Originally posted on August 27th, 2010. At the time I had labelled it Equipment of the Year, as it was the first article of its kind in 2010. Though the EotW series is currently defunct, I owe it to my associate sillybrit and his brilliant BAotW series to put this back online in ways of support.
This is a special one-time EotW article is a quick-n-dirty write-up. Its intention is merely to raise awareness of a few parameters pertaining to a rather eclectic weapon. Maybe it can serve as a starting point for discussion?
Today, I want to look at a contentious piece of equipment, the Bearhunter Superheavy AC. It is known to us foremost as a rather unwieldy Battle Armor weapon that often incorrectly described as a “Heavy Machine Gun, but with +1 to hit” – indeed, it is actually worse than that, yet has a few other minor differences and only truly comes into its own in roles other than a standard BattleTech play Battle Armor weapon.
History
The Bearhunter was first seen both as a game weapon and an in-universe piece of equipment in Combat Equipment, or early 3060s. First created as a triple support AC for conventional troops by the Hell’s Horses, their disastrous showing against the Ghost Bears during the Horses' first stay in the Inner Sphere immediately spread the weapon amongst its intended target. Indeed, the weapon was first employed by a canon unit on the scary Ghost Bear Golem Battle Armor in the same publication.
Since then, it has been a weapon associated more closely with the Horses, as they fielded it on their own Gnome Upgrade (TRO 3058U), Afreet suit (TRO 3075) and in their heavy jump infantry (TRO 3085). It also remains a Ghost Bear weapon as their assault infantry at least are illustrated with it (they don't actually use it in their canon stats). The Bearhunter never became a 'Mech-grade weapon and hence its appearances, while prominent on Battle Armor, are few and far between.
Side note 1: yes, I am aware of the infantry only being examples, their stats' intended use being generic; nevertheless an image is created in TRO 3085 which is what I was commenting on above. Side note 2: it is ironic that the Golem suit itself spread back to the Horses and their own versions are noticeably lacking the Bearhunter. This may be a prudent reflection on their utterly lacklustre game performance, which brings me neatly to…
Stats
The Bearhunter is all about damage at the expense of everything else, which holds true for all incarnations of the weapon, even at its most displaced. Fatefully, this displaced usage is also the most common one: as a Battle Armor weapon in standard BT play. As such, let’s look at this not-an-HMG.
The similarities compared to the HMG are manifest, both weapons doing 3 damage, causing burst damage against infantry, weighing 150 kgs and having a maximum range of only 2 hexes. The difference lies in the detail:
The Bearhunter has a +1 modifier to hit, representing the heavy recoil (game rule – refer to table in TW, p. 305).
The ranges are fundamentally different. The HMG has a short range of 1, medium range of 2 and no long range. The Bearhunter has a vastly inferior range bracket of 0/1/2. Now add to that the fact that TW, p. 218 states "All weapon attacks against units in the same hex as the battle armor unit are considered to be at Range 1, except anti-personnel weapons, which are at Range 0." and we have a problem. Effectively, what this translates to in terms of to-hit modifiers is:
Weapon Range 0 Range 1 Range 2 Range 3
HMG +0 +0 +2 –
Bearhunter +3 +3 +5 –
Clearly, the Bearhunter is vastly inferior.
On top of that, the Bearhunter takes up 2 slots vs the HMG's 1 slot on a Battle Armor.
Finally, proving my "damage above anything else" point, there is a tiny redeeming feature of the Bearhunter. The specific footnote on the table, TW p. 305 states that the weapon should be treated as a Flamer vs infantry. Turning back to page 217 then clearly shows us that the Bearhunter does 3D6 vs the HMG’s 2D6 damage (both are BA grade).
So in summary, the weapon's range and to-hit modifiers suck, but it is the only one to combine 3 conventional damage with 3D6 anti-infantry damage. No, it is not worth it, but this is the slight caveat to calling it 100% outclassed by the HMG.
Surely this cannot be it, right?
Right!
Even Combat Equipment way back when was mostly concerned with the RPG aspect of the game (back then MW3) – the Support Vehicle construction rules that were first released in that book were focused on enriching the RPG aspect of the universe, too.
Thus, it is with great satisfaction that I can confirm that the Bearhunter is the true buzzsaw of AToW. Actually, I cannot, I am not well-versed in the RPG. Still, it takes a fool not to realise that the Bearhunter is vastly superior to anything else in terms of armor penetration and pure damage (and fire rate, if I interpret the data correctly, but feel free to jump in here) both in the BA (pp. 215 & 403) and conventional (p. 273) versions.
And this is translated directly into the conventional infantry version. Have a look at the tables in TM, pp. 349-352. There is nothing, I repeat nothing there that comes close to the Bearhunter’s damage. Forget its lacklustre range and to-hit modifiers. It is the supreme damage multiplier for conventional infantry. Sure, it can only be fielded in lots of 1-per-squad, but look at what it does to the jump infantry in TRO: 3085, p. 211. That is some scary stuff.
Usage
This is where I ask for your own takes.
As a huge Battle Armor fan, I personally like the weapon for its added in-universe flavour, but cannot really abide it for its stats. While it has the nice option of high-level damage vs both armoured and conventional targets, its intrinsic negative traits are an instant disqualifier. The unit carrying it needs to close and suffer return fire. As such, it needs to be both tough and quick; the three canon units carrying it (Afreet, Gnome, Golem) only do one of the two.
There is no situation in which I would not rather have an HMG. But mentioning this, I would correct myself and then choose the Flamer over either weapon. I am gladly prepared to drop 1 point of anti-armour damage to gain a hex of range and have the fire options at my disposal. Right now, without additional, optional rules, the Bearhunter cannot really compete with other Battle Armor weaponry of the 150 kg weight bracket.
Further factors are covered above, such as damage multiplier for PBI and fearsome RPG equipment - I'll stop now and let you do the rambling!
So there you have it. The RPG weapon that translates as "lacklustre" for BA and "scary" for infantry; feared in-universe, scorned by casual gamers and ultimately, a very interesting and colourful addition to the BT universe. I hope this quick write-up has piqued your interest and more importantly – made you check you used it accurately when fielding it.
One thing that did not survive the forum transition was an additional section on how to counter the Bearhunter. IIRC, it went like this: "Shoot at BA fielding the Bearhunter with anything that has a 3+ range. The end."
