Author Topic: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank  (Read 14732 times)

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« on: 30 June 2011, 23:10:51 »
Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank

(The original article has been lost to time; talk to GreyWolfActual if you want a copy.  The other article indicated some issues with divergent statistics.  This one is concerned exclusively with the record sheets from RS3050 Upgrades Unabridged and RS3075 Unabridged and has been updated .)

Continuing my recent string of TRO2750 updates to deal with Royal models, I bring you the Puma Assault Tank:  Big.  Visually impressive.  Powerful.  Well, two out of three isn't bad.  The Puma may have been procured to make the Alacorn look better.  I'm not sure why this was actually a concern, the triple Gauss murder machine has always looked good to me, but it would explain why the SLDF actually bothered with this thing.  Another suggestion on that front from the inimitable chanman goes, "I was going to say data corruption and blueprints for an Age of Sail warship got mixed in.  I still like the idea of some crazy land admiral trying to cross the T with his column of Pumas."  In any case, it's not terribly impressive because of some... interesting... decisions about weapon placement.  The Puma's origins lie with an armor general in the Hegemony, concerned at the way BattleMechs were displacing combat vehicles from their traditional roles left, right, and center and the possible implications for both his employment and the Regular Armor Command (which had been going on for about two centuries by 2681, but hey, who's counting?), but they outsourced the response to a company that previously had only built BattleMechs, which may explain why the design is so deeply flawed and was apparently made by engineers with only the barest knowledge of combat vehicles, much like two ships passing in the night but never to share a dock.  The PMA 001 was made with environmental systems that were a disaster against nuclear or chemical weapons and still heated to 120 degrees in combat, hindering crew effectiveness.  I certainly hope that's Fahrenheit but sufficiently wry commentators might well have used it for the effect 120 degrees Celsius would have on crew efficiency.  (At the time the article debuted, chanman suggested “deliciousness” for that.)  The next model fixed that problem but had jamming issues with the LRMs - our putative land admiral would have had a lot of fun with that.  After that, some ham-fisted butterfingers messed up the cooling coils for the lasers.  Suffice to say that the complete engineering history of this vehicle probably reads like something out of a tech show's engineering disasters episode, right up until they get to the really fun stuff like "city in flames, hundreds dead".  The effect on the tank's reputation scarcely needs to be imagined.  Early fluff in TRO2750 about the LRM 20s being able to fire forward is probably best dismissed in character as another one of those little engineering problems that was never properly worked out.

The baseline Puma we're concerned about is the PAT-005, the model in TRO3050U and listed as the stock Star League variant.  It's also curiously enough pure introductory technology. With a 95 ton tracked chassis, this is one of the biggest tanks in the game, on par with the Ontos or the Alacorn and only slightly smaller than the Behemoth or the mighty Mars tanks of the Clans.  A 285-rated Pitban standard fusion engine, perhaps the very same model that would later drive the BNC-3S Banshee to greatness, provides a typical 3/5 movement curve with a 54 kph flank speed.  So far, so good, although we're not scratching the paint on the Star League's real wonders of technology, and the armor keeps up the trend.  At 11.5 tons of standard plate layered 48/32/24/48, it's on the light side for my tastes on a unit this big but still quite solid and, frankly, the firepower doesn't inspire anyone to devote the sort of attention that a Mars or Alacorn rates.  That's right.  We're done with the good news.  The firepower looks reasonable, heck, even nice in that pretty little column on page 182 if a bit heavy on energy weapons but the devil's in the details here.  The main gun is definitely the Donal PPC in the turret.  The LRMs are, as implied, only able to fire out of their side mounts, one on each side.  Perhaps fortunately given that if they have the bearings to both be useful at once you're probably already on your way off this mortal coil, only two tons of ammunition were provided, shared between the launchers.  Normally, yeah, I'd be screaming for more ammo, but here, I'd really rather not have any more explosives rattling around inside the tank than necessary.  The front has two medium lasers and an SRM 4 fed by a single ton of ammo - kind of shades of the Demon but that's not a bad thing in my book.  Remember, though, you're paying heat sinks for the lasers here.  All the basic sinks are tied up with that Warhammer arm this thing uses for a turret gun.  The stern has two weapons, which is definitely at least one too many.  A vehicle flamer (the kind of flamer that doesn't need heat sinks) and a small laser (yes, there's a sink for it) are provided for waxing your rear.  The flamer makes a certain kind of sense, really, but the small laser lacks the range or power to threaten anyone.  It can't even scare infantry anymore, not that it needs to with a flamer full of who knows what pointed at them.  Usable, sort of, but I seriously question the wisdom (or perhaps integrity) of whoever in the SLDF's procurement office bought these instead of a few production runs of Manticores.

So you're the Word of Blake or ComStar looking at this lemon on your table of organization and equipment.  You figure you can do better now.  To the designers' credit, the PAT-007 really is an improvement but as we've just seen, that doesn't really take much and the new model is suitably off-beat to follow in its predecessor's footsteps.  Unfortunately for when this variant was introduced, it seemed like the original's fluff history of engineering problems and real history of record sheet screwiness reached out from the dark and terrible places where bad game mechanics lurk to claim another victim.  Fortunately, corrected stats are now available, so let the good times roll!  Working from them, overall, it's a fair model but devotes too much firepower to the sides.  Again.  The engine is now a 285-rated light fusion engine, pricy but capable.  The main gun is now a heavy PPC.  The missile racks were all replaced by MML 7s - you've lost a lot of your LRM potential but at the same time gained the ability to actually generate useful deterrence capabilities against close-in attackers on your flanks.  These are now fed by five tons of ammunition, plenty of endurance.  The lasers and flamer are still in place but each side now boasts a machine gun array with two MGs fed by plenty of ammo.  A B-pod sits on the front to keep battle armor off the bumper.  The armor is marginally thicker at 49/33/24/49 while CASE (which should be there, I think) increases survivability.  Finally, some joker slipped a surprise into the deck with C3i, giving you the ability to either stand off and take advantage of a spotter or drive into someone's teeth (an excellent choice if the main gun is shot out by critical hits) and act as a particularly hard-to-dislodge spotter yourself.  It won't last that long - the armor still isn't terribly thick and C3 spotters have a popularity right up there with Typhoid Mary - but it's a viable option.  Just one last note on the fluff - it kind of waffles over whether or not this is a ComStar model but the line referring to uprated ComGuard units is in the wrong context to refer to the PAT-008 and there are no other variants, so this looks like it's also available to the (supposed) good phone company.  (Author's Note: It is.)

The other new Blakist model is a bit of a riff on the PAT-007 above.  While it lacks the construction problems of the PAT-007, the PAT-008 also lacked a listing of MML ammo originally.  My reconstruction of the unit indicating 3 tons of MML ammo was vindicated with the coming of the Unabridged sheets.  Aside from that, though, smooth sailing.  Described as a model for Protectorate commanders to let them sit off a bit, the loadout makes sense in that context.  It uses the same 285-rated light fusion engine as the PAT-008.  The main gun is an ER PPC, while the missile racks had Artemis IV added and were bumped up to MML 9s.  A targeting computer enhances ER PPC accuracy.  All of the other weapons are gone.  In their place, the Word of Blake engineers loaded no less than six anti-missile systems fed by five tons of ammunition.  (Note to Thunderbolt missile users: Shoot someone else.)  CASE was replaced by a half-ton of armor in a dubious boost to 51/35/26/51.  B-pods were placed on the sides and front, making infantry or battle armor leery of getting right on top of this model.  Finally, ECM was added, although you no longer have C3i.  It's durable, it's survivable until someone hits an ammo bin (hint, hint), and it's still pretty underwhelming.

The Star League Defense Force (probably) wasn't unaware of the problems with the Puma, either, and in a section of TRO3075 from HTE, we got to see their answer.  A lot of times, the Royal models either here or in Operation: KLONDIKE are manna from the heavens, made of win and sent down by the Blessed Beas to take names and kick shiny metallic butt.  This isn't one of them.  It's better at being a Puma, sure, and doing what it is a Puma does but like any of the other Pumas, it needs more win to really stand out as anything other than, "That oddball Star League tank with the side-mounted missiles."  Now it's just saying, "That oddball Star League Royal tank with the side-mounted missiles."  Considering the expense, unless someone just really wanted to play shell games, I wonder why they didn't buy more Alacorns.  Anyway, let's get down to brass tacks.  The main power plant was replaced with a 285 XLFE (this would be why I said "more Alacorns" - the exact same power plant!), while the armor wasn't messed with but had CASE added.  The main gun was bumped to an ER PPC (indicating this is a fairly late upgrade - ER PPCs weren't really widespread until 2760, which is why they're thin on the ground in TRO2750).  The LRMs are mated to Artemis modules and have their ammunition doubled.  The land admiral is no doubt squeeing in glee, especially since his chaser SRMs are now a pair of Streak 2s.  The rear laser becomes a pulse model, giving it some real bite against infantry.  As I said, this really doesn't do anything but turn it into more of a Puma.

Using a Puma is a bit problematic.  In general, it's one more big, slow tank but the fire arcs are wonky, which is the main problem with the entire design.  Those side-mounted missile launchers might work for surprise fire or screening but aren't terribly useful in general combat nor do the LRMs on the Star League versions (PAT-005, Royal) really strike fear into the heart of flankers who are moving quickly and closing.  The MMLs, which can salvo off a pretty respectable number of 2 point clusters, really do work better there in my opinion.  They're tough enough considering the way you can't focus fire.  Generally, I'd reserve Pumas for flanking and screening work for other assault tanks, disposable spotters (for those of you whose minds don't boggle at calling a 95-ton LFE unit "disposable", anyway), and palming off to militias for getting your hands on the really nice toys.  They could also be useful as urban fire support, especially with the Tactical Operations rules that let them fire in multiple directions, and use of semi-guided LRMs if you can get them is a definite plus.  The Age of Sail line tactics should probably be reserved for tanks that are harder to immobilize and thus disorder the entire line but it can work if you've got the taste of sea salt in your mouth; these work better with the Star League models and plenty of room.

Fighting Pumas isn't hard.  Cripple them with crit-seekers, then apply damage until something pops.  The basic model and PAT-008 lack CASE, so feel free to try for ammo kills, but don't expect anything quite that simple with the Royal or PAT-007.  The PAT-007, thanks to the C3i, can be a much larger headache than apparent and needs to be jammed - they lack the standoff power to really be a priority for defense so an enemy may well be willing to hurl them into your teeth like bricks to provide spotting data.  Expect EW games from the PAT-008 (ghost targets are fun, but jamming to cut out the Artemis systems a lot of LRM 'Mechs use these days are probably more common thanks to being in the core rules).  If nothing else, don't be afraid to deprioritize the Puma.  It's big, sure, but they generally don't have the power that a lot of tanks this size can bring down on targets.  If you can cripple one - lock the turret and immobilize it - in an inconvenient position, that can go a long way to keeping it from causing any real trouble at all but be aware that unlike some tanks, those side-mounted missiles make it more of a flank threat after being crippled so pay attention to the firing arcs as you maneuver.  Stern attacks are almost always a good idea for killing armored units.

References:  The Master Unit List now includes all known Pumas, including two of the engineering “learning experiences” I mentioned in the fluff section.  The only mini available at CamoSpecs is in the livery of the Free Rasalhague Republic's Third Hussars and it's quite pretty in my opinion.
« Last Edit: 10 May 2012, 16:55:06 by Moonsword »

M-Rex

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 973
  • In Ferro, Veritas.
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #1 on: 30 June 2011, 23:18:20 »
Thanks man!


"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered his last round...

"Carrying stuff may be a sign of improper utilization of your minions." - 'Freelance Writer' Paul

Demos

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1602
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #2 on: 01 July 2011, 03:16:23 »
Wow. Awesome!

I use the Puma often as Opfor unit in the relevant campaigns (WoB/Jihad; StarLeague), but only marginally in my own units.
I'd could live with the side-mounted launchers, if the restricted firearcs were reflected by a lower BV (like rear weapons).
So the tank is way too expensive.  ;)

Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
but jamming to cut out the Artemis systems a lot of LRM 'Mechs use these days are probably more common thanks to being in the core rules
IIRC Artemis was always in the core rules as L2 equipment.  ???
"WoB - Seekers of Serenity, Protectors of Human Purity, Enforcers of Blake's Will!"

Trace Coburn

  • Starfighter Analyst
  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4310
  • За родину и свободу!
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #3 on: 01 July 2011, 05:47:24 »
IIRC Artemis was always in the core rules as L2 equipment.  ???
  Yeah, but the 'ghost targets' he mentioned first are a rule from TacOps.  ;)

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4879
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #4 on: 01 July 2011, 08:49:17 »
Its one of those "This could have so much potential" designs. The extra tonnage wasted on the rear firing weapons, the side weapons and their limited arcs, it just all begins to add up.

If the side firing arcs were a bit more forgiving, I would suggest using the Puma as a true "assault" tank (despite its limited armor), and keep moving it forward, using its LRMs to soften targets off to the sides, but the side arcs really don't come into play until you almost become level with the target. Using the TacOps alternate vehicular firing arcs might alleviate this a bit, something you might want to keep in mind if you're playing around with advanced rules.

Turning them side ways in their position to bring a LRM20 and the PPC on your target is viable, but you run the risk of heavy motive system damage, and you might not be able to switch sides when the side armor starts to get worn down (which can happen quite quickly.

The 007 is an interesting step up, and you don't feel quite as bad simply facing the target since you have a MML7 to the front as well. However, the continued use of the small laser is probably unacceptable. I can't believe any review of combat data from Tukayyid turned up evidence where the small laser was worth the tonnage. Pull it, drop in an ECM or more armor. The tactics are basically the same as the 005. Either stay really far back, and use those side missiles to prevent anyone from flanking you (or try to prevent), or move forward, use those MG arrays to clear infantry as you spot for something with more usable firepower.

I think the 008 is really one of those "Wait, what?" designs. Fluffwise, it might make sense. A command tank for high ranking Protectorate armor commanders. The execution seems quite unique. Overloaded with AMS and B-pods it looks to be quite..sturdy. The lack of CASE kills it though. It completely defeats the entire concept behind the tank. You can't design a tank to keep Armor commanders safe at all costs, and then not provide CASE. Its ridiculous. You can wax about how you've got MML9's with Artemis and a targeting computer enhanced ERPPC and GECM, but without the CASE, its quite a joke. Put your commander in another tank,and use this one just like the 005 and 007.

I'd could live with the side-mounted launchers, if the restricted firearcs were reflected by a lower BV (like rear weapons).
So the tank is way too expensive.  ;)

That's a good point. Its sort of surprising that there aren't reductions for side mounted weapons, considering their limited firing arcs. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that vehicles can always fire all their weapons, and the BV figures they'll be running into the middle of everyone and always have multiple targets around them.

All of the Puma variants cry out for a Sponson variant. Maybe in the rumored XTRComStar

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #5 on: 01 July 2011, 10:18:24 »
  Yeah, but the 'ghost targets' he mentioned first are a rule from TacOps.  ;)

Got it in one, Trace.

Its one of those "This could have so much potential" designs. The extra tonnage wasted on the rear firing weapons, the side weapons and their limited arcs, it just all begins to add up.

Ten tons here, ten tons there, sooner or later we're talking about real tonnage.

If the side firing arcs were a bit more forgiving, I would suggest using the Puma as a true "assault" tank (despite its limited armor), and keep moving it forward, using its LRMs to soften targets off to the sides, but the side arcs really don't come into play until you almost become level with the target. Using the TacOps alternate vehicular firing arcs might alleviate this a bit, something you might want to keep in mind if you're playing around with advanced rules.

As a rule, I'm not.  TacOps vehicle rules mess with their chances and survivability pretty heavily and I assume a working starting point of Total Warfare as a common denominator.  I don't even use ghost targets that much, I just find it the sort of thing someone using ECM should know about and suggest for use.  The chess game of ECM/ECCM/ghost targets appeals to me on an intellectual level.

Turning them side ways in their position to bring a LRM20 and the PPC on your target is viable, but you run the risk of heavy motive system damage, and you might not be able to switch sides when the side armor starts to get worn down (which can happen quite quickly.

This has gotten more likely, not less, with the introduction of more recent weapons and proliferation of the Star League's own favorite solution, the LB 10-X.  On the other hand, at range, a PAT-005 (or the other two at any range) is certainly more capable of taking care of itself than most tanks are, so we're not talking about the disaster that, say, Hetzers or Hunters have to deal with.

The 007 is an interesting step up, and you don't feel quite as bad simply facing the target since you have a MML7 to the front as well. However, the continued use of the small laser is probably unacceptable. I can't believe any review of combat data from Tukayyid turned up evidence where the small laser was worth the tonnage. Pull it, drop in an ECM or more armor. The tactics are basically the same as the 005. Either stay really far back, and use those side missiles to prevent anyone from flanking you (or try to prevent), or move forward, use those MG arrays to clear infantry as you spot for something with more usable firepower.

Yeah.  I spent a fair bit of my time in that section trying to get the stats clarified so we had something to actually work with; at the time, Bosch suggested they were a workable solution until something formal was done.  It's an improvement but not a great one.  A good effort, though.  My suggestion of using them as a spotter is very much a brute force solution.  They're not the easiest things to kill in the world, even immobilized, so if you've got one, you might as well use it.

I think the 008 is really one of those "Wait, what?" designs. Fluffwise, it might make sense. A command tank for high ranking Protectorate armor commanders. The execution seems quite unique. Overloaded with AMS and B-pods it looks to be quite..sturdy. The lack of CASE kills it though. It completely defeats the entire concept behind the tank. You can't design a tank to keep Armor commanders safe at all costs, and then not provide CASE. Its ridiculous. You can wax about how you've got MML9's with Artemis and a targeting computer enhanced ERPPC and GECM, but without the CASE, its quite a joke. Put your commander in another tank,and use this one just like the 005 and 007.

Yeah, I didn't go there directly, but I'm not exactly complementary.  That said, as I've discovered to my considerable annoyance, CASE on tanks is fairly rare.  You get used to it or you get grumpy and used to it.  (Take a guess which one I've done.)  Given that, if you don't have other, better solutions, a dedicated command variant with that sort of missile protection isn't a bad answer.  Given that Protectorate commands generally have a whole pile of Demons sitting around, I'm not sure you can't find something more survivable.

That's a good point. Its sort of surprising that there aren't reductions for side mounted weapons, considering their limited firing arcs. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that vehicles can always fire all their weapons, and the BV figures they'll be running into the middle of everyone and always have multiple targets around them.

An assumption like that makes some sense but it involves exposing your sides freely.  Granted, that happens, but it's not really something players try to do.  Hovers and WiGEs are going to be even more vulnerable.

All of the Puma variants cry out for a Sponson variant. Maybe in the rumored XTRComStar

There's some interesting possibilities there.

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6127
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #6 on: 01 July 2011, 18:32:41 »

Yeah.  I spent a fair bit of my time in that section trying to get the stats clarified so we had something to actually work with; at the time, Bosch suggested they were a workable solution until something formal was done.  It's an improvement but not a great one.  A good effort, though.  My suggestion of using them as a spotter is very much a brute force solution.  They're not the easiest things to kill in the world, even immobilized, so if you've got one, you might as well use it.



If I may point to aerospace tactics, a big part of Naval C3 is not about having spotters, but creating an area where approaching one ship means everyother ship can provide fire support at low modifiers. Its something I have done with MRM Demolishers to great effect, making it difficult for smaller units to penetate the formation safely.

zephir

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #7 on: 18 February 2012, 08:58:37 »
Thought this might be a good addition for anyone trying to find a use for it:

In a hex map game the Puma might be used to cross maps sideways (beating, in a nautical term), while laying minefields for anyone trying to flank you.

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #8 on: 07 May 2012, 17:05:18 »
Article updated to reflect the new (and corrected) stats in RS3050 Upgrade Unabridged.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #9 on: 07 May 2012, 17:23:01 »
I am sad. I only just know figured out what the letters in the model numbers corresponded to, initially believing them to be random alphanumerics like in some 'mechs.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #10 on: 07 May 2012, 17:34:49 »
While you're in here, any bright ideas on how to use these things?  You're our go-to guy for wacky antics, after all, and I've never been quite sure what to do with them.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4879
Re: Repost: Vehicle of the Week: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #11 on: 07 May 2012, 18:33:03 »
Article updated to reflect the new (and corrected) stats in RS3050 Upgrade Unabridged.

Did they update the Record Sheets again?

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #12 on: 07 May 2012, 18:36:20 »
City combat. In a chaotic urban brawl with enemies all over the map, you can protect your sides from most fire simply by pointing them at buildings*, and I've always found value in indirect LRM fire to help out friendlies that round a corner and suddenly find themselves facing more than they can handle. With a Puma, so can help multiple widely spaced parts of a fight with just one unit.

Escorts for other heavy tanks. Since side shots are so popular for disabling vehicles, you can keep your forward armor pointed at the main enemy force, and the missiles will be handy for shooting at tactical valets.

Similarly, I've always maintained that the chance to disable multiple heavy tanks at once with side hits is one of the few situations where I'll risk using a fighter in a strafing attack. LRMs make good AA weapons by virtue of their range. I think we can all see the happy marriage of capability forming here.

Finally, I like the mention of mines zephir** made. An established behavior pattern of mining random hexes can discourage people from trying to flank you, or foil a flank-in-progress. Similarly, doing so during a fighting withdrawal can funnel them towards your most powerful units, turning his pursuit into a meat grinder.

Long story short, finding a use for a Puma is like finding a use for a Marik assault 'mech. Neither delivers the concentrated punch you expect for a unit of their mass, so you have to look past that. Where Marik assaults excel in giving extra durability to a unit of heavy mech firepower and speed, the Puma instead can provide medium mech firepower on three targets at once, with a heavy tank's speed and durability. Learn to use that firepower spread to best effect, and you've learned how to use the Puma.

Come to think of it, I need to look into the intro date for this guy. He'd be useful for Reunification War scenarios that involve Taurian ambushes, where you never know what direction the next enemy will show up form.

*obviously, this will require an infantry screen to make sure that the buildings you pass do not contain enemies that would defeat this tactic. This should be encouraged, as infantry in other parts of the city make excellent spotters for the aforementioned indirect LRM fire. It also gives me the idea of using the Puma kind of like a cargo-less Trajan as an oversized infantry support unit. Between the PPC and LRMs, you can put the tank in the middle of an infantry advance, and yet be capable of threatening the medium/light units that are often sent to eliminate infantry all across your line.

**also, welcome to the forums, dude!
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #13 on: 07 May 2012, 18:39:47 »
Did they update the Record Sheets again?

As far as I'm aware, they haven't been updated since RS3050U Unabridged was released.  The article was still based on the set of sheets before that, though.

When I chose this thing for this week, I didn't actually realize it had already been posted on this iteration of the boards.

City combat. In a chaotic urban brawl with enemies all over the map, you can protect your sides from most fire simply by pointing them at buildings*, and I've always found value in indirect LRM fire to help out friendlies that round a corner and suddenly find themselves facing more than they can handle. With a Puma, so can help multiple widely spaced parts of a fight with just one unit.

Well, it looks like I had one thing right, at least!

Come to think of it, I need to look into the intro date for this guy. He'd be useful for Reunification War scenarios that involve Taurian ambushes, where you never know what direction the next enemy will show up form.

I hate to rain on your parade for this one but the intro date is 2681.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #14 on: 07 May 2012, 18:46:52 »
Just saw that myself. Wargharble.

Guess I'll point it at Periphery Uprising Taurians instead. Could also be handy for Operation Smother scenarios, where I can shoot at Davions and Kuritans at the same time. Thunders are also handy in these fights, since the SLDF wasn't actively trying to kill either side in that conflict, and nothing simmers things down like physically seperating combatants with a very visible minefield.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

zephir

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #15 on: 08 May 2012, 14:38:02 »
**also, welcome to the forums, dude!

Oh, thanks   :)
I've been around on previous incarnations of this forum, but never a prolific poster.
I read your articles/ posts with joy, though.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #16 on: 08 May 2012, 14:44:52 »
Not sure what that says about your tastes or mental stability, but thanks!
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Zureal

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1081
  • There are Mechs incoming? Bring up T-Rex!
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #17 on: 08 May 2012, 19:07:39 »
a mostly worthless tank, and i still think that the SLDF brass got paid off to buy the dame thing.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #18 on: 09 May 2012, 00:34:57 »
If you wanna make the base model work, ditch the rear weapons, the 2 tons on the flamer can go to sponson mounting the LRMs while the 1.5 on the laser? Armor, MG? Something like that

Zureal

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1081
  • There are Mechs incoming? Bring up T-Rex!
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #19 on: 09 May 2012, 09:55:51 »
If you wanna make the base model work, ditch the rear weapons, the 2 tons on the flamer can go to sponson mounting the LRMs while the 1.5 on the laser? Armor, MG? Something like that

 or do the smart thing and just buy another Alacorn :P for about the same money.

blitzy

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 660
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #20 on: 09 May 2012, 14:09:26 »
a mostly worthless tank, and i still think that the SLDF brass got paid off to buy the dame thing.

I'd say more of mostly worthless.  It can fire in multiple arcs so disabled or not it can usually fire at something.
"..and like children playing after sunset, we were surrounded by darkness."  -Ruri Hoshino


SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #21 on: 10 May 2012, 05:43:43 »
or do the smart thing and just buy another Alacorn :P for about the same money.
I said base, as in the 005, the one with the SFE? I doubt it costs as much a an Alacorn

Redshirt

  • Iron Banner Addict
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 843
  • Please wait while I make my Perception Roll
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #22 on: 11 May 2012, 08:29:46 »
With TacOps and the Advanced Vehicle construction rules, I've often wondered how the tank would be received if you put the side LRM's in Sponson Turrets...
I am one with the Force, and the Force is with me.

This is a Sham! This is a Mockery! This is a... a... TRAVISHAMOCKERY!!!!!!

Wrong. Utterly and completely wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. You're wrong. You couldn't be more wrong. You're the creamy filling of wrongness in the middle of the wrong donut with brightly colored sprinkles of wrongness on top. You're wrong.

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #23 on: 11 May 2012, 16:28:42 »
It improves significantly as someone closes.

Isanova

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1339
  • There you are!
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #24 on: 12 May 2012, 00:32:14 »
It's built for SLDF tactics.

Start your lance / company in the center of your line of battle, as the enemy advances have them charge the enemy sides in a / \ or V pattern. They can lay into enemy targets and fire a full LRM-20 flight into the back of enemy fast mechs that get past their line.

If they get stuck, you now have a few well armed bunkers on the battlefield.
Freeborn and proud~

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6127
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #25 on: 12 May 2012, 01:23:34 »
What are the rules for Guided LRMs and the facing of the firing unit?

Of course the SLDF did not have access to that, but they got other exotic ammo.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #26 on: 12 May 2012, 06:22:07 »
S-Gs still have to fire at targets within their firing arcs.

I suppose if your group agreed, you could adapt the off-axis shot rules for capital missiles to ground use, but that'd be strictly a house rule.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

gyedid

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2582
  • Always brighter on the other side of the mirror.
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #27 on: 12 May 2012, 10:50:04 »
I still maintain that charging into the enemy's midst with hot-loaded LRMs is the best way to get use out of this tank.  Assuming they don't get immobilized first, and you have a GM who'll let you hot-load...but with those two conditions met, the Puma becomes a formidable melee unit, able to shoot at targets on three sides.

cheers,

Gabe
So, now I'm imagining people boxing up Overlords for loading as cargo.  "Nope, totally not a DropShip.  Everyone knows you can't fit a DropShip in a WarShip!  It's...a ten thousand ton box of marshmallows!  Yeah.  For the Heavy Guards big annual smores party."
--Arkansas Warrior, on the possibility of carrying Dropships as cargo in Warship cargo bays.

TERRAN SUPREMACY DEFENSE FORCE.  For when you want to send the SLDF, but couldn't afford the whole kit and kaboodle.

nova_dew

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 951
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #28 on: 12 May 2012, 11:58:59 »
It's built for SLDF tactics.

Start your lance / company in the center of your line of battle, as the enemy advances have them charge the enemy sides in a / \ or V pattern. They can lay into enemy targets and fire a full LRM-20 flight into the back of enemy fast mechs that get past their line.

If they get stuck, you now have a few well armed bunkers on the battlefield.
They could also be used as a defensive mobile picket since tank regiments were mainly defensive, any one want to face a full regiment (since they used mainly full regiments of the same tank  #P ) of Puma's defending a ammo dump or other stationary target?
A member of Clan Ghost Bears Legal Team

Diablo48

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Vehicle of the Week Update: Puma Assault Tank
« Reply #29 on: 13 May 2012, 01:18:18 »
I still maintain that charging into the enemy's midst with hot-loaded LRMs is the best way to get use out of this tank.  Assuming they don't get immobilized first, and you have a GM who'll let you hot-load...but with those two conditions met, the Puma becomes a formidable melee unit, able to shoot at targets on three sides.

cheers,

Gabe

I would rather have mines because it will let you cover your flanks with some serious deterrent without needing to divert your attention to the job.


View my design musings or request your own custom ride here.

 

Register