His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/08/09 11:11 AM
173.127.107.184
|
LGRs are great for fire support.
I got to admit that is you put two LGRs into a mech that your looking at a rifleman. I don't see the problem with that since the rifleman is a excellent fire support mech.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Venom
06/09/09 02:47 AM
207.191.200.101
|
I dunno about that. I seem to think that two ER PPCs would make a better choice for fire support.
Consider:
2 ER PPCS and the double heatsinks needed in additon to the "free" ones weigh 20 tons. Granted, you loose a couple of hexes in range but gain 4 damage.
2 LGRs no extra heatsinks and two tons of ammo for each weigh 28 tons. Now you also have the pesky problem of those darn things blowing up.
Better yet 2 LRM-20s with five tons of ammo a peice and CASE weighs in at 31 tons. Now, you loose a little more range but you get an average of 12 points of damage per turn and gain what every fire support 'mech wants:indirect fire. FWIW, 2 LRM-15s, 4 tons of ammo each, CASE and Artemis IV weighs in at 25 tons and will still do more damage on average than the LGR.
|
Cray
06/09/09 07:57 AM
147.160.136.10
|
The LGR is very much a niche weapon and it takes some effort to use correctly. I'd almost always take an ER PPC over an LGR. However, the LGR does have more favorable range breaks and it weighs about the same as 1 ER PPC on a vehicle. There's room for its use.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/09/09 11:22 AM
173.116.251.89
|
I agree about the two ERPPCs.
With the two ERPPCs you are looking at a lot of heat build up. A LRM system will only increase the heat problem where the LGR will not. Two ERPPC and two LGR you are looking at some serious fire support hurt.
My preference would be either the PPC or the ERLL. I am not a fan of the IS ERPPC unless its the only long range weapon the mech carries.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Prince_of_Darkness
06/09/09 10:29 PM
71.38.74.162
|
Quote:
The LGR is very much a niche weapon and it takes some effort to use correctly. I'd almost always take an ER PPC over an LGR. However, the LGR does have more favorable range breaks and it weighs about the same as 1 ER PPC on a vehicle. There's room for its use.
I really agree with Cray on this one; however, another advantage that the LGR has is that it earmarks a 'mech or vehicle carrying it as either a FWL or Word machine 
|
Tripod
06/10/09 12:18 AM
192.91.75.29
|
Some focus on the volitility of the LGR but...
What if a mech has taken 1 or 2 engine hits? Do you still want the ERPPCs?
TBA
|
Venom
06/10/09 02:25 AM
207.191.200.101
|
In the case of an IS XL engine, you have already had breaches on at least one torso location so you are in bad shape and will not likely survive the next round. Hail Mary Alpha Strike anyone?
In the case of a light engine you may have lost a torso. Reguardless of weapon load you are now in serious trouble as half your loadout is likely gone. Depending on circumstances, fighting withdrawl is the best of your options; the worst option being suicide charge.
In the case of a standard engine you have suffered a breach of your thickest armor(or extremly bad luck with a through armor critical). YOu can reasonably extrapolate that the remains of your 'mech are just that:remains. In this case, no matter what you have you are well and truely screwed.
Point is that by the time you take a couple of engine hits your 'mech has taken other damage that has likely rendered it all but useless as a combat machine no matter what the weapon load. Will there be cases where a LGR will be handy? Yes, but they are rare. In my experience the catastrophic destruction of a GR has lead to many woes.
|
Tripod
06/10/09 03:15 AM
192.91.75.30
|
With the premise of the design being fire support, continuing to support the frontal attack force might be better than a withdraw... A fire support mech in a perfect situation take little fire itself. Every weapon, and every design(within reason) has it's place...
TBA
|
KamikazeJohnson
06/10/09 08:43 PM
142.161.158.183
|
Not to mention that, on a 'Mech, GRs of any size pair up nicely with high-heat gear like ERPPCs or ERLLs
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Bob_Richter
06/12/09 02:04 AM
66.191.9.99
|
LGRs do a fair shot at taking over the old "stupid-range plinker" role from the AC/2. As you might expect, they have a much higher effect density (8 damage in 13 tons, vs 4 damage in 13 tons for the AC/2,) and some very nice brackets.
For general fire support, you still can't beat the LRM, and for direct-fire support the LGR has trouble competing with ER PPCs and Gauss Rifles over much of its range. Excellent brackets make it hard to outmaneuver, but even when it's in great position, its damage effect simply isn't all that great, considering what you've invested in it.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Bob_Richter
06/12/09 02:06 AM
66.191.9.99
|
Quote:
another advantage that the LGR has is that it earmarks a 'mech or vehicle carrying it as either a FWL or Word machine
You appear to have misspelled "disadvantage"
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|