.ais.org mma...@nyx.cs.du.edu IRC:Drstyle
997van...@gw.wmich.edu
> In article <1992Dec11.0...@u.washington.edu> fore...@stein.u.washington.edu (Carl Chavez) writes:
>>Why do people complain so much about FASA's designs? They're not flawed,
>>they're nearly PERFECT!!! Remember, nearly all designs are commissioned by
>>the military. Militaries through history are known for being impressed by the
>>mediocre...:)
>>
>>Actually, one of the reasons why I have some problems with the 3055 update
>>is that it has quite a few good mechs in it. Of couse, I must always smile
>>when I see the 4/6 100 ton mechs (especially that really stupid on with the
>>axe! - the "Berzerker"?).
>
> Yeah, there are some decent designs, especially the @$#$! Wraith!
> A guy in our group has two of them, and we can't kill the damn things!
> @$#@$@!
>
> MDM, looking for a good Wraith-killer (besides Eric the Cleric)
Try a couple of Kimodo's or Archers with Thunder LRMS and hope you hit their
hex. That way when they try to jump out of that hex they might set off the
mines and that's a piloting skill roll.
>
>
> --
> "To be the man, you have to BEAT the man" Ric Flair, EX-REAL World's Champion
> "I'm gonna hit ya, and you're gonna fall" Ren, and Nick to John K.
> "Never underestimate the greed of the American public" Me
> Micheal Marks: sa...@umcc.ais.org mma...@nyx.cs.du.edu IRC:Drstyle
John VanDerKolk
Second Genyosha
>In <1g6f3h...@golem.wcc.govt.nz> tai...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>(stuff, such as how nasty a warhawk omni w/4 lg pulse lasers can be, deleted)
>> The issue of falling back to old tek (3025) is becoming more attractive
>> to a lot of players I know. Tried of the "Arms Race" they are just playing
>> the game. The tech advantage enjoyed by the Clans can get a bit much at times.
>> Which is why we play with certain "House rules" now.
>> #1 Clan forces can only use official Sheet meks form the sheetbooks.
>> Why? Because Clan meks don't need "tweeking", they are good enough
>> without it.
>Nooooooooo!!! This rule completely defeats the purpose of Omnimech concept.
>The basic idea of omni is that you can config them anyway you want to suit the
>mission/ personal taste.
This rule is the one that everyone screams at :) Why do we have it?
Because the combat efficiecy(sp) of the Clan meks is very high, you
can go very wrong with all the Clan goodies, LgPLasers etc, Targeting
Computers and DSHS (Double Strength heat Sinks). To improve on these
designs is only to make the lethality of these meks ever more extreme.
With at least 3 variants per design, surely you can find something you
like? Ok I shouldn't call you "surely" :)
>> #2 Inner Sphere forces can use madeup meks pending approval from all sides.
>> Why? Cause the IS needs all the help it can get. BTW most of my designs
>> are used in my group :)
>Hmmm... The Clans really need help now; in particular, they needs lot of ECM
>suites to be fit when fighting you mechs to counter all the C3 units you have
>on your designs. You made some d*mn GOOD designs for the snakes, Tony. BTW,
>can you send me the stats on the Crossbow? (the Arrow IV mech).
Forgot to tell you that all electronics are interchangable with us. Same
crits and tonnage for either side. Though of course you can mix Clan and IS :)
My C-3 cravings are thus denied :( Though of 46 meks, only 16 have C-3 at all.
I usually mount TAG in the head, because everyone seems to hit that location
when empty (My karma is bad and their's is better) and it produces no heat :)
> (lots of stuff deleted)
>> In fact the old tek (3025) Battlemaster is a prime case in point. There are
>> some very serious problems with this mek, check this out. The whole mek is
>> 10 tons overweight and needs to go on a diet :)
>> Battlemaster 85 Tons - Battlemaster 75 Tons = Difference
>> IS 8.5 7.5 1.0
>> 340 27.0 19.0 8.0
>> Gyro 4.0 3.0 1.0
>> -----
>> 10.0
>> Now we can see that the 75 Ton version is as good as the 85 Ton original.
>> Yet we don't have 75 Ton Battlemasters do we. Slowing the speed to 3/5
>> would mean an additional 15 tons for the 85 Ton Battlemaster and 10 for the 75.
>> But with all the extra weapons and heatsinks we end up with a very different
>> mek and hence not a Battlemaster and we haven't even talked about the
>> rear-mounted mediums :)
>Good point, Tony. One more point on the need of BM to go on a diet plan is
>that the stock version is underarmored. The only important advantage for
>current tonnage and FA$A blew it once again. So if one can get same
>performance out of a 75-ton frame and still get about the same amount of
>protection, why not make 75-ton BattleMasters?
Cause the Union workers for the 85 ton Battlemasters didn't want to?
In war, the obvious is not always taken. The US Army didn't start to
find your M-1s until several years after their availability, they cost
too much :) In the 3025 world, Kurita still produces Chargers! Why? Cause
there was nothing else, retooling would take too long and is impractical.
Economics starts to raise it's ugly head and I better stop now before the
historian in me starts. BTW I'm doing a Hist major hence my interest.
>Keep on the good works designing snake mechs, my Sigma Galaxy will be waiting
>for the day in 3067.
>Cheers,
>Zachary Tseng
>Khan, Clan Ghost Bear
>Commander, Sigma Galaxy, Clan Ghost Bear
The argument on "designing" meks is still unresolved, but I'm sure that time
will tell and bring about a conclusion on this matter. Don't worry after I
remove the two pussycat Clans, I'm gonna go a-hunting Bear! I need a new
floor rug :) See you in 3067.
Robert E Day
>In article <+xi1H=cg...@atlantis.psu.edu>, Z...@ECLX.PSU.EDU (Zachary S Tseng) w
rites:
>>In <1g6f3h...@golem.wcc.govt.nz> tai...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>>> The issue of falling back to old tek (3025) is becoming more attractive
>>> to a lot of players I know. Tried of the "Arms Race" they are just playing
>>> the game. The tech advantage enjoyed by the Clans can get a bit much at tim
es.
>>> Which is why we play with certain "House rules" now.
>>> #1 Clan forces can only use official Sheet meks form the sheetbooks.
>>> Why? Because Clan meks don't need "tweeking", they are good enough
>>> without it.
>
>>Nooooooooo!!! This rule completely defeats the purpose of Omnimech concept.
>>The basic idea of omni is that you can config them anyway you want to suit th
e
>>mission/ personal taste.
>
> This rule is the one that everyone screams at :) Why do we have it?
>Because the combat efficiecy(sp) of the Clan meks is very high, you
>can go very wrong with all the Clan goodies, LgPLasers etc, Targeting
>Computers and DSHS (Double Strength heat Sinks). To improve on these
>designs is only to make the lethality of these meks ever more extreme.
>With at least 3 variants per design, surely you can find something you
>like? Ok I shouldn't call you "surely" :)
My initial bid will be to use only standard varaints(book mechs).
Will you match my bid, or do you concede the bidding to me? ;)
-
--
If the price that I must pay to obtain my * Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov- * Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe * Barony Middle Marches, *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson* Middle Kingdom *
Mark Urbin
FASA's designs prove one of Murphys Rules of Combat...
"Remember, your weapon was built by the lowest bidder."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Urbin Racal-Datacom Boxborough, MA ur...@interlan.interlan.com
These opinions are mine. No one else will admit to them.
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot
on the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Schipper
>Oh, and by the way - just my personal opinion: Rifleman(men?) bite! 2/4/2
>for torso armor on the back!!?? Arrgh! The question I have what type
>of idiot would want one? But then again, it's better than running around
>with the infrantry... :-)
I believe standard Riflemen are too hot, and the lack of both back armor
and manuverability may be a problem, but not the armor by itself. At
Gamex, one of the tournaments was a free for all calling for custom 75 ton
mechs. I used one with 4/6/4 movement and NO back armor. I did pretty
well until I was forced to leave due to other obligations. Maybe the back
armor would have been a weakness if everyone had knew about it and tried to
hit me in the back, but it is VERY difficult to get a back shot on someone who
knows what they are doing.
RedSwordTarga
> This rule is the one that everyone screams at :) Why do we have it?
>Because the combat efficiecy(sp) of the Clan meks is very high, you
>can go very wrong with all the Clan goodies, LgPLasers etc, Targeting
>Computers and DSHS (Double Strength heat Sinks). To improve on these
>designs is only to make the lethality of these meks ever more extreme.
>With at least 3 variants per design, surely you can find something you
>like? Ok I shouldn't call you "surely" :)
Except the 60-70 ton range of FASA clan 'Mechs have almost no armor and more
useless systems than you can shake a stick at....
Axly
ANDREW Morris
>
>Yeah, there are some decent designs, especially the @$#$! Wraith!
>A guy in our group has two of them, and we can't kill the damn things!
>@$#@$@!
I don't know about the Wraith, but in 3025 standards the best mech that
I had to EVER deal with was the AWESOME. 3 PPCs and 28 heat sinks. Didn't
move worth shit, but hey, with PPCs who cares!
(Sorry, we also played with an aditional rule we through in. When
attacking with energy weapons your "victim" took heat as well as damage
we used a 50% heat damage - therefore for a PPC you not only took 10
damage you also took 5 heat. {see any of the 3025 books for why...})
>
>MDM, looking for a good Wraith-killer (besides Eric the Cleric)
Sorry don't know much about 3055... (In fact NOTHING!)
Try a modified AWESOME design... <GRIN>
ANDREW Morris
Um, not to slam you, but give me a Locust and I'll take out your mech... The
only thing Locusts are good for in combat ARE the shots in the back...
Paul A Daniels
I don't think the clans have much of an advantge these days.
Heck anyone crippled by that silly sense of honor that most perople play them
with, and then the fact that the IS mechs are almost (*donns flame retardant
suit) as good. Heck even using the 3025 tech you can come up with some
deadly mechs, (let alone vehicles). The poor old clanners dont have much of a
chance when they have 1.5 times their tonnage up against them, they have to
be extremely mobile, as all you need to do with the IS designs is over gun them
you can guarantee a kill fairly quickly, all though you take losses :).
Heck the modify the old 3025 warhammer, drop its speed to 3/5 and
replace its short range weapons for an AC/20 (you wouldnt want to bbe mugged
by this), or change the AC/20 for ML and heatsinks to use them. You end up with
a very nasty mech and that is without FF armor, blue shields etc....
Playing without the clan honor system, and allowing the IS to field
whatever it wants, 1.5x tonnage for the IS is giving them an advantage.
Oh for a complete rewrite of the Construction/Weapon types/damage rules
but then it would be slower or no longer battletech ;)
-
[All of the above was MHO, so if you don't like ti just ignore it. I just get
a little irritated with all the people complianing about the unfair advantage
of the clans.]
RedSwordTarga
>
> I don't think the clans have much of an advantge these days.
>Heck anyone crippled by that silly sense of honor that most perople play them
>with,
Well, the Clan honor system is not the debilitating thing that it looks
like it is at first. If an enemy 'Mech fires on more than one 'Mech, it
opens things up into a free-for-all.
Axly
Second Genyosha
>p...@probitas.cs.utas.edu.au (Paul A Daniels) writes:
>> I don't think the clans have much of an advantge these days.
>Well, the Clan honor system is not the debilitating thing that it looks
>like it is at first. If an enemy 'Mech fires on more than one 'Mech, it
>opens things up into a free-for-all.
>Axly
Using the Clan Honor system is fine, but the IS must remember that "There's
a time for every season". Choose the time to break the code of one-on-one
wisely. I do it when I can strike behind the Clan meks and ensure that at
least one will die that turn. Strike when it is advantageous to you, though
it is better when you attack from ambush.
The free-for-all that is mentioned, sometimes isn't so. As many Clan meks
continue to fight the one-on-one system even when the code is broken, this
was mentioned in the "Blood of Kerensky" novels by Stackpole. As Clan pilots
are more accustomed to the IS ways, they may go all out and brawl, but then
they might be slow learners :) Though the "Jade Phoenix" books mention the
free-for-all situation, they don't seem very "Clan" to me, so I'll leave
it up to you to decide.
Finally if you do keep to the rules of the one-on-one of the Honour code,
then remember when your Clan mek has made it's kill, it stops. They did let
another Clan pilot finish it's combat without aid. Plus a last point, what
about "Swarms" they can hit more than one mek at the same time. My Clanners
tend to ignore such things as "accidental fire", but then they know that I
have limited numbers of special munitions :(
**Have a very merry Christmas and Happy New Year! and don't drink and drive!**
This has been... : "I have never listened to anyone who criticized
Tony Taia :my taste in space travel, sideshows or gorillas.
TAI...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz :When this occurs, I pack up my dinosaurs and leave
My ideas are mine only, ok? :leave the room." - Ray Bradbury 1980. Age 60.
