Just thinking of a possible house rule

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
09/15/14 03:59 PM
208.54.40.243

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Missiles do not use modified to hit numbers for range but instead you modify the roll on the number of missile hit chart.

Short range +2
Medium range no mod
Long range -2
Extreme range -6

This is like a shot gun that its not hard to hit at long range but good luck doing any real damage.
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!!!
ghostrider
09/15/14 05:04 PM
67.49.101.109

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Interesting take on it.
I always hated the crap of the missiles that hit tables. The scatter is too much at times.
I do like the idea more should hit when they are closer, since they should not be so spread out when first launched.

The large drop off after it leaves long range is very appropriate, though people will say its bad enough to hit, why hurt the successful shots.
I would say because the missiles should be out of fuel at that point. Or something like it.

Would you extend this table into the cluster rounds on the lbx cannons?
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
09/15/14 06:58 PM
208.54.40.164

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Would you extend this table into the cluster rounds on the lbx cannons?



Yes. Anything that uses the missile table. But I am not sure if I would keep the -1 to hit VTOLs. I don't want the LBX to become to powerful against VTOLs.

The Thunderbolt would use the normal attack rules as would anything else that dose not use the missile hit table
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!!!
ghostrider
02/27/15 04:54 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
guess talking about some of the things in another thread would be better put here. I will start doing that if anyone responds to the post about vehicle movement hits in the lateral design thread.
ghostrider
02/27/15 05:08 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Guess I shouldn't be so lazy.

First idea was making it so cannons had enough ammo of one type per critical spot reserved to help with their limitations and put them back on par with energy weapons. Might need a few rules to avoid someone using things like ac 20's every round.

Someone suggested putting a limit on how often energy weapons could fire. It makes some sense since you hear of ppc loads in novels and as supply depot spoils, but nothing is said elsewhere.

A limit to fusion fuel for anything that uses that engine type. Maybe cause a possible power outage like a heat shutdown rolls after every 20 turns. Yes, games don't normally last that long, but it would force units to solve their conflicts sooner. Each 20 turns or so would increase the roll to avoid it just like the heat scale so eventually it would shut down.
This would also add to raid objectives, since it would become something both sides needs, and not all planets make it.

Hovercraft move damage. Every time the skirt takes a hit, the pilot must make a drive skill roll to avoid losing control of the hover craft. You could also have an uncontrolled turn changing the facing of the vehicle on a second failed roll.
Other ground units moving at flank speed could be forced to make a roll as well if they suffer a movement crit.
Possible effect could range from crew shaken, lose a turn, to normal damage including the vehicle ending up on their roofs.
This would make the drive skills worth a damn.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/27/15 10:41 PM
172.56.15.236

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Having energy weapons having to recharge for a turn after being fired would really bring them down from being the ultimate weapon in the game. Of course to get around that is to have far more energy weapons than you have heat sinks for and fire only half of the energy weapons each turn.
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!!!
ghostrider
02/27/15 11:09 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Where that is probably true, it would mean less weapons being fired at once, since they would need double the weight in energy weapons. That should limit the number of heatsinks and other items on a mech.
But I do like the idea. Granted, you could just over load with energy weapons knowing the next round you would be cooling further, since you couldn't fire anything.

I didn't think about this line of thinking when reposting the limit n energy weapons firing.
I was thinking more along the lines of so many shots like ammunition in cannons and such.

Another idea might be risking a weapons melt down as the heat of the mech rises. Saying things like connections and even power cables overheat and melt. Possible power core flaws show up, such as cracking the focusing lens as you run the cold coolant around it.

Suggestions would be interesting.
Retry
02/27/15 11:56 PM
76.7.225.145

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
What happens on a modified roll of less than 2 for these missiles?
ghostrider
02/28/15 01:57 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
This is an older thread that was revived for suggesting some more house rules, or at least see if they don't bite the big one.

But to venture a guess, but from what I can figure, you would use the 2 column. You have rolled to hit, this would just be to see how many hit. But donkey would have to answer this.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/28/15 07:10 AM
172.56.16.137

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Retry writes:

What happens on a modified roll of less than 2 for these missiles?



Good question

The 2 missile column anything that comes up as a negative number you missed even though you rolled a hit.
The 4, 5, and 6 missile column one missile hit.
The 10 column you would continue on the 2 column.
The 15 column you would continue on the 4 column.
The 20 column would continue on the 5 column.

Rules for Anti Missile System would be changed to follow the new rules except for missiles that rolled on the 5 column where all missiles where destroyed before hitting the target.

This applies for all standard LRM, SRM, and MRMs I don't know the rules for all of the newer missile systems of how they work on the missile chart.
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!!!
ghostrider
02/28/15 02:21 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
for streaks you need to see if they hit to begin with. If it doesn't lock, they don't fire. That would mean ams wouldn't function.
And I see why they are not subject to this concept. But that is specific rules.
ghostrider
03/04/15 05:06 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Maybe I'm thinking about autocannons the wrong way. Maybe increasing the damage or range on it might be the way to go.

It might be worth using an ac 5 if it did like 7 or 10 points of damage, or went out to lrm ranges. Just as an example.

Another idea might be to increase the force of them, such as causing a piloting roll or adding say +1 or +2 to one, when hit by any of them, since they would strike with kinetic force instead of just burning off armor. More concentrated then lrms.

The thought came up in the cannon thread, but this is more of a idea search then discussing the use of them over other weapons.
wolf_lord_30
03/04/15 05:19 PM
166.216.165.93

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Not a bad idea since the cannons weigh a bit and take up quite a few criticals. You would have to be careful though, our some people will quickly complain about them.
I like the idea of knocking down mechs easier.
Maybe all autocannons have a chance to knock down a mech, regardless of damage taken. If you take 20+ damage in addition to being hit with an autocannon, there is a +1 modifier. Very similar to what you said ghostrider.
I could see this s being a little too mean though. I happen to fall enough on 4s and 5s.
ghostrider
03/04/15 09:31 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If they complain about the cannons, then next time they should use them themselves.
But yeah, it would take some work to make it so they are back to being useful without being over powered.
Also, you wouldn't have to deal with the cannons as long as energy weapons so that kinda balances out.

And I share you luck with rolls at times. Need 5's to hit, and only hit one out of 6 shots..
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/05/15 01:54 AM
172.56.22.69

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would do a house rule that ACs automatically cause a piloting roll and the bigger the cannon the bigger the modifier. Each 5 points of damage after the first 5 points adds a +1 mod. One hit from a AC-2 has a -1 mod.

Missiles have to do 20+ points no modifiers added for higher damage.

Energy weapons cause no piloting roll, the amount of damage is irrelevant there is no chance of causing a mech to fall.
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!!!
wolf_lord_30
03/05/15 02:19 AM
166.137.244.52

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would think that much energy zapping the mech and blasting away armor would still cause a mech to topple over. Definitely not as much as ballistics though.
ghostrider
03/05/15 05:06 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
that is why the 20 point rule would be in effect, though I do wonder why they didn't go with 16 originally.
That would be a ton of armor being dropped.

Don't have anyone in the area I live in that plays, but if you do try this out, let us know the outcome.
I can understand energy weapons needing to focus on a specific point, so they have effective ranges. It may be short, but a simple bounce would avoid that focus.

I can also see where shells do not need to hit the same exact spot to do their damage. If you read the novels, they almost always say the shells walk across the mechs body part.
Justifying a little extra range is easy when you look at it that way.
As someone said. All misses shots magically disappear at the end of their range.
With the speed of the shells, there effective range doesn't match properly.

It is my understanding the explosives on the shells does the damage, not the kinetic force like a gauss rifle.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/05/15 08:03 AM
172.56.21.208

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
wolf_lord_30 writes:

I would think that much energy zapping the mech and blasting away armor would still cause a mech to topple over. Definitely not as much as ballistics though.



How so? What would happen that would cause a mech to lose its balance by being hit by basically light? All that is happening is the armor is melting off the mech. Its not being hit with any kinetic energy that would cause it to all of a suddenly to lose its balance.
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!!!
wolf_lord_30
03/05/15 08:37 AM
166.137.244.52

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I'm not sure. My science fiction physics is a bit rusty. But you are being hit and losing armor, maybe that would help cause it. Aren't ppcs like lightning? And lightning still hits with force. If it's not like lightning, I wonder what game I'm thinking of. Maybe 40k. Anyways, I would think that being as big and concentrated as the lasers are, they would still hit with some sort of force. Plus when you see the artwork, lasers still cause explosions, because it's no fun to draw armor melting off. We all want to see massive damage. Damage and explosions cause falling. At least for simplicity's sake.
ghostrider
03/05/15 11:50 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You would have a shift of weight depending on how much armor was being lost.
And if you ever seen the original battle star galactica when they used laser cannons, the shots actually exploded when they reached a certain point. Not realistic, but good special effects.

I would think ppcs send out what looks to be lightning, but is actually more of a beam. Otherwise, it would be affected by things like weather. Granted, I am not sure about things like x-rays or microwaves if they push with any real force, but that is the type of energy output of the ppcs. Now this is a guess on my part, so feel free to show me I'm wrong.
Now a plasma rifle would be a different story. But most plasma explanations say it sends out a jet of ionized gas. So that is what I am basing that off of.
ghostrider
03/05/15 08:27 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Just a couple random question popped into my head.
Why does the cannons heat up so quickly with the larger cannons?
I understand the larger ones creating a little more heat then the smaller ones, but why would it jump from 3 heat for the 10, to 7 heat for the 20?
And with the design of the cannon, wouldn't it kick most of the heat out of the barrel with the projectile?
Hell, the fluff on the original demolisher stated just that. It was designed to force the left over gas out of the barrel when fired.
The machine gun would heat up faster then a cannon, since they would be firing more shots faster.
Or did I miss something?
ghostrider
03/05/15 10:16 PM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
had a few more thoughts come up.
Why can't the clans have come up with a lighter cannon design like they did with missile launchers? Maybe use that as the next improvements.
Since the gauss rifle came out, it basically destroyed all other cannons. Might be heavy, but produces 1 heat for 15 points of damage at ranges further then almost everything else. Why bother with the ac 20 or even the 10, when you can fit a gauss? That goes for alot of other weapons as well. No spread like an lrm 20, plus possibly not hitting with half of them.

Another thought is the medium laser. The benefits definitely outweigh any side effects.
And with the er version, it has become too powerful for the weight and heat.
Maybe it should be bumped up to 5 or so heat with adding a ton extra. Half the weight of a large laser with the same heat to damage output for the standard 3025 model.
Increase the heat for the er to equalize it with the rest of the weapons.
I know this idea won't go over well.
Akalabeth
03/05/15 11:17 PM
64.251.81.66

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Double the damage. Double the heat.
wolf_lord_30
03/05/15 11:50 PM
166.137.244.52

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The funny thing about the medium laser is that it was stated in the books as being a workhorse of the inner sphere, but not good enough to be a main weapon. That is what their idea behind it was anyway. I don't know if it quite hit that role as they intended it to. It may have surpassed its fluff origins.
Retry
03/06/15 01:14 AM
76.7.225.145

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

You would have a shift of weight depending on how much armor was being lost.
And if you ever seen the original battle star galactica when they used laser cannons, the shots actually exploded when they reached a certain point. Not realistic, but good special effects.

I would think ppcs send out what looks to be lightning, but is actually more of a beam. Otherwise, it would be affected by things like weather. Granted, I am not sure about things like x-rays or microwaves if they push with any real force, but that is the type of energy output of the ppcs. Now this is a guess on my part, so feel free to show me I'm wrong.
Now a plasma rifle would be a different story. But most plasma explanations say it sends out a jet of ionized gas. So that is what I am basing that off of.



Yes, there would be some shift of CoG due to armor loss. There'd also be a theoretical shift in CoG while ammo gets consumed, though. Autocannons and Gauss Rifles also cause a CoG shift due to armor loss on impact, but they have an additional high kinetic-energy effect that lasers lack.

PPCs might do something similar, but I know nothing about the physics of a particle projection cannon.

BT plasma uses, IIRC, superheated plastic to inflict kinetic or heat damage, both in the case of the Rifle. There's probably a significant kinetic component considering the Rifle deals as much damage as an AC/10 at the same ranges with the same ammunition endurance, while having heat inflicting effects and being a BA and PBI murdering machine, AND a vee-wrecker, while being lighter and more compact than an AC/10. Only real disadvantage is it's higher heat, generating as much as a PPC, but you can plan a design for that.

One Medium Laser can't really be a primary weapon unless you're a Savannah Master or something to that effect. A battery of medium lasers sure can though. (Unless you're an assault mech that moves like 3/5, in which case you should probably have a PPC or something as well.)
ghostrider
03/06/15 03:04 AM
76.89.120.217

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Depending on the mech, the loss of a ton of armor is 5% of the mechs total weight. That would be significant, which makes me wonder if it might be an idea to penalize a lighter mech that loses a ton or more in one round.
Also the loss of that much weight would affect the pilot for a short period so the piloting roll is a good idea for the 20 plus damage in a round.

And strangely enough, that logic asks if mechs should not be forced to make a pilot roll when they get hit in the legs by a ballistic weapon, as the force would cause it to shift from the hit. I would say larger then an ac 2 single shot. This would be more pronounced during a run.

Yes. Speed of the game suffers with more little rules being put in, but having some logic makes it more realistic.

And a side note. There are several 3025 mechs that used a medium laser as their primary weapon. The stinger and locust come to mind. The wasp has the srm 2 as well.
Retry
03/06/15 05:02 AM
76.7.225.145

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There's an alternative rule that modifies a mech's PSR based on it's weight class.

I think it's +1/0/-1/-2 for light/medium/heavy/assault classes.

Stingers and Locusts fall under the "savannah master" category, where they don't actually have a payload for anything anywhere close to heavy.
wolf_lord_30
03/06/15 08:51 AM
166.137.244.52

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I personally didn't like the alternative rule. Some of these light mechs have so little armor, they don't need the extra disadvantage of falling over easier. It felt as if it gave an unfair advantage to the heavier, and more armored, mechs.
As for realism in the game, it is hard to add elements to a game and keep it playable, fun, and not bogged down with special rules. Battletech already plays at a slower pace than a lot of games, some people don't like that and won't play it because of how long it can take. Adding more special rules for the sake of realism will just end up taking longer and maybe push some other people away. I understand why you would want to in a sense, but to me,I like a game to still be a game.
Let me give an example.
I have played some flight simulator board games, Birds of Prey and Flight Leader. Birds of Prey was a true simulator: airspeed, throttle settings, drag,lift, finding angle to target, angle off nose, angle off canopy, visual sighting and radar settings. Not to mention the movement was in 3d on a 2d board, the pieces showed you relatively where you were,but your true position was on your plotting chart. And you could cause damage to your fighter if you performed maneuvers that exceeded your jets intended performance and cause your pilot to black out.
Flight Leader on the other hand just had a HUD record sheet, simplified rules for maneuvering and spotting enemy fighters. It still had altitude, but it was simplified, and it still accounted for drag, but it was done for you in a chart.
So birds of prey was an actual flight simulator on paper, whereas flight leader was the strategy and tactics of flight, not so much the realism. Still a good game, but it only took a few minutes to finish up a turn for a squadron. Birds of prey took around 20 to 30 minutes to finish one turn, and that was if you only had one fighter each.
This is kind of an extreme example of realism, but all I am trying to really say is while realism can be good, it will slow the game down a lot.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/06/15 11:30 AM
172.56.7.233

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That is why they are house rules. Your willing to give up speed of play for more realism but its not rules that are forced onto people
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!!!
wolf_lord_30
03/06/15 11:34 AM
166.137.244.52

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Very true
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)
Extra information
2 registered and 65 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: 31629


Contact Admins Sarna.net