LAMdriver
03/31/11 02:17 AM
64.147.209.78
|
After looking through alot of the newer designs of 'Mechs, Vehicles, and Aerofighters, I have come up with a list of weapons and equipment that, while they bring more depth and tactics to the game, just plain suck IMHO. They also slap this stuff on all the new versions of Mechs, Vehicles, and Aerofighters.
1. Snub-nosed PPC--A weapon that loses power as you move into different range brackets. Buy the time you get to long range you have lost over 2/3rd of your wepons power.
2. Heavy Gauss Rifle--Same as above.
3. Plasma Cannon--Lets fire burning chuncks of plastic at mechs and see what happens. Good vs vehicles, BA, and infantry, but that is it.
4. Heavy Laser family--A +1 to hit, higher crit space, and higher heat than the ER version. You also have to install a targeting computer to break even to hit something.
5. Chemical and Bombast Lasers--Lasers that have ammo....kinda self defeating.
6. Targeting computer-- I just hate these things. I don't understand why you would slap one in your Mech if your using a Pulse Laser, RAC, or a weapon that is not functional with it. IF you are a sniper 'Mech, then I understand and it makes sense, but otherwise WTF?
7. C3 and C3i--A little ECM and your screwed.
8. MASC-- Like the idea, but the risks outwieghts the gains.
9. VS pulse lasers--too much of a headache to keep up with for what they do.
This is the ones that I don't like. Now that being said there are some newer weapons out there that I love. For example, the HPPC, LPPC, RAC's, Angel ECM, HAG's, Narc and iNarc, Stealth Armor, and others are just some of the newer tech out there that makes sense to me.
Anyone else got weapons and equipment they dislike or hate outright?
" The object of war is not to die for your country. It's to make some other bastard die for his!"--Patton
""War is Hell. Combat is a motherfucker."---General Tommy Franks
Edited by LAMdriver (03/31/11 02:18 AM)
|
Cray
03/31/11 08:42 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
1. Snub-nosed PPC--A weapon that loses power as you move into different range brackets. Buy the time you get to long range you have lost over 2/3rd of your wepons power.
OTOH, the SN-PPC has a short range of 9. Who cares about the rest of the range when you have a range modifier of 0 for 9 hexes? 
Quote:
2. Heavy Gauss Rifle--Same as above.
I admit I never liked this one and was ranting about it on rec.games.mecha as soon as I picked up FM:Lyran Alliance at...was it DragonCon 2000? The Improved HGR is better.
Quote:
3. Plasma Cannon--Lets fire burning chuncks of plastic at mechs and see what happens. Good vs vehicles, BA, and infantry, but that is it.
I assume your description of "flaming chunks of plastic" is tongue-in-cheek. 
The plasma cannon is a poor Clan copy of the Inner Sphere's plasma rifle, but that's what you get when you rush things into service.
Quote:
4. Heavy Laser family--A +1 to hit, higher crit space, and higher heat than the ER version. You also have to install a targeting computer to break even to hit something.
Agreed. Most people get wow'd by the raw damage and don't look at the high target numbers resulting from the low range. Clan pulse lasers beat out Clan ER and Heavy lasers for damage-per-ton thanks to their -2 bonus.
Quote:
5. Chemical and Bombast Lasers--Lasers that have ammo....kinda self defeating.
1) Bombast lasers do not have ammo.
2) I don't see lasers with ammo as "self defeating." After all, lots of weapons have ammo. The point of weapons is to do damage, not be electrically powered. And the concept is a Clan resurrection of the first combat-effective lasers.
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/index.html
3) The one weak advantage of chemical lasers is that they're treated as ballistic weapons for heat purposes on vehicles.
Other than that, chemical lasers were MEANT to stink. They're an obsolete technology that no amount of Clan wondertech could improve to match other Clan weaponry. If you want a powerful laser, use a fusion-powered laser, not something burning toxic chemicals in a transparent rocket nozzle. The Clans have a whole scientist caste, but it's a caste that hasn't done any serious military research since the mid-2800s and their first generation of new products are prone to being poorly thought-out. See: heavy lasers and ATMs.
Quote:
6. Targeting computer-- I just hate these things. I don't understand why you would slap one in your Mech if your using a Pulse Laser, RAC, or a weapon that is not functional with it. IF you are a sniper 'Mech, then I understand and it makes sense, but otherwise WTF?
1) Pulse lasers and RACs work with target computers (see pg143 TW). They get the -1 bonus but not the other features, like making aimed shots.
2) I generally don't bother with TCs, but there's more to targeting computers than sniping. The 2d6 probability curve has sharp changes with even a -1 bonus. For example, you're 3 times as likely to succeed on a target number of 11 as a 12, and twice as likely to succeed on a 10 as an 11. Even at lower target numbers where the difference is less dramatic, you're 28.5% more likely to succeed with a TN of 7 than a TN of 8. Higher rates of hitting translate directly into higher damage: for the same gun, hitting 28.5% more often means 28.5% more damage. This, of course, has to be traded against the weight penalty of the TC.
3) For the weapons that do benefit from all features of TCs, a good gunner can consistently plant his shots in a single location. A Clan warrior who gets into short or medium range with a TC and ER lasers - or a salvaged SN-PPC - can be murderous.
Quote:
7. C3 and C3i--A little ECM and your screwed.
So carry some ECM of your own and jam their ECM. There are rules for ECCM in BT.
Quote:
8. MASC-- Like the idea, but the risks outwieghts the gains.
Agreed.
Quote:
9. VS pulse lasers--too much of a headache to keep up with for what they do.
That's fair. I like the variable bonus - it's not harder for me to track than different ammo types for an LRM.
You asked what I dislike: ATMs. They're oversold as being flexible. A weapon is not flexible when it needs 3 types of ammo to accomplish what older weapons (like Clan LRMs) accomplish with 1. ATMs lack indirect fire and can't use LRM-type utility ammo (no mines, no smoke, no flares, no incindiary, etc.) ATMs are an overbilled kludge.
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.
Edited by Cray (03/31/11 08:44 AM)
|
KitK
03/31/11 04:15 PM
128.233.4.192
|
Quote:
You asked what I dislike: ATMs. They're oversold as being flexible. A weapon is not flexible when it needs 3 types of ammo to accomplish what older weapons (like Clan LRMs) accomplish with 1.
Yeah, I always thougth having to carry 3 tons of ammo to cover every situation was a pretty heavy string to attach. One could carry just one ton of ammo appropriate to the mission (a true omni-mech weapon), but then you'ld not have the one you wanted when plan A flew the coop.
I just ran some of my own numbers on an ATM3 and a Clan LRM5 to see what I thought of this. I used gunnery of 4 (I know the Clan standard is 3).
Setting aside weight differences, critical space requirements, and ammo needs to look at just long-term damage production, it looks to me that:
...LRM ammo (Reg. & A4FCS) out guns ATM ER ammo
...LRM ammo (Reg. & A4FCS) out guns ATM regular ammo
...LRM A4FCS out guns ATM HE ammo
...LRM regular ammo barely out guns ATM HE ammo
Results range: 4.9 Standard Deviation: 1.8
ATM combined ammo, using only the type that gives the lowest to-hit modifier, crushes LRM A4FCS ammo by 2.6 standard deviations. How? It makes up ground and surpasses LRMs by using its advantages (6 extra hexes of range {22-27} and 6 hexes of enhanced damage per missile { HE @ 1-3; Regular @ 4, 5, 10}). Having HE ATM ammo’s enhanced damage, instead of ER damage with to-hit penalties, is the big equalizer.
Sooooo:
...ER ATM’s range advantage is negligible due to high to-hit numbers and low damage yield. It is also hurt by its minimum range.
...Standard ATMs are hurt by a shorter maximum range, subsequent range bracket adjustments, and their minimum range. Even improved damage yield is not enough help, leaving standard ATMs well below average and the worst performer of the lot.
...HE ATM’s enhanced damage and lack of minimum ranges permit it to pull nearly even with regular LRMs in spite of their lack of range.
...Combined, ATM ammo types have the potential to seriously out gun LRMs over time and with extensive use. However, the very narrow niche (best to-hit number) of use for regular and HE ATMs may be difficult to attain in short term use and in brief firefights. Pilots will have to gamble higher to-hit numbers on standard and HE ATMs to supplement ER ATMs low damage yield in hopes of beating the odds and breaking even with, or surpassing, enemy LRM fire.
KK's 2cents
|
LAMdriver
04/01/11 01:51 AM
68.118.31.98
|
Thanks Cray for your points. The comments that you provided were informative, and have changed my mind on some of this weapons and equipment. But still have thoughts on the stuff I listed.
1. Snub-nose PPC--I will admit the 9 hex short range is sweet. OK I like this one now...LOL.
2. Yes the improved Heavy Gauss rifles are awesome, but crit and massive heavy. Then again it is about damage and these gun pack a wallop.
3. Plasma Cannons still suck.
4. Heavy Laser family-- I am glad that we agree on this one.
5. Sorry about the Bombast Laser. I was mistaken.
6. Targeting computers-- Nice to know they stack with the pulse lasers and can be used with the RAC's. But you lose half of the TC's purpose with these weapons. I still don't like these, but nice to know on the info.
7. C3 and C3i --Glad to know that info, but they still seems to be a liabilty. I personally don't use them, and I try to exchange them out if my Mech's if they come with them for something else.
8. MASC-- 'nuff said.
9. VS pulse lasers-- To each their own.
Your ATM agruement was most eye opening. The 3 tonnes of ammo to make a ATM flexable is NOT flexable, and seems almost wasteful.
KitK...your statisical analyist was very good. But I zoned out while reading it...just like I did in that statisics class in college...that I repeated twice before passing. LOL!!
" The object of war is not to die for your country. It's to make some other bastard die for his!"--Patton
""War is Hell. Combat is a motherfucker."---General Tommy Franks
Edited by LAMdriver (04/01/11 01:52 AM)
|
Cray
04/01/11 09:12 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Your ATM agruement was most eye opening. The 3 tonnes of ammo to make a ATM flexable is NOT flexable, and seems almost wasteful.
And, yet, the most common response is, "...nuh-uh, it's flexible!"
Quote:
2. Yes the improved Heavy Gauss rifles are awesome, but crit and massive heavy. Then again it is about damage and these gun pack a wallop.
I got one onto the Orion in XTRO:Marik but, yes, it was just too big.
Quote:
7. C3 and C3i --Glad to know that info, but they still seems to be a liabilty. I personally don't use them, and I try to exchange them out if my Mech's if they come with them for something else.
I can't see the liability in C3i. A C3i is a lightweight, 2.5-ton item. With it, you can see up to 5 friendly 'Mechs gain a -4 to-hit bonus as their long range penalties evaporate and they're effectively at short range with the Bad Guys. -4 to hit is better than anything other bonus in the game: better than pulse lasers and TC, better than semi-guided missiles or precision AC ammunition, better than any to-hit bonus.
Further, the jamming radius of ECM suites is shorter than the short range of long-ranged weapons. A C3i unit spotting for a group of C3i-equipped fire support units can stay outside of jamming range and still call in LRMs, Gauss Rifles, ER large lasers and ER PPCs, Heavy PPCs, etc. as if they're at short range. That's just game beating stuff.
And if ECM jams it for a turn or two, oh well. It's only a 2.5-ton penalty on the 'Mechs. It's not like I'm carrying a 6-ton targeting computer that only offers a -1 to-hit bonus. C3 Masters get to be a burden, but C3i is awesome.
Far from being a liability, I'd call it "serious cheese." I don't use C3 often just because it's so over the top.
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.
|
KitK
04/01/11 06:04 PM
128.233.4.233
|
Quote:
But I zoned out while reading it...just like I did in that statisics class in college
Sorry about that. I understand all too well.
Back to the main question.
I always hated that SRM2 (and AC 2 for that matter) didn't come in 0.5 tons like MG ammo.
I suppose the AP gauss rifle is a good weapon...I don't believe they got a GR to weight a half ton. Clan Small pulse lasers already out range MG and rifle infantry with a -2 bounus. Guess the plasma cannon wasn't good enough.
Surely there must have been some weight efficency in MG arrays, rather than geting heavier? Balance I suppose, but it seems odd.
NARC launcher/ammo. maybe in a campaign. Try this one over an open comm frequency - "Listen up now! You let me waltz my Orion ON1-M in close enough to NARC you, then let me back up so I can put it to good use with my LRMs!" Flagrant stupidity.
|
Cray
04/02/11 12:27 AM
97.100.133.59
|
Quote:
NARC launcher/ammo. maybe in a campaign. Try this one over an open comm frequency - "Listen up now! You let me waltz my Orion ON1-M in close enough to NARC you, then let me back up so I can put it to good use with my LRMs!" Flagrant stupidity.
NARCs are awesome in a campaign because they let you turn olde skool missile boats into L2 missile boats with an ammo swap. No need for Artemis, C3, or anything else - just add one or two NARC-equipped scouts to the missile boats and you're golden.
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.
|
KitK
04/05/11 01:08 AM
71.17.192.22
|
Quote:
NARCs are awesome in a campaign
Yeah, I was sure I had read somthing like that in the forums once before, and I don't disagree. The scouts are definately prerequisite - the Orion ON1-M is NOT a scout! Maybe my problem is more with that Orion than the NARC... 
|
LAMdriver
04/07/11 10:29 AM
96.37.25.90
|
NARCs are very cool in a campaign. I like the iNARC too...less ammo but more diversified payloads to deliver.
KitK, I too have a problem with the Orion ON1-M. Just don't like it. I have a bigger problem with the Archers that have the NARC on them. "Hey let me get close enough to use this weapon then get my butt kicked while trying to get back to a safe range to use my LRMs!!!" Seems kinda silly.
NARC on a scout or medium mech would be effective, but placeing one on an Assualt Mech with heavy armor would be effective too. For example, replaceing the LRM20 on an Atlas AS7-D with it. That way you peg another assualt mech, let your support units wear them down, and pound it down with your AC-20, SRM6, and medium Lasers.....hmmmmm. Or peg another mech and let your support work on him while you attack another unit.
Going to have to run some simulations with these two in mind.
" The object of war is not to die for your country. It's to make some other bastard die for his!"--Patton
""War is Hell. Combat is a motherfucker."---General Tommy Franks
|
Rotwang
04/23/11 03:51 PM
94.226.191.131
|
In the original Battledroids/BT rules designers came up with heat rules to add a little spice to what would otherwise be a fairly straightforward game.
Much of the tech was well-designed until the Clan invasion, after that some kind of disease took hold of engineers and they couldn't design something new without one massive drawback or flaw. Earlier weapons may have been heavy, short ranged or high heat, but they never were glaring as the drawbacks of the more recent designs.
If those rules had been in place before the original TRs 2750 and 3050, much of the new kit would be crippled by glaring flaws, weapons like the Gauss rifle would have at least five heat, shorter range, less ammo, less damage and blow up half the time, short out the battlemech etc ...
We'll probably never again get weapons as good as those seen in the earlier days of BT.
I think whoever came up with the OS launchers mistook a brain haemorrhage for a good idea.
Edited by Rotwang (04/23/11 03:53 PM)
|
Cray
04/24/11 01:17 AM
97.100.133.59
|
Quote:
Much of the tech was well-designed until the Clan invasion, after that some kind of disease took hold of engineers and they couldn't design something new without one massive drawback or flaw. Earlier weapons may have been heavy, short ranged or high heat, but they never were glaring as the drawbacks of the more recent designs.
The disease was called, "paying attention to irrate players."
Quote:
If those rules had been in place before the original TRs 2750 and 3050, much of the new kit would be crippled by glaring flaws, weapons like the Gauss rifle would have at least five heat, shorter range, less ammo, less damage and blow up half the time, short out the battlemech etc ...
There was a great deal of player irritation at some of the TR:2750 gear, like the Gauss Rifle, where the developer who signed off on it even allegedly blamed illness and mind-altering anti-histamines for letting such an unbalanced weapon through to print. If you phrase the search queries right, you can still find the old arguments from the 1990s on rec.games.mecha.
The same feedback happened with Clan technology, which wasn't well play-tested and even suffered from print errors that over-powered some items (e.g., the minimum range of Clan LRMs was lost when the stats were transcribed into the final document.)
The current developers paid attention to that feedback and all the griping about constant power escalation. Too many games suffered from that. So, new weapons were generally intended to be relatively balanced with respect to their predecessors.
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
04/24/11 01:48 AM
72.59.210.12
|
If I had a say in the design of the early game I would change all of the ACs the AC2 would have the range of 9 and the AC20 would have the range of 24. I would have also made the AC2 weigh only 2 tons.
But I was not and none of it is not.
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!!!
|
LAMdriver
04/24/11 02:00 AM
64.147.209.78
|
Rotwang, I would have to respectfully dispute your claims that the Gauss Rifle is over powered. I think that it is very well balanced. They are heavy, crit heavy, if mounted in the arms require the removal of the hands on a 'Mech, and when it is destoyed explodes for damage to the unit equipped to it. Also the Gauss rifle stays charged even if the reactor is shut down. All of these liabilies need to be offset, so you have the low heat, great range and damage.
The Clan weapons system arguement is pretty lame. While the Sucessor States were spiraling into a technological Dark Age, the Clans were just refining what was brought with them, the best the Star League had to offer. Makes since to me.
$0.02 D-Bill
" The object of war is not to die for your country. It's to make some other bastard die for his!"--Patton
""War is Hell. Combat is a motherfucker."---General Tommy Franks
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
04/24/11 08:22 AM
108.97.21.155
|
No, the Clans technology decline was a great deal faster than in the Enter Sphere. You cant just land on a new planet and start where you left off. There is a great deal if city enter structure that has to be laid down before you can do anything else and that could take years. And not long after they landed there was a civil war that would bring down there ability to survive at all let alone advance their technology. They where lucky that they survived with a level of technology to allow them even to be able to return to the Enter Sphere let alone to invade it. That the Enter Sphere was surprised that they survived at all let alone to return to invade the Enter Sphere is not all that surprising. The chances where stacked against them.
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!!!
|
Cray
04/24/11 11:20 AM
97.100.133.59
|
Quote:
Rotwang, I would have to respectfully dispute your claims that the Gauss Rifle is over powered.
I think that was me, not Rotwang. And I'm just repeating the rants from players in the early 1990s, not stating a personal opinion.
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.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
1 registered and 145 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: 10733
|
|
|
|
|
|
|