Sarna News: BattleTechGear.com

Category talk:Sniper BattleMechs

Purpose of this category?[edit]

Question : What, exactly, is the purpose of this category? Is it just to mention mechs designed for long-range? If thats the case, it should include all the LRM boat types. I really don't understand it. ClanWolverine101

(Should have replied here from the start.) I guess that they meant mechs who are primarily build for using direct-fire long range weapons. On the other hand, you could argue, using real world snipers as example, that it isn't a sniper if it can't head-cap from long range. LRM boats doesn't count because they use missiles and can do indirect fire. --Neufeld 14:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Still - I question its use, here. Occasionally, in the TROs, we'll see something like a variant of the Wraith switched the LPL for a ER PPC, making it an effective "sniper mech". That I can buy. This? This seems rather arbitrary. ClanWolverine101
Since it was created in 2006 it may be the remenants of an early attempt to organize the BattleMechs by role, To me a sniper battlemech would specialist long range direct fire unit with a one shot kill capability. but with how common the gauss rifle has become I believe that this category is either redundant or needs to be further defined to stop it becoming a simply list of Mechs with Gauss Rifles --Dmon 16:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Dmon, I think your initial statement (about origin) may have hit it on the head. I created it, but have no knowledge of what was the basis for it. I'm more partial to other roles now, as defined in this essay, anyhow. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 17:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The "proper" categories from the rulebook[edit]

May I turn your attention to the CBT Introductory Rulebook pdf (found here under "Product: Classic BattleTech - Introductory Rulebook" as "Introductory Rulebook" download), page 51, where it says: "For the sake of discussion, we have divided the ’Mechs available in BattleTech into seven broad categories: scouts, strikers, skirmishers, brawlers, missile boats, snipers and juggernauts." I suppose this is the original inspiration for the otherwise arbitrary sorting of 'Mechs into these categories; the book also gives the "official" definitions of the respective categories and sorts the starter 'Mechs into them. I was somewhat surprised to find no reference to this paragraph from an official (and free) online publication here on BTW. Frabby 17:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Frabby - Is that link broken? ClanWolverine101
Apparently it is not possible to link to the pdf directly. I fixed the link above, plus directions to the correct file. Frabby 20:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Wow...good job, Frabby. All six examples of a sniper role are in this category, too. You know my mind better than my wife. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I've uploaded the PDF file, provided a link and a reference to it on the BattleMech Portal and will add a descriptive summary statement to each of the categories, with a link to the PDF shortly. Should help cut down on the speculation in the future. Good job, ClanWolverine101, for asking the question. Led to a site improvement. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - though I'm not sure I'm still comfortable with these categories. Look at how many variants we see of the older mechs. Look how many different functions they serve. Did we REALLY need a Griffin the specialized in close combat, for example? Probably not, but we have one, so putting the Griffin into whatever we decided short-range specialist mechs category seems unwise to me. Does that make sense?ClanWolverine101
I think BattleTechWiki talk:Project BattleMechs is a better place for that discussion. --Scaletail 02:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)