Cray
07/29/14 07:06 PM
67.8.171.23
|
Quote:
Karagin writes:
You misunderstood, I am saying the ability of having the two gives you more options then just having one type to pick from.
Having two types of ATM ammo - short range and long range - does give you two types of ammo options to choose from.
However, you're not getting more battlefield options since long and short ranged ammo are doing the same thing: directly damaging armor. You could get the same damage profile from one type of LRM ammo.
A useful battlefield option would be to switch from "normal blowing **** up ammo" to "mine field ammo" or "smoke ammo." Then you're getting truly different effects from your available options.
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.
|
GiovanniBlasini
07/29/14 09:40 PM
75.85.176.204
|
Quote:
Karagin writes:
Maximum Tech and there is nothing I can find in the current core rule books saying it's no longer valid.
If it's not there, it means it's no longer a valid construction option.
Member of the Pundit Caste
"Which side are we on? We're on the side of the demons, Chief. We're evil men in the gardens of paradise, sent by the forces of death to spread devastation and destruction wherever we go. I'm surprised you didn't know that." -- Col. Saul Tigh, BSG2003
|
Karagin
07/29/14 09:59 PM
70.118.139.48
|
It is part of the experimental rules and thus while not for tournament, really who even plays in a tournament anyways, and unless Randal or TPTB have stated it's not there, then it is still legal to use. And please read again what I wrote, I said there is nothing noted in the Core books saying you can't use it, so where does it say it is no longer allowed? Again if Retry is going to use Mega Mek for his designs then it should cover the rules fully not half way.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
07/30/14 02:19 AM
24.30.141.170
|
The clans using only effective vehicles might be true with the newer story lines. The original vehicles they came out with had more flaws then the mechs did. Most vehicles were shunned since only a mechwarrior was a true warrior. All others were fodder.
Now the aero pilots have tried to say differently, but that debate still rages.
|
GiovanniBlasini
07/30/14 03:37 AM
75.85.176.204
|
Quote:
Karagin writes:
It is part of the experimental rules and thus while not for tournament, really who even plays in a tournament anyways, and unless Randal or TPTB have stated it's not there, then it is still legal to use. And please read again what I wrote, I said there is nothing noted in the Core books saying you can't use it, so where does it say it is no longer allowed? Again if Retry is going to use Mega Mek for his designs then it should cover the rules fully not half way.
Fractional Accounting is covered on pages 376-377 of Tactical Operations. Those rules supersede the version of the rules in Maximum Tech.
The opening paragraph of those rules also state:
Code:
These options can be used together or separately, offering a greater degree of variance in home-grown units, but reflect experimental-level unit design and are not generally compatible with tournament game play.
In other words, they're an optional rule. There's nothing requiring you to use fractional accounting. In fact, you generally won't see it used on published designs, and there's absolutely nothing requiring anyone to accept a design made with fractional accounting at their table. Hence why fractional accounting is considered an "advanced construction option", and is included in Tactical Operations, rather than be considered a "standard construction option", which would have put it in Tech Manual.
Why should Retry, or anyone else, be required to use an optional rule when posting a design to the board?
Member of the Pundit Caste
"Which side are we on? We're on the side of the demons, Chief. We're evil men in the gardens of paradise, sent by the forces of death to spread devastation and destruction wherever we go. I'm surprised you didn't know that." -- Col. Saul Tigh, BSG2003
|
Karagin
07/30/14 06:18 AM
70.118.139.48
|
The point is the use of FA is allowed, so telling me it's not was wrong, the use of FA allows the players more options and if Mega Mek is going to be billed by Retry as fully supporting the rules then ALL of the rules should be allowed by said program and followed, not what they pick and chose.
So I gave a take on the vehicle to show him that a Lg Pulse could be used and with doing so by using FA, you get the better weapon and a bit more armor on the vehicle over all, I never said it was the best of the best or his was wrong, I said it could be done and showed. He offered other ideas on things and given the nature of the game you will endless variants.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
07/30/14 12:03 PM
76.7.224.205
|
I don't want to use FA. I'm either going to design all FA or standard designs, and I already went with the standard route. Comparing between isn't fair because the rounding issues can benefit one or the other with the exact same tank design.
|
KamikazeJohnson
07/30/14 09:52 PM
24.114.24.193
|
Hmmm...maybe we need a new thread to discuss Fractional Accounting...
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
ghostrider
07/30/14 11:52 PM
24.30.141.170
|
I think we may have to kj.
I was hoping to avoid this line when I said enough on it.
I do believe karagin had an issue when someone else was using them fa to squeeze some extras into their units, so this is kinda of stupid.
I go by the original rules of using half ton units rounding up with a few exceptions, like the light mg. But that is covered.
This was about the ares tank, and got off track. I guess I will start the fa thread, since it is something I really don't like.
|
Karagin
07/31/14 02:40 PM
70.118.139.48
|
I have not had issues with FA, you can check the designs I post use it a lot.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|