Karagin
07/19/04 04:14 PM
195.238.38.203
|
Okay currently the folks I play BT with here, well some of them anyways, have been discussing the merits of taking the Gauss over the PPC family and vise versa...so what do you folks think?
Which is better and why?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Minnime
07/19/04 07:01 PM
80.130.31.13
|
None is better, at least not in general.
The thing are the 10 double Heatsinks you get for free in level 2, you can take 1 ER PPC on even medium mechs -> only 7 Tons.
The next PPC costs you 13 Tons (+5 Heatsinks).
However, the 3th PPC costs already +8 tons (15tons) but 3+24 Slots -> too much.
Proper setup is on an Assault Mech 2x ER PPC + 2x Gauss (less slots, pretty much same weight).
Another rather nice mix is 4x light Gauss + 1x ER PPC.
4 ER PPCs are possible, but vs 2x ER + 2x Gauss they suck.
8x PPC is possible as well, but it is nonsense of course, imho a loophole in the rules that allow unlimited heat on a mech without killing it (or the pilot).
The free 10 doube Heatsinks are like the 8 PPCs; a hole in the rules as well, at level 1 it was no problem to have 10 free heat, but in level 2 it is a problem, as you can mount a ER PPC on pretty much every mech, favoring the lighter mechs.
Gauss has 2 advantages: a) damage b) to-hit modifiers
PPC has 2 advantages: a) range b) unlimited ammo
Weight & Heat, see above.
greets
Minni
|
Cray
07/19/04 09:54 PM
68.200.111.156
|
You can make either work. My preference is for PPCs, though. For the following reasons:
*With DHS, 2 PPCs (or ER PPCs) can be fit into the tonnage of 1 GR, more or less.
*No explosions from PPCs.
*No ammo dependency from PPCs.
*If you're mounting more than one (ER) PPC, you've probably got the tonnage and heat sinks to handle a sweet medium laser battery for short range punishment.
*With a pair of PPCs, I have more chances to hit than the same tonnage of GRs.
*You can fit a PPC on almost any size mech. It takes some work to get a GR on a light mech. This lets me standardize a big gun across many chasses.
It's the ammo independence, hit opportunities, and potential for wide usage that sell the PPC to me.
But, like I said, the GR can be useful, too.
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.
|
Nightward
07/20/04 02:43 AM
211.26.66.163
|
Clan PPC vs Clan Gauss:
PPC is TEH WINNAR!!11
An extra hex of range and no minimum, as well as such light weight and few criticals. Hands-down one of the best weapons in the game.
IS PPC vs Gauss Rifle:
Depends. Heat is more of a factor here, but the PPC still has a slight edge because it's Energy.
As noted by Minime, the efficiency of each weapon is determined by what else you're packing. On a 'Mech that has a lot of other high-heat weapons, the Gauss has an advantage by running so cool. If you're good to go with heat, the PPC gains a clear advantage due to the weight and the fact that it's ammo independant.
But let's face it, the Gauss Cannon has more style than the PPC, and that's got to count for something 
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.
|
Lone_Wolf_Radick
07/20/04 12:54 PM
65.1.53.170
|
Agreed, the PPC and Especially it's ERPPC big brother are, at least IMHO, superior weapons due to their lack of a minimum range, the fact they don't explode when hit, and lack of dependency on large Iron Footballs (ammo). Don't get me wrong, I see the value and deployment avenues of the Gauss Rifles as well, but for extended engagements or battles where smaller chassis are employed, your big punch can more easily come from (and keep coming from) PPC's... Kudos to those who combine them for wicked effect, because 4 GR's or 5 ERPPC's is quite deadly, but rather specialized and can be countered. The combination of the two (on one Assault 2x2 or across your lance/Star) with other weapons as backup is a more realistic representation of warfare anyway.
War Never Determines who is right, only who is left.
"I find your lack of faith disturbing-Darth Vader"
|
Vicen_Korel
07/22/04 08:35 PM
66.38.6.161
|
In my opinion the Clan ER PPC better than the Gauss Rifle. equal damage the heat is easy to account for with the first one installed, the weight is much less, with ammo considerations less criticals are used. However I have occasionally ran a gauss instead of the PPC on large mechs. The ammo doesn't explode, so if you put it in the center torso, you can gain a 1 in 12 chance that the engine or gyro isn't hit from a lucky critical. The Inner sphere ER weapons however are just not worth the extra heat in my opinion. If using an inner sphere mech I prefer the original PPC if i'm using energy or, the gauss if I need the damage. Besides, have you seen what a gauss can do when you have a targetting computer and C3?
"Nothing sends your love like an ER PPC"
--Vicen Korel
|
Gnome76
07/22/04 11:27 PM
68.12.242.212
|
Play Level 1, that way there's no choice! PPC wins by default.
Serious personal opinion, I only use Gauss on vehicles, due to critical slots.
Edited by Gnome76 (07/22/04 11:31 PM)
|
Gangrene
07/23/04 12:50 AM
24.6.228.14
|
For IS tech, the gauss rifle is always superior to the ER PPC IMO. The standard PPC, however, is a good bargain for the tonnage, especially when using DHS. The PPC slightly edges out the gauss rifle in overall usefulness because it can be mounted on lighter mechs without having a such a great impact on the overall design.
This is a little OT, but to me the two weapons in tandem make a great combination. A gauss rifle for the really heavy hits and head capping, and the PPC for sustained firepower with a nice punch.
Gangrene
|
Gnome76
07/23/04 01:44 PM
68.12.242.212
|
And here's a nice off-the-wall (and slightly munchkin) thought: Gauss LB-X
|
Gangrene
07/23/04 09:27 PM
24.6.228.14
|
What's so munchy about that? It makes the gauss worse, IMO. The best thing about the gauss is the concentrated damage at long range.
BTW, its already been done. In the Unbound scenario pack there is a silver bullet gauss which behaves like LB-X shot.
Gangrene
|
Gnome76
07/26/04 06:18 PM
68.12.242.212
|
Well, if the changes are along the same lines as what were made from regular autocannon to their LB-X versions, here's what I came up with for the Inner Sphere version:
Code:
Heat Damage Minimum Short Medium Long Tons Critical Ammo
1 15 2 1-8 9-17 18-25 15 8 8
And with rolling on the 15 column for missile hits, and rolling a hit location for every point of damage, that's... umm.... *opens up calculator*.... 13-34% chance of a head hit, and 5.6-16% chance of a crit, and a -1 to-hit for using cluster rounds... and with a range identical to a Light Gauss Rifle, I'd choose this over an LB-X 20 any day.
|
Lone_Wolf_Radick
07/28/04 03:45 PM
65.1.42.9
|
A Gauss LBX would never work... The shot would Be torn from the casing by the magnets or magnetized so badly they would never spread right... An alternative would be using a ferrous case with non-magnetic shot inside, but then you risk the huge magnetic field required for firing a gauss round crushing the case shell... and what of the explosive inside? Magnetism, much like it's cousin electricity would probably set off the explosive before it even left the barrel, and if it didn't it would take so much low grade explosive it would screw up the ballistic travel capability of the round in flight. That's why Gauss slugs are non-explosive Solid Ferrous rounds, perfect for magnetic rail cannon. A nice idea, but more dangerous to the shooter than the target IMHO...
War Never Determines who is right, only who is left.
"I find your lack of faith disturbing-Darth Vader"
|
Sauragnmon
09/05/04 10:20 AM
66.185.84.197
|
Radick, I find one fault in your comment. The alternative way to deal with the physics of the railgun and still provide the shotgun effect, would be a timed release sabot covering a package of non-magnetic shots. Essentially the container is designed like a Discarding Sabot, only that it is designed to release either by proximity sensor or flight distance, at which point the normal cluster scatter occurs.
EDIT:
And for the record, I like the Gauss rifle on smaller mechs. It provides a low-heat sniper weapon. For the combined tonnage of a PPC with its heat sinks, I can slide plenty of gauss rifle ammo and the rifle itself into the mech.
Edited by Sauragnmon (09/05/04 10:35 AM)
|
Nightward
09/05/04 05:37 PM
203.214.144.56
|
ER PPC (IS) 7 tons. 6 if you're Clan. The 'Mech has 10 integral Heat Sinks. Assuming they're only singles and you have to add 7 to cover running and firing the cannon: 14 tons all up if you're Inner Sphere, or 13 if you're Clan.
Gauss Rifle with at least two tons of ammo: 17 if you're Inner Sphere, or 14 if you're Clan. The 10 integral Heat Sinks should take care of heat dissipation.
The top example where you're required to cover the Heat Sinks is at the very worst. A PPC will probably be a lighter 'Mech's main weapon, and most 'Mechs would have Double Heat Sinks.
Unless it's unfeasibly slow or has pathetic armour, nothing under about 75 tons can have more than one Gauss due to the weight. Plenty of things under that weight could have dual PPCs, though.
As we discussed earlier, it depends on how much free heat you can afford as to whether Gauss or PPC weapons are more effective.
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.
|
wildger
08/19/05 07:07 PM
139.48.112.106
|
Unless your pilot has good gunner skill, I would prefer not to have gauss due to the need for ammo.
|
Karagin
08/19/05 10:34 PM
63.157.59.230
|
Now that is an interesting line of thinking on this topic. First time I have heard someone point out that part of the equation.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Wraith
08/19/05 10:51 PM
24.255.140.173
|
I don't really even consider that a factor, my Gauss-toting mechs are reserved for veterans or higher, just for that fact... Actually, except for AC-plinking mechs, all my ammo-based mechs are pretty much for the vets. If I'm playing regular and green, I'd rather take some PPC and ML mechs. WHM-6D, mmmm
-Wraith
|
Karagin
08/19/05 11:06 PM
63.157.59.230
|
It seems some do consider it a factor.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Gnome76
08/22/05 02:18 AM
68.13.227.28
|
Particularly mercenary commanders... wasted shots are wasted money, and they couldn't really make the pilots cover the cost of the ammo that misses the enemy.
|
OgreMagi
04/01/06 12:42 PM
24.171.110.44
|
update on the rules
New heat level rules do not allow for the uber ppc heat loophole.
The rule was heat beyond 30 if you make the roll it simply gone after the last turn making a mech able to dissipate 20 or more heat without penalty. New heat rules allow for heat levels above 30 heat making it extreamly impossible a mech would survive.
|
Toontje
04/03/06 05:57 AM
131.155.85.169
|
Been a few years like this already..
Ammo costs are not excessive, few thousand cbills a shot, if it was either conserve a couple thousand in ammo or armour (by killing the oppponent faster) I know what I would prefer..
Also, the purchage costs for energy weaponry are higher IIRC, but don't have the bmr near right now. Still prefer standard ppc's over ER and gauss in most cases. Used a GR mech 2nd last time, some minor internal damage, then boom the rifle.. and XL went along with it.
Rather to blow up, then.
|
Dodger
04/23/06 10:30 PM
202.124.65.145
|
PPC's dude! I hate ammo in any form, cause you can run out, or it can explode. Got to love energy weapons!
Major Lawrence" Dodger" Protheroe
Commander 1st Recon Battalion
"The Wild Cards"
|
LordChaos
04/24/06 04:09 PM
66.188.199.196
|
Love the PPCs, old king of the battlefield (unless you're at range 2 facing an AC20...). but gotta give Gauss the respect a top contender deserves.
Real mechwariors pilot IS mechs.
|
JackGarrity
09/20/06 02:22 AM
71.207.230.120
|
Q: has anyone ever seen specs on a 'Light' PPC before? I read about it in one of the few Btech storybooks i have is one of the Coleman books. Main character guy called Micheal Searcy, gets a Pillager with dual light PPCS I think, but ive never been able to find specs on them anywhere.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Toontje
09/20/06 04:16 AM
84.24.178.225
|
Could be the brand, LordLight PPC's IIRC.. Now and ERLL, you can also see as a kind of ppc.. similar damage and range.
but there are new armaments out there now, could be a TW one.
Rather to blow up, then.
|
JackGarrity
09/21/06 01:40 AM
71.207.230.120
|
nope they were called light PPCS all over, then again it might have been created for story flock, they didnt have quite the range or the damage but were decent.. then again, i was fooling with the BAF program, it might have been a pair of battle armor class PPCs that were slapped on there. heh.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Greyslayer
09/21/06 02:17 AM
216.14.198.52
|
I remember infantry had 'light PPCs' though they were hardly worthy to mount on a mech. Good enough to fry the leg off an elemental though 
|
JackGarrity
09/21/06 06:52 AM
71.207.230.120
|
*nods* im thinking that is what it was, just story flock made them sound cooler.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Toontje
09/21/06 07:35 PM
84.24.178.225
|
man-pack ppc not mechworthy by long shot.. Even support PPC is better, tho you need 3-4 men to move and operate it. And better as in does 2 battlefield damage, 1/5th of std ppc.
could have been oldfashioned ppc's instead of the erll, and light, since not ERPPC..
Rather to blow up, then.
|
JackGarrity
09/22/06 01:15 AM
71.207.230.120
|
heh.. like PBC old fashioned? maybe. o.O well then tehre should be specs for a Light PPC thats a midrange between Manpack/support and the heat factory of the mech class. hm.. mite be something for me ta try yea.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Toontje
09/22/06 04:06 AM
84.24.178.225
|
The specs are there, it's called a LL... No need to make something very similar, only needlessly complicates things..
Rather to blow up, then.
|
JackGarrity
09/22/06 07:56 AM
71.207.230.120
|
but eets FUN yeah. heh. dunno just, pondering tech is all. protomechs have poential, and lighter mechs always can benifit from hardware.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Greyslayer
09/24/06 06:17 PM
216.14.198.52
|
Historically in one of the older books kicking about (Perhaps a old Snords book or something) I seem to remember a Star League PPC that did more damage as was perhaps slightly lighter than the stock standard PPC but was only in experimental levels of testing on mechs before the Star League collapsed. They may have referred to it at the Light PPC.
|
JackGarrity
09/25/06 02:15 AM
71.207.230.120
|
*nods* therein is the problem, a lot of the old books have one or two refs, or they change the information in small ways via new publications adn things get lostin the mix. its probably something that is best suited for protomechs anways; I like the PPC but the mass and heat, cause me to use it rarely, I use clan tech elements becuase they are better in conjunction with IS tech as a hybrid, i rarely use omnimechs of any sort, just wish some of the equipment was a bit more compact or at least not require so much HS.. then again, everyone would possibly be in a Awsome with 6 PPCs if that was the case.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
Dragonstar
10/01/06 01:06 AM
68.127.119.29
|
The light PPC is a Kurtian invention first debuted on (I think) their Panther light mech. I don't recall the book it is in, unfortunately. I'll have to dig through my books. It is a real weapon (or at least it was-it must have been dropped). It did less damage and had less range than a standard PPC but was lighter. Along the lines of the light Gauss. If I recall, it did 8 points of damage. I wasn't impressed. It was in one of the Kurita source books a few years ago, before FASA closed. I'll go through my books and let you know.
|
JackGarrity
10/01/06 01:19 AM
71.207.230.120
|
ooh.. thanks ^^ and if its kurtia then even better ;D long live the Combine, regardless of the Coordinator heh. yeah now, just need a way to insert data into the drawing board. heh.. and woot its Vash.
Greetings Mechwarrior.
|
strife
01/08/07 04:58 AM
216.40.89.182
|
Guass rifles do make more sense on vehicles, but, reguardless, a guass is for blowing of arms and legs and heads. The concentrated damage and long range make it better then a PPC. Although, PPCs are nice if you got dbl heat sinks, You can stick one on a fusion powered vehicle, but thats about it.
For an assault mech, I'd say the PPC takes a back seat to a guass rifle as a primary weapon.
Guasses cost less then a UAC/10 and the ammo is cheap too, (its just a metal football) About them exploding, well, put the ammo in a a CASE. Anyways, they're cool because a guass and annilate just about any light mech with one good shot to the CT. Light mechs deserve to be annilated.
"caliber fifty JUSTICE!"
|
Karagin
01/08/07 06:24 AM
70.123.166.36
|
Gauss Ammo doesn't explode, the gun does.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Fang
07/30/08 04:45 PM
151.193.203.12
|
Question. Guass ammo does not explode, true. Would placing case in the location the rifle is located actually divert any damage in the same way as ammo in the event of an explosion? Lets say, a mech has less than 15int in the right torso where the Guass is located. Would case actually divert damage from the exploding rifle away in the same way as a typical ammo blow out? or would that only work with exploding ammo?
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
|
Lafeel
07/30/08 05:19 PM
157.157.83.10
|
I think case works on exploding gauss rifles too, although I would have to check to be sure. *more than willing to do just that if asked*
|
Fang
07/31/08 01:05 AM
75.181.136.63
|
I'm askin'! I'm askin'!
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 01:12 AM
157.157.83.10
|
From: Total Warfare, Catalyst games edition (ie the latest version of the Battletech rules), page 133, direct quote
Quote:
If ammo (or any other explosive component such as a gauss rifle) in a CASE equipped location explodes, it damages the internal structure. Any excess damage simply dissipates
Not the entire entry for CASE, but it says it all, and in the first two sentences, no less.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 01:38 PM
70.0.47.68
|
So CASE explosions no longer destroys the rear armor?
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 01:45 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Quote:
So CASE explosions no longer destroys the rear armor?
Nope, apparently not, as there's nothing said about that happening.
edit: that is how vehicles went out their case explosions instead. Through the rear armor..And here's the real kicker: while for 'mechs only one slot cooks off, they all do on vehicles, so even if you survive thanks to case, you now have a serious headache (crew gets stunned) but also all of your ammo is gone.
Edited by Lafeel (07/31/08 01:53 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 03:31 PM
70.0.47.68
|
In my book everything in that location is destroyed except the engine, cockpit and front armor.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 05:40 PM
157.157.83.10
|
That makes no sense what so ever..
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 06:00 PM
70.0.22.79
|
In the third printing 1995 book of Battletech compendium
quote If ammo in a CASE-equipped location explodes it damages the weapons, internal structure, and equipment mounted in that location. Apply excess damage to the armor of the location (the rear armor, for torso locations) any remaining damage not absorbed by armor simply dissipates. end quote
Elsewhere it said vital components such as engine and cockpit will not take 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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 06:11 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Quote:
In the third printing 1995 book of Battletech compendium
quote If ammo in a CASE-equipped location explodes it damages the weapons, internal structure, and equipment mounted in that location. Apply excess damage to the armor of the location (the rear armor, for torso locations) any remaining damage not absorbed by armor simply dissipates. end quote
Elsewhere it said vital components such as engine and cockpit will not take damage.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the rules back then also had it so that you could not put case on vehicles, period, iirc.
also if all the internal structure of a location is gone, that location is destroyed, so if you had a xl engine in there, it just had it's fusion reactor opened up like a coke can. (one of the main reasons why xl engines are so vunerable)
Edited by Lafeel (07/31/08 06:14 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 07:49 PM
70.0.22.79
|
Yes your wrong. It destroys all ammo the IS and rear armor of all vehicles. Its dead in the water but from what it says nothing else is destroyed. It implies that all damage is reparable.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 07:57 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Quote:
Yes your wrong. It destroys all ammo the IS and rear armor of all vehicles. Its dead in the water but from what it says nothing else is destroyed. It implies that all damage is reparable.
As long as the reactor doesn't explode, sure. However that does not mean that said repair is going to be either easy, cheap, or fast.
I think you just don't realize what the is is to a mech. It's the skeleton, so if you lose such a large portion of it (equalient to a large chunk of your rib cage (about half of it)), including everything along with it, do you think that repairing you is easy? It works pretty much the same for a mech, so you can figure it out.
Edited by Lafeel (07/31/08 08:00 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 08:14 PM
70.0.22.79
|
There is a big difference between a living thing and a machine. You can take parts from a lot of machines and make one working machine. You cant take hamburger and make a living cow.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 08:18 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Sure you could take parts from fifteen different 'mechs and make a new one, but the end result will almost invariably be a frankenstein's monster, namely a mechanic's (and often a pilot's) night mare.
Plus, if the fusion engine goes up (explodes), which can happen when it loses it's shielding (represented by the three possible engine crits), you will be lucky to get few usefull pieces of armor as salvage, as a uncontrolled nuclear fusion reaction destroys pretty much anything it comes close to.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 08:24 PM
70.0.22.79
|
I think we got off subject some time ago.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 08:26 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Now you say that when I've done such a good job of proving your statements in accurate..
|
Fang
07/31/08 10:58 PM
75.181.136.63
|
sooo...vehicles can now have CASE?
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 11:53 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Quote:
sooo...vehicles can now have CASE?
Sure can, but ammo explosions are still nothing to scoff at for the reasons I stated above.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 09:50 AM
70.6.213.25
|
Quote:
sooo...vehicles can now have CASE?
They always could. Unless they could then they could not then could again. I don't have a copy of each printing of all the books. I don't know if at one point that vehicles could not have CASE.
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!!!
|
Fang
08/01/08 04:44 PM
151.193.203.13
|
1994 Battle Tech Compendium. I cold have sworn that it stated vehicles coudl not have case. But now that I think about it, I think that was actually DBL Heatsinks that were forbidden on vees. CASE is used, but blows out all the rear armor as stated before.
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 10:40 PM
68.26.156.30
|
The DHS are not aloud in vehicles at least as far as my book goes
Thats another rule that tries to make mechs more powerful than vehicles. But since vehicles don't need heat sinks for anything other than energy weapons its no loss.
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!!!
Edited by His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey (08/01/08 10:43 PM)
|
Lafeel
08/01/08 10:41 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Quote:
The DHS are not aloud in vehicles at least as far as my book goes
Still aren't, as far as I know.
|
Zandel_Corrin
11/06/08 11:59 PM
123.2.140.247
|
Anyhoo.... getting back on topic....
Consider the mechs that mount GRs.... The clan executioner is a good example.... 1GR and 2 ERLL.... uses a GR cause it doesn't have the heat for ERPPCs.....
GR best used with other weaps.... high heat weaps.... saves the headache you get from piloting a heat freak like the Nova Cat... Bad design IMHO
Galaxy Commander
Zandel Corrin
Night Dragon Clan
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
12/31/08 04:30 AM
173.116.112.136
|
The assault mechs that I have designed have ERLL and GR. I am not much of a fan of the ERPPC. I would rather have a ERLL or PPC. The ERPPC runs to hot for the range and damage that it has. That is for IS as for the Clans the 15 damage with the Clan ERPPC is acceptable.
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!!!
|
Flameblade
05/25/09 10:48 AM
98.67.160.86
|
I think which way you go should be based on the size of the mech and its additional weaponry. Light Mechs should go ER PPC. Since they will not be carry much in the way of additional HS, and equipment. Whereas large sized Mech's will have to deal with higher heat totals. Mounting a Gauss means you can drop many smaller energy weapons onto the Mech for close in fighting.
However, once you get into specializing Mechs for specific purposes it goes beyond raw stats.
|
LAMdriver
06/12/09 05:58 AM
68.118.31.98
|
Another factor to consider is the mission that your unit is on. Is the mission a direct assault or covert landing and LRRP (long range recon patrol)? Harassing rear areas or Sniper op? You have to look at the totality of your mission and plan accordingly.
For direct assault and sniper ops, I would go for a Gauss rifle. For harassing and LRRP, PPC are the way to go.
Why you may ask? One word: logicistics.
If the direct assault or sniper mission is sucessful, you can return to base or wait for the supply train to refitt and rearm.
As a LRRP you are cut off from your supply lines until pick or your dead. An added bonus with attacking rear areas is the PPC's abilty to start fires which can help your units and hinder the enemy. It also can turn a simple hit and run missions into a "scroched earth" resource denial missions.
I hope that this adds another dimension into your campaings.
" 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
|