questions about lams

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
Akalabeth
05/04/16 06:48 PM
64.251.81.66

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Why is a LAM rotating in mid-air thought to be impossible?

We've done that with Jet Aircraft for years

https://youtu.be/gY423vqG9uU?t=15s

We can fly backwards as well:

https://youtu.be/bKQlxCbaRQ4?t=40s


Slowly in both cases yes. But 300 years of innovation will allow LAMs to do some crazier stuff no? ]


In the original rules, LAMs had to pay 2 MP to land and could face any direction.
Compare to this Battlemechs, which when jumping pay 0 MP to perform any facing changes.
ghostrider
05/05/16 01:00 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Relooking at the partial wing picture, if that is an accurate portrayal of it, I should think it should be center torso, or spread out over both sides. The lift in one section would or at least should unbalance the whole thing while flying.

And with the original issue, the person that did this should have been a lawyer, not a computer tech. He took alot of rpg's and distorted alot of the rules to allow him to do things few others would have bothered with.

I still like lams and the concept. Without that being allowed, they work. They are not dedicated mechs or fighters, and should not be thought as that.
ghostrider
05/18/16 03:35 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
another thought about launching lams.
Shouldn't they have to go so many spaces forward on launch before they can turn.
Not just pop up facing a different direction then they were when on the ground going into flight mode?
GiovanniBlasini
05/21/16 05:19 AM
75.80.182.44

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

another thought about launching lams.
Shouldn't they have to go so many spaces forward on launch before they can turn.
Not just pop up facing a different direction then they were when on the ground going into flight mode?



What makes you think they don't? And, no, I'm not referring to twenty-year old rules.
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
ghostrider
05/21/16 02:07 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
No references to it during the discussion. As logic only seems to come into the concepts when the developers want to keep something from happening, it stands to reason, they did not deal with this subject as well as they could have.

And with your response of what makes me think they didn't as opposed to putting up where that can be found tends to support this idea.

Now unless someone else is using your account, you have been very good about posting the rules or where they are at, GB.
No one else has posted about it either.
But it was a question of shouldn't they. Not 'oh my god. the such and such that did it missed this important concept' like it seems people are taking it as.
Akalabeth
05/21/16 07:02 PM
108.180.183.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

No references to it during the discussion. As logic only seems to come into the concepts when the developers want to keep something from happening, it stands to reason, they did not deal with this subject as well as they could have.



Giovanni stated quite clearly that they use turn modes which makes it dangerous to turn before moving X number of hexes. Turn modes are explained in Tactical Operations and referenced in the LAM rules in Interstellar Operations.

Quote:
GiovanniBlasini writes:

The only way an AirMech has to get behind someone is to fly there, spending 1 MP per facing change, and requiring turn mode rolls any time they fail to move the minimum number of hexes in a straight line before turning. LAMs do not use jumping movement in AirMech mode.

GiovanniBlasini
05/21/16 07:57 PM
172.58.17.165

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

Now unless someone else is using your account, you have been very good about posting the rules or where they are at, GB.



Nobody else is using my account. I just don't enjoy having to explain the same thing over and over, pointing out that someone is wrong, as they're looking at rules that were last published in 1994 (Tactical Handbook), rather than actual current rules, only to bonce again asked why things work in a way that they don't actually work, and expressly state doesn't work.

To reiterate again, in the hopes that maybe this will be the last time I have to:

AirMechs don't use jumping movement. LAMs have not used jumping movement in AirMech mode since 2010, when the LAM quick-start rules, which two posters on this board helped write, were published. They use modified WiGE movement.

WiGE movement doesn't permit what you're describing.

AirMechs, under current rules published in Interstellar Operations, are further restricted by being required to use turn modes, the optional rule for WiGE movement in Tactical Operations. Even if players agree that WiGEs don't need to use this rule, LAMs in AirMech mode are required to do so, further restricting their turning ability.
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
ghostrider
05/21/16 11:05 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Ok. So from this last statement. Gb is saying lams do not spin around in flight mode, without piloting rolls.

Why wasn't this said when it was suggested by another that lams could face any direction while landing.
It was stated that the lam could face any direction while landing, as they were run by jump jet rules, yet this was not stated at this time. Only when the launching of a lam was questioned.
Yet with the person suggesting the jump jet rule was to be used, it would be logical to believe the launching was handled the same way.


AirMechs don't use jumping movement. LAMs have not used jumping movement in AirMech mode since 2010, when the LAM quick-start rules, which two posters on this board helped write, were published. They use modified WiGE movement.

Why wasn't this stated in the beginning?
It seems you supported the person that was suggesting the ability to land facing any direction without stating this earlier on.
I did not see it posted in opposition to that statement, but in opposition to the other end of that logic.
GiovanniBlasini
05/22/16 01:34 AM
75.80.182.44

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Really? Really?

You know, it might actually help if you actually read what I wrote in the first place.

We're done here.
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
ghostrider
05/22/16 02:02 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Ok. I did misinterperate the seemed like statement
WiGE movement, with some modifications, seemed a perfect fit for AirMechs, and handily removed most of the worst complaints about AirMech movement under the old rules.
I did not realize it was made into the rule.

You know, it might actually help if you actually read what I wrote in the first place.
This statement works in the opposite direction as well.
Several statements referred to information put up by the very person asking for links when used to counter the same statements.
Stating information is in a book I had said several times previously I did not own, starts off with this very statement of reading what was written to be more then one sided.
And I do realize not everyone rereads what they posted previously to see where context might be gotten from.
So remember that as you post to other comments.

And I did not see where you corrected the other person stating a lam in flight mode can land facing any direction after you stated the seemed like statement.
CrayModerator
05/22/16 05:13 PM
72.189.109.30

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Looks like there are plenty of answers to LAM movement and performance here even if the answers from the LAMs' current writer aren't being read. So, thread is closed.
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.
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
Extra information
1 registered and 72 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: 16620


Contact Admins Sarna.net