no arms on mechs

Pages: 1
ghostrider
12/15/16 03:23 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If it is correct that maxtech allowed a mech to be missed if a mech that started with no arms on it, yet the hit location came up with a hit there is unreasonable.
That would mean 3 location shots from the side, and 4 from the front/back would no longer hit the mech.
This is highly abusive to the hit and location tables of the game.

Since it was in a thread already starting to go off topic, I thought I would bring this up in a new thread.

How many think this should never have seen the light of day, as it is basically a full cheat of the gaming system.
FrabbyModerator
12/15/16 04:27 AM
84.180.67.83

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The rules mantra of "There's a rule for that..." doesn't mean there would be a *good* rule for everything. Personally, I find many fringe problems have received arbitrary or counterintuitive solutions. There are also limits to the 2d6 system, where a single to-hit modifier point may have either vast consequences or nearly none at all, depending on circumstances because of its intrinsic bell curve.

Luckily, there's (to the best of my knowledge) only one single canonical 'Mech variant without arms, and even that one might be apocryphal. And it's a variant of the UrbanMech. So the issue is pretty much a moot point in canon games.

Once you're throwing optional rules, home-brew designs and custom modifications in, players have to agree on the ruleset and thus could veto their opponent making use of a perceived cheat or overpowered rule.
KamikazeJohnson
12/15/16 04:33 AM
142.160.216.118

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Frabby writes:

Luckily, there's (to the best of my knowledge) only one single canonical 'Mech variant without arms, and even that one might be apocryphal. And it's a variant of the UrbanMech. So the issue is pretty much a moot point in canon games.



IIRC, the original TRO that mentions the armless variant also specifically describes it as a failure because any Arm damage would automatically apply to the torso.

Personally, I don't like the automatic miss rules (armless 'Mechs, the new partial cover rules) is that it means an elite gunner with a painfully easy shot (to-hit number of like -6 or so) can STILL have a significant chance of missing completely, which makes no sense.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
12/15/16 02:10 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Ok. So it isn't just me that thinks the hit roll should mean a hit.
Though the ams might change that with missiles, but not all weapons fired.

I would think higher penalties to hit would be used instead of missing the unit is the way to go there. I mean a miss is a miss in the canon game. That should be covered with the to hit roll.

There is one small issue with optional rules. Some people forget to tell newer people that haven't read the rule books it is not a main option for the game. More then a few issues stem from this. Just like house rules. Some people forget they are not canon and when they get into games with others, chaos ensues.
And a few times, it was forgotten to agree on rules until the situation comes up.

But I guess the idea of it may not be a good rule does help soften the issue some.
Still would like to hear other opinions on this.
Retry
12/15/16 06:47 PM
129.237.108.67

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I'd suggest re-rolling on an arm hit and treating an armless mech as possessing the Narrow/Low Profile quirk.
MJB
12/27/16 02:43 PM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We tested the armless concept extensively and found that the trade-off between the miss chance balanced very well with the added difficulty of standing from prone. Armless mechs were not overpowered nor underpowered; also, were they not over or under selected. Armor went a little further, but you lost internal structure padding for your torsos.

We had armless versions of many mechs, pretty much selected my the minis; Catapult, Stalker, Naga, and a few others.

For the record, my group and I used to correspond with FASA fairly frequently back on the 90s, and we were also one of the teams of playtesters for the Tukayyid module.

It's worth trying as long as you also include the penalties.
ghostrider
12/28/16 01:48 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So missing 4 shots from the front/back made the trade off of standing up about the same? Or 3 shots from the side?
This issue is especially skewered when the sides are being hit, since the arm (on the incoming fire side) is normally in between the torso and the shot coming in.

I would like to hear how this is true.
If you aren't using the ultra mechs, maybe just 3025 light mechs, falling down is no where near as likely as hitting an opponents arms. And normally when you did fall, you were not going to be getting back up as it normally meant leg damage. Even some of the larger ones taking 20 points, I don't see how missing so many shots was countered by it being a little harder to stand up.

Maybe we just had crappy dice rolls, or something else was up.
I guess it is assumed all damage starts at the ends of the arms where the hands should be and eats up armor up the arm. Not that it would be targeting the dead center of the largest portion of the mech.
What good is the dice roll if a hit isn't a hit?

Also, making a mech without arms should be heavily penalized for standing up. It should also suffer a bit when making piloting rolls as the arms can not be used to counter balance or even attempt to hold up the mech with any terrain.
I would guess slapping a legless mech on tank tracks would mean the mech could never suffer a fall. So does that mean they wouldn't have to bother with leg actuators and gain the extra spaces of the tank for equipment?
MJB
12/28/16 10:14 AM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Mech weight is not a factor in having to make a Piloting roll for having taken 20+ points of damage.

Armless mechs were heavily penalized by the rules.

Both of my groups (six in one, seven in the other, all experienced) tested the concept pretty extensively. In my opinion it was pretty balanced, as was amply evidenced by the fact that armless mechs weren't overly chosen.

I'm not aware of legless mechs, so I have no experience or opinion.

In any case, whatever suits your group and keeps the game enjoyable.
ghostrider
12/28/16 01:48 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I used the lighter mechs as an example, because they normally aren't falling due to 20 points of damage. Heavies and assaults are more likely to deal with that. As such, the 5 point medium laser is alot of damage to the 20-30 ton range. A single miss for them can make or break their surviving a combat. Unless the roll is for something like moving in rough, a fall is normally the end of the mech anyways.

I know it sounds picky, but when using the armless mechs, you did make sure firing arcs where restricted, and not had the torso weapons fire on the rear flanks like arm weapons can? It is something that tends to be forgotten when using regular mechs that have the arms removed and just torso weapons there.

It would be my opinion that an armless mech would never be chosen by anyone that has experience playing the game, except to avoid that damage that would be taken by the arms.
It sounds like an exploitable loop hole.

I would guess the next step in this would be making a turret for the armless mechs to allow weapons greater range firing arcs, while keeping the ability to avoid hits when the arm is the location. Similar to what the quads have now.
MJB
12/28/16 03:21 PM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We always played by the rules as written, so no, torso mounted weapons could not fire to the rear.

Some of the mechs were equipped with turrets if suggested by the mini (Hornet and Flea spring to mind).
MJB
12/28/16 03:23 PM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Oh, and the weight required for turrets in light mech was a definite negative factor.
Drasnighta
12/28/16 03:24 PM
173.183.129.245

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Torso mounted weapons could not inherently fire into the rear.

They had to be specifically *rear mounted* and designated on the design as such.
CEO Heretic BattleMechs.
ghostrider
12/28/16 08:54 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The turrets change alot of things. The armless mech could then fire into arcs that only a mech with arms could.
So this negates the issues of firing arcs, while giving them the advantage of being missed.

The statement for the torso mounted weapons was there to clarify the lack of arms on normally used mechs did not forget the firing arcs of the front torso mounts, which has happened in the past with a few modified units. Just like a few times a locked turret was forgotten and was used in a firing arc it could not longer work in. It happens on occasion.

I do understand not all the units used the turrets, so that isn't the only factor.
I still don't see why a mech with no arms should gain any sort of advantage over mechs with arms. It is by choice you have removed them, not something forced upon you.
Almost like making a mech with 10 mls, but only having the initial 10 single heat sinks, then complaining the mech runs hot.

But then I have been reminded physics and logic don't match the game mechanics.
MJB
12/29/16 12:28 PM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We played a LOT of BT, including more than a few 8-12 hour marathons. It was exceedingly rare that firing arcs were forgotten and not pointed out immediately by someone at the table.

Back to armless mechs, I was reminded yesterday that losing 24 slots was also a big penalty.


Edited by MJB (12/29/16 09:40 PM)
ghostrider
08/22/17 11:03 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Had a conversation come up about this, and it was asked...

Shouldn't the automiss be attached to mechs that have lost their limbs thru damage, such as the right torso being gone from a mech even the round prior to another volley hitting it. Since it is missing the torso and arm on that side, it would stand any shots hitting that location be an automatic miss.
Yes, the rules say to reroll. It sounds like you are giving away something for free at this point.
It sounds like a contradiction to the rules.
Missing something, and it never being there should be one an the same, or both should follow the same rule.
The archer is suggested to have the head in the crotch area, yet it is still rolled as a head shot. This should mean any head shots should automatically miss an archer, as it does not have a head.
Karagin
08/23/17 06:36 AM
72.176.187.91

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
All mechs have a head, and the idea that it is similar to our own in location only applies to those mechs with humanoid appearance. The Archer has one if you at the miniature and the artwork in the same relative area as we do so the hit would still apply. Check out the rules for torso mounted cockpits.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Wrangler
01/22/18 08:15 AM
50.199.229.75

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Be interesting to see how well if someone had Mech with both no arms and a Torso-Mounted Cockpit. It properly be not great design either. I kept thinking the O-Bakemono would be candidate have those attributes.
When it hits the fan, make sure your locked, loaded, and ready to go!
Pages: 1
Extra information
1 registered and 104 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 9774


Contact Admins Sarna.net