Karagin
01/21/03 04:31 PM
68.21.149.51
|
How many of you feel that the minimum on the IS LRMs is something that should have gone away or at the least been cut down to three hexes given all of the increase in weapons technology that has happen since 3050?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Nightward
01/21/03 06:14 PM
202.138.16.127
|
They're fine as is. LRMs are supposed to be for long-range fire. For everything else, we have MRMs and SRMs.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Cray
01/21/03 06:26 PM
65.32.253.120
|
Reduction in minimum range is overdue, more than a decade overdue. The Inner Sphere has been copying so many other Clan ideas that a reduced minimum LRM is only logical.
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.
|
NathanKell
01/21/03 11:15 PM
67.86.63.119
|
Along with the ER Medium and Small, the other LB-Xs, UACs, Streaks...you'd think minimum-less LRMs would be far higher on the priority list...
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson |
Vapor
01/22/03 03:18 AM
202.128.73.183
|
Since the minimum range for IS LRM's was hardware related, it never bothered me. The minimum range represents the distance the missiles have to travel after being launched before they can acquire a target lock.
Granted, with the amount of Clan tech that the IS has had available to study recently, they should have solved the problem by now. If I understand it correctly (I'm not saying I'm right), Clan LRM's are based on a bore-sight lock, whereas the IS LRM's use a missile-based lock. Basically that means that Clan LRM's are locked on target before they leave the launcher, while the IS LRM's don't acquire the target until after they leave the launcher. Yes, I agree that they should have reduced, or even eliminated, the minimum range for IS LRM's. However, I don't really believe it is necessary because of what Nightward mentioned. If I need a missile to use within the LRM's minimum range, I'll use SRM's or MRM's.
Therefore, as far as BT history goes, yes, the minimum range should have been reduced or eliminated by now. As far as practicality goes, it shouldn't be necessary.
"For those about to rock, we salute you." - AC DC
"The evil that can come, from the heart of a man, must be answered in kind 'till it disappears, and we're safe." - Kansas
|
Cray
01/22/03 06:59 AM
65.32.253.120
|
In reply to:
The minimum range represents the distance the missiles have to travel after being launched before they can acquire a target lock.
The "hot loading" option for LRMs in MaxTech or the Tactical Handbook (the ability to reduce LRM minimum at the expense of risking ammo explosions) suggest it's a matter of safety fusing more than target locks. The missile warheads simply haven't armed in their minimum range.
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.
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 09:51 AM
4.35.174.250
|
ERs Medium and Small were just a logical progression, like the all-size Ultras, LBs, and large Streak racks.
Not really a persuit of a Clan idea.
Long-range Pulse Lasers have yet to materialize outside of level 3. If fact, the only uniquely Clan idea that's really been copied was the Targeting Computer, and even that badly.
-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
01/22/03 09:53 AM
4.35.174.250
|
...were a typo on the original weapons table, unfortunately perpetuated even into this day. Clan LRMs should have a minimum range, even as IS ones do. The ONLY improvement Clan LRMs were supposed to have offered was reduced mass and crit space.
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/03 10:01 AM
68.21.149.243
|
Prove what you say...seeing how TPTB never changed it...so please prove it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
BA_Evans
01/22/03 10:27 AM
65.194.182.3
|
If the reason for the IS LRM's poor performance is an issue of safety locking, shouldn't the LRM's have reduced damage inside the minimum instead of reduced chances to hit?
The LRM's would still hit you, they just wouldn't explode.
|
Countergod
01/22/03 12:00 PM
160.39.139.144
|
I personally dont think that the ER lasers in Btech are very useful, I rarely use them, as it only give a +1 range to each range bracket. If I have a mech that already has enough heatsinks for it (like the 3 ML Fireball) I will use it because it is nice to have the extra range, but I dont use them too much.
As for the LRM's the Clans have had 300 years to improve thier LRM's, thought I think that they should still have a minimum range, just a shorter one. As for the IS LRM's I dont see why you need to remove them, as you have sooooo many weapons for short range, ie UAC-20, RAC-5, LB-20AC, the classic ML, MPL (esp with targeting computer). When I build or look at a FASA/WizKids Mech with LRM's, I go with how much damage vs heat you can do without LRM's then maxamize it, thus there is no reason to fire LRM's anyways 
***Chemistry is like art. One wrong move can really ruin your day!***
To: All other empire leaders
From: Maj. NevLord Madman (Mad Man's Marauders [STB] )
Subject: Hi Neveron
Date Sent: 7/12/3222 12:50:00 AM
May i just point out u all suck 
Maj. NevLord Madman |
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 12:30 PM
4.35.174.250
|
Very simple.
Got an original 3050 TRO?
Find anything OTHER than the table that says LRM minimum ranges have been removed. The entry on Clan LRMs and SRMs is actually the same one that details other standard weapon types. All it says is that they're half the mass in addition to taking one less critical.
-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
01/22/03 12:33 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>As for the LRM's the Clans have had 300 years to improve thier LRM's,<<<
And yet, aside of the mysteriously removed minimum range, they have not. Strange, eh?
Clan LRMs are the same size as their IS counterparts, even if the LAUNCHERS are half as heavy. Does putting these ubermissiles in my Archer remove its minimum range?
>>>
I personally dont think that the ER lasers in Btech are very useful,<<<
Play me MegaMek sometimes and I'll show you otherwise. 
Range is one of the most important weapon characteristics...
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/03 12:36 PM
68.21.149.202
|
WRONG, TR3050 copyright 1990 NON-REVISED addtion on page 226 it lists ALL of the Clan weapons and it states clearly that the LRMs DOES NOT have minimums.
So I am sorry Bob but you are 100% WRONG on this one.
Do have a nice day.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
01/22/03 12:37 PM
68.21.149.202
|
In reply to:
Bob wrote:
Clan LRMs are the same size as their IS counterparts, even if the LAUNCHERS are half as heavy. Does putting these ubermissiles in my Archer remove its minimum range?
Actually it does, seeing how from as far backs TR3050 NON-Revised the Clan LRMs NEVER had a minimum range.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 12:47 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>page 226 it lists ALL of the Clan weapons and it states clearly that the LRMs DOES NOT have minimums.<<<
I wouldn't know.
My TRO 3050 hasn't had a page 226 for about a decade.
Somebody check that for me?
>>>So I am sorry Bob but you are 100% WRONG on this one.<<<
I dunno. I think I'd rather wait for some confirmation.
Could somebody scan page 226 and send it to me? (I think that counts as Fair Use, especially given that I've owned the manual since 1991...)
-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
01/22/03 12:52 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>Actually it does, seeing how from as far backs TR3050 NON-Revised the Clan LRMs NEVER had a minimum range. <<<
Okay, Karagin...
First, that wasn't even what we were talking about.
Second, stop repeating yourself, it's extremely annoying.
Third, yes, I know it's in the damned unrevised first printing. My contention was that it was an error THERE, one nobody ever bothered to correct. Just like they "lost" the Standard ACs and Lasers because they weren't on the Sacred Table.
Fourth, actually, the answer to my question is "no." Clan LRMs can't be fired from Inner Sphere launchers (which is silly) and even if they could, LRMs don't have variable stats based on ammunition (which is silly.) Inner Sphere LRM *LAUNCHERS* have a minimum range.
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/03 12:55 PM
68.21.149.202
|
Seeing how you can slap on Clan systems to IS mechs...plenty of those kinds of refits in the Twycross scenario pack...the point still stands.
And there was NO error since NONE of the erratas for TR3050 EVER listed the Clan LRMs has having any kind of minimum range.
So the point is vaild and on what you are talking about.
Have a nice day.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cadet
01/22/03 01:07 PM
206.102.34.143
|
If the TRO:3050 was a typo, why wasn't it every corrected in subsequent printings, or in any of the rulebooks that have been printed since then? Just because the fluff doesn't mention Clan LRMs losing the minimums doesn't mean it wasn't intentional on the part of the designers.
Do I think the minimums should be lowered. Absolutely. I don't buy the "It would unbalance the game" or the "Bills won't do it because the arms race is over" arguments either. It wouldn't be the first time a rule has been revised or a weapon stat changed. Remember TRO:2750? Gauss Rifles used to have ten shots per ton of ammo.
They could change it right now.
Does not play well with others.
|
Cadet
01/22/03 01:26 PM
206.102.34.143
|
I'm not following your reasoning about why the Targeting Computer is a bad idea.
I think the only bad thing about the targeting computer is that it can be linked to pulse lasers. This isn't such a bad flaw for IS pulse lasers but are horribly unbalancing in favor of Clan units.
Does not play well with others.
|
Cadet
01/22/03 01:53 PM
206.102.34.143
|
I think part of the problem is that we're really talking about two different definitions of the Clans. We have the current definition all about honor bidding using better 'Mechs even in their second line units AND we have an undefined vague idea about the Clans from 1990.
That same TRO:3050 that says the Clans have lighter standard autocannons and lasers as well as improved LRM launchers also ignores Clan organization and honor rules. It mentions bidding but never explains how to do it. In time FASA began to define the Clans, and they evolved into the Clans we know today.
As far as certain weapons listed, I think it was just FASA realizing that having stardard weapons for the Clans was just pointless. Why have a standard AC when I can get an LB-X for the exact same weight and size? Why get a standard Large laser when I can get an ERML to do the same job and for lighter and less heat? I think they made the right decision to simply ignore those weapons when it came time to come up with a Master List for the BattleTech Compendium.
I think you can make the case for Clan launchers being better than their IS counterparts and that is why there is no minimum. I think you can make a case for Clan missiles being better than their IS counterparts and that is why there is no minimum. I think you can make a case for lawn gnomes using pixie dust and that is why there is no minimum. But I don't think we can really go off the fluff text from an ill-defined version of the Clans to support the version we have today, and that includes weapon states. Bottom line is Clan weapons are just that much better and it is because the game designers said so. I don't believe it was an accident or a typo.
Does not play well with others.
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 02:29 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>If the TRO:3050 was a typo, why wasn't it every corrected in subsequent printings, or in any of the rulebooks that have been printed since then? <<<
By then, it was so deeply entrenched...
...and IIRC (I probably don't,) the dev team that published TRO:3050 didn't make it to the second printing.
>>>Just because the fluff doesn't mention Clan LRMs losing the minimums doesn't mean it wasn't intentional on the part of the designers.<<<
Nope.
But I don't think it was, any more than was depriving the Clans of standard lasers, PPCs, or ACs.
Even if it was, it was still stupid.
>>>Do I think the minimums should be lowered. Absolutely. <<<
Why?
I think the min range for Clan LRMs should be RAISED to 6, to comply with the crude, unguided rockets they are identical to.
-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
01/22/03 02:30 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>I'm not following your reasoning about why the Targeting Computer is a bad idea. <<<
Didn't say it was.
>>> This isn't such a bad flaw for IS pulse lasers but are horribly unbalancing in favor of Clan units. <<<
The real flaw is the insane, disgusting ranges of Clan Pulse Lasers....
-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
01/22/03 02:31 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>plenty of those kinds of refits in the Twycross scenario pack...<<<
...ALL of which are now illegal...
>>>And there was NO error since NONE of the erratas for TR3050 EVER listed the Clan LRMs has having any kind of minimum range.<<<
Nor did any of them mention the removal of the Clans' standard energy weapons and ACs...
-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.
:)
|
Cadet
01/22/03 02:34 PM
206.102.34.143
|
Well you did say it was a bad idea:
"If fact, the only uniquely Clan idea that's really been copied was the Targeting Computer, and even that badly. "
Does not play well with others.
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 02:37 PM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>I think part of the problem is that we're really talking about two different definitions of the Clans.<<<
Not really.
I'm aware of all the definitions you are...
>>>That same TRO:3050 that says the Clans have lighter standard autocannons and lasers as well as improved LRM launchers<<<
Actually, they were only smaller, IIRC, -1 crit, no change in tonnage. Made them odd.
>>>As far as certain weapons listed, I think it was just FASA realizing that having stardard weapons for the Clans was just pointless.<<<
The same consideration never stopped them from continuing to list the pointless old standard AC/10 on the Inner Sphere charts...
>>>I think they made the right decision to simply ignore those weapons when it came time to come up with a Master List for the BattleTech Compendium.<<<
I disagree. That decision made a number of Canon Battlemech designs illegal and deprived us forever of the concept of what a Clan Second-Line Battlemech should look like.
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/03 02:37 PM
68.21.150.199
|
Wrong again bucko...Randal said they were illegal for Tournement play BUT they are legal mechs as far as the storyline goes. Nice try and you can ask him if you don't believe me.
See if they are illegal as you claim, which is wrong, then groups like the Hounds and Dragoons are illegal if their use of retro-fitted machines and given how that is not the case, it is YOU who are again wrong on this.
As for the standard weapons, I agree with Cadet's nicely written reply to you. Why use them when there are better things to chose from? And by that as Cadet said why would the Clans use a medium laser when their ER medium does the same thing for better damage and range for the same amount of weigth.
So to sum up, the LRMs have NEVER had minimums because they are made better, and there was NEVER a typo or mistake on this.
Have a nice day and do check with Randal on refitted IS mechs for the Clans, illegal for tournments but NOT illegal for standard game play, I am sure he will give you the straight answer on this...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/03 02:38 PM
4.35.174.250
|
Someone needs to take a class in sentence-structure analysis.
I said that the Targeting Computer was an uniquely Clan idea,
that it was the only such idea copied by the Inner Sphere,
and that it had been copied badly.
I never said it was a bad idea, you just misread my sentence.
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/03 02:40 PM
68.21.150.199
|
In reply to:
Bob said:The same consideration never stopped them from continuing to list the pointless old standard AC/10 on the Inner Sphere charts...
Did you miss the idea that the IS is playing catch up and that while Group A has the cool new toys in the IS, Group D may not? Thus the standard weapons will always be around since they are cheap and give small groups like merc supply of weapons that they can afford as well as their use would be wide spread in places like the Periphery and other low tech areas...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cadet
01/22/03 02:43 PM
206.102.34.143
|
I don't think they were that deeply entrenched though. The BattleTech Compendium came out only a few months later and it could have been changed then if it was a typo. It was no different than the Gauss Rifle change between TRO:2750 and 3050. A year apart, but the change was needed and that was that.
I don't think it was stupid to deprive the Clans of standard AC/lasers/PPCs. What was the point of them? They would have been lighter than the IC weapons, but no different in wieght than the Clan weapons. Why would I put a 6 ton PPC on my mech, when I could put a 6 ton ERPPC?
I'd be Ok with giving Clan LRMs a minimum the same as IS LRMs, but if that isn't going to happen, then the IS minimums should be dropped to 3.
Does not play well with others.
|