Author Topic: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"  (Read 23669 times)

NoOnesShowMonkey

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #30 on: 17 June 2012, 09:15:54 »
To be honest, the clans are only that much superior in the novels.  If you actually played out a lot of those Cluster vs RCT fights of the clan invasion I think the curbstomping would go the other way around.  Even if the tanks are not very good in the RCT, the tanks alone outnumber the Clans by something like 6 or 7  to 1 depending on cluster composition.  And that is before factoring in the mechs which outnumber them by over 2 or 3 to 1 again depending on cluster composition.

Though this is a different thread entirely, a 3025 RCT fighting off a clan cluster (as at the start of the Invasion) would pretty much get corn holed.

The slowest strategic speed for almost the entire cluster is 5/8/X, meaning they only fight where and when they want to.  Outside of a city siege, the clanners would uttery destroy the IS forces in detail.  Not only does each mech represent a concentration of firepower that the IS really can not deal with, the cluster as a force is capable of concentrating their firepower where and when they want to in a way that the IS simply can not deal with.

Imagine rolling maps with just a star of Ullers engaging... well... anything at all, really.  Whatever they can't shoot to pieces, they can outrun.  Now what if that is a star of the classic 5/8/x heavies?

gooseman

  • CDT Miniatures XO
  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3482
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #31 on: 17 June 2012, 09:34:49 »
Lance terminology has always confused me in BattleTech.  Why the blazes is a lance designation not the range of tonnage that four like class BattleMechs are?  Light would be up to 140, Medium from 145 to 220, Heavy from 225 to 300, and Assault from 305 to 400.

Perhaps because lance terminology denotes function/capability instead of mass?
Daoshen Liao: Wrong! Xavier! What is best in life?
Xavier McCarron: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #32 on: 17 June 2012, 14:27:32 »
Perhaps because lance terminology denotes function/capability instead of mass?

Because lance terminology is dictated by mass, so this is an arguably false supposition?  A quartet of Whitworths is a medium lance, but a quartet of Trebuchets is a heavy lance, even though the 'Mechs are used in the same role and have similar weapon loads.  Hell, the Trebuchets are faster, so you think they'd get called the medium lance instead, no?
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

A. Lurker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #33 on: 17 June 2012, 14:35:32 »
Because lance terminology is dictated by mass, so this is an arguably false supposition?  A quartet of Whitworths is a medium lance, but a quartet of Trebuchets is a heavy lance, even though the 'Mechs are used in the same role and have similar weapon loads.  Hell, the Trebuchets are faster, so you think they'd get called the medium lance instead, no?

Considering that Trebuchets are medium 'Mechs themselves, what is it again about them that makes them a "heavy" lance?

mitchberthelson

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 624
  • Death to Zohan!
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #34 on: 17 June 2012, 15:27:49 »
What about when that company gets attacked by company of 55 tonners? Do you call BV or other form of balance?

I've run that type of scenario before a few times in 4th SW-era. In my experience, if the 55'ers don't have their longer range bands matched up well, the kitties can actually win. If they do, then the 55'ers will take some damage, but the Panthers will get murdered.

Panthers at company strength and operating with proper fire discipline can often arbitrarily execute roughly 1 Mech a turn, regardless of weight. If they want to go for "low hanging fruit" and the enemy is a mixed force, that can increase.

However, Griffins are absolute masters of that kind of "Hand of God" firing pattern. Add in their solid armor and mobility/good TMM's, and a well-run Griffin company is one of the deadliest things an all-Mech force can face on the SW battlefield. If I had a choice, between that and a more traditional Command/Fire/Scout organization at the same average weight, I'd take the Griffins every time unless the mission was recon or urban warfare.

Dervishes can get almost as nasty at range when grouped up into homogenous units and Griffin/Dervish teams can be brutal.
« Last Edit: 17 June 2012, 15:30:17 by mitchberthelson »

Devens

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 826
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #35 on: 17 June 2012, 16:24:29 »
Though this is a different thread entirely, a 3025 RCT fighting off a clan cluster (as at the start of the Invasion) would pretty much get corn holed.

The slowest strategic speed for almost the entire cluster is 5/8/X, meaning they only fight where and when they want to.  Outside of a city siege, the clanners would uttery destroy the IS forces in detail.  Not only does each mech represent a concentration of firepower that the IS really can not deal with, the cluster as a force is capable of concentrating their firepower where and when they want to in a way that the IS simply can not deal with.

Imagine rolling maps with just a star of Ullers engaging... well... anything at all, really.  Whatever they can't shoot to pieces, they can outrun.  Now what if that is a star of the classic 5/8/x heavies?

Actualy the IS would farebetter than you think.  The clans armor is no thicker than the IS's.  And you are assuming the IS general will play fair.  Smoke screens work wonders in leveling the range game for one.  Minefields also work wonders.  Massesd tube artillery is something the clans dont have an effective counter for.  Your also assuming alot by assuming the IS general will be dumb enough to separate his forces. 

On the other hand it has been shown clearly that the Clans, outside of Clan Wolf dont have the ability or discipline to fight a protracted engagement.  Try fighting 5 Clan mechs against 15 IS mechs and 36 IS tanks of level 1 tech.  Thats about your force ratio you are looking at Average weight of a mech force at the time was 50 tons, Lyran more like 60.     

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #36 on: 17 June 2012, 16:36:21 »
Considering that Trebuchets are medium 'Mechs themselves, what is it again about them that makes them a "heavy" lance?

This is exactly my point.  Lance weights, for whatever reason in BattleTech, are not lined up that way.  Instead, having a lance of all high-end medium 'Mechs makes it a heavy lance, and a lance of all high-end light 'Mechs makes it a medium lance, and a lance of all high-end heavy 'Mechs makes it an assault lance.  It's still based on tonnage, but it skips a critical part at the "common sense" step.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Devens

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 826
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #37 on: 17 June 2012, 16:42:35 »
I've run that type of scenario before a few times in 4th SW-era. In my experience, if the 55'ers don't have their longer range bands matched up well, the kitties can actually win. If they do, then the 55'ers will take some damage, but the Panthers will get murdered.

Panthers at company strength and operating with proper fire discipline can often arbitrarily execute roughly 1 Mech a turn, regardless of weight. If they want to go for "low hanging fruit" and the enemy is a mixed force, that can increase.

However, Griffins are absolute masters of that kind of "Hand of God" firing pattern. Add in their solid armor and mobility/good TMM's, and a well-run Griffin company is one of the deadliest things an all-Mech force can face on the SW battlefield. If I had a choice, between that and a more traditional Command/Fire/Scout organization at the same average weight, I'd take the Griffins every time unless the mission was recon or urban warfare.

Dervishes can get almost as nasty at range when grouped up into homogenous units and Griffin/Dervish teams can be brutal.

I find that any SW era company where everything has a PPC can be very brutal.  Same holds true for a well run company of Enforcers.  Sniper based units dont always need bodyguards because the PPC can be used at short range effectively. 

When I run a traditional Command/Fire/Recon mix I try to get everything to have at least 1 token long range gun with descent throw weight.  Also, a recon lance does not have to have 4 scouts, 2 scouts with PPC or LRM based fire support works fine also.

I may not be the biggest fan of the panther, but you have to respect them as they punish you severly if you ignore them for to long.

five_corparty

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1380
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #38 on: 17 June 2012, 16:43:57 »
"What constitutes a 'Light Assault Group'?"

Ehh, they're the same as a regular assault group, but with only 2/3 the calories...

(sorry, HAD to be said!  >:D

Devens

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 826
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #39 on: 17 June 2012, 16:52:49 »
This is exactly my point.  Lance weights, for whatever reason in BattleTech, are not lined up that way.  Instead, having a lance of all high-end medium 'Mechs makes it a heavy lance, and a lance of all high-end light 'Mechs makes it a medium lance, and a lance of all high-end heavy 'Mechs makes it an assault lance.  It's still based on tonnage, but it skips a critical part at the "common sense" step.

I find grouping lances by weight to be foolish anyhow(4 Jenners are not a medium lance).  I think function not weight should govern a lance.

Devens

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 826
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #40 on: 17 June 2012, 16:54:34 »
"What constitutes a 'Light Assault Group'?"

Ehh, they're the same as a regular assault group, but with only 2/3 the calories...

(sorry, HAD to be said!  >:D

Not far off actualy.  They are an Assault unit, but they are a lighter mass than your typical assault unit.  Those medium lances coupd contain an aweful lot of hunchbacks to be honest. 

mitchberthelson

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 624
  • Death to Zohan!
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #41 on: 17 June 2012, 16:57:02 »
I find that any SW era company where everything has a PPC can be very brutal.  Same holds true for a well run company of Enforcers.  Sniper based units dont always need bodyguards because the PPC can be used at short range effectively. 

When I run a traditional Command/Fire/Recon mix I try to get everything to have at least 1 token long range gun with descent throw weight.  Also, a recon lance does not have to have 4 scouts, 2 scouts with PPC or LRM based fire support works fine also.

I may not be the biggest fan of the panther, but you have to respect them as they punish you severly if you ignore them for to long.

Yeah, I had a whole other "don't rush an Enforcer gun line" post in the GM'ing thread, and I too tend to put at least one or two ranged Mechs in each scout lance for skirmishing and defense.

gooseman

  • CDT Miniatures XO
  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3482
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #42 on: 17 June 2012, 17:42:01 »
Because lance terminology is dictated by mass, so this is an arguably false supposition?  A quartet of Whitworths is a medium lance, but a quartet of Trebuchets is a heavy lance, even though the 'Mechs are used in the same role and have similar weapon loads.  Hell, the Trebuchets are faster, so you think they'd get called the medium lance instead, no?

And a fire lance is what tonnage range?
Daoshen Liao: Wrong! Xavier! What is best in life?
Xavier McCarron: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #43 on: 17 June 2012, 18:05:19 »
So, 4 assault lances (280+ tons), 10 heavy lances (201-280 tons), 28 medium lances (131-200 tons), and 12 light lances (up to 130 tons), for the two Battalions.

This is how lance weights officially break down.  Whatever else they are, Fire, Support, Command, or what have you, they are also Light, Medium, Heavy, or Assault size.

The problem being, It is entirely possible to have Medium lance made up of entirely light 'Mechs, a Heavy lance made up of entirely medium 'Mechs, and an Assault lance made up of entirely Heavy 'Mechs.  Hell, it's possible to have a Heavy lance made up of 3 mediums and a light 'Mech.  That doesn't seem off to you?
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

master arminas

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2231
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #44 on: 17 June 2012, 18:06:02 »
Because lance terminology is dictated by mass, so this is an arguably false supposition?  A quartet of Whitworths is a medium lance, but a quartet of Trebuchets is a heavy lance, even though the 'Mechs are used in the same role and have similar weapon loads.  Hell, the Trebuchets are faster, so you think they'd get called the medium lance instead, no?

Because you don't always have homogenous lances.  Look at the Black Widow Company (circa 3025).  Command lance is a Warhammer, Marauder, Crusader, and Griffin.  265 tons.  And it is most assuredly a heavy lance.  Fire Lance has two Archers, a Stinger, and a Wasp.  180 tons.  Medium Lance.  Recon Lance with Rifleman, Phoenix Hawk, and two Stingers.  145 tons, and it is a Medium Lance again.

As to why the lances don't represent actual 'Mech weight classes exactly?  It doesn't have to.  Four Jenners, or four Firestarters, or four Panthers is effectively a Medium Lance, although on the low end, just like two Centurions, a Treb, and a Hunchback are the high end.  Same for two Griffins, a Shadow Hawk, and a Wolverine, except that is a low-end Heavy Lance, whereas two Thunderbolts, a Grasshooper, and a Warhammer make up a high-end Heavy Lance.  And God forbid you should ever run into a lance of four Orions.  That is an Assault Lance, my friends.  Even though there isn't a single rare assault-weight 'Mech in it.

It is just how it has always been.

Master Arminas

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #45 on: 17 June 2012, 18:14:35 »
Because you don't always have homogenous lances.  Look at the Black Widow Company (circa 3025).  Command lance is a Warhammer, Marauder, Crusader, and Griffin.  265 tons.  And it is most assuredly a heavy lance.  Fire Lance has two Archers, a Stinger, and a Wasp.  180 tons.  Medium Lance.  Recon Lance with Rifleman, Phoenix Hawk, and two Stingers.  145 tons, and it is a Medium Lance again.

Every single one of these designations matches up to the average size of the 'Mechs included.  Command lance averages mid-range Heavy (70 tons, rounded up to the nearest five), Fire lance averages low-end Medium (40 tons), Recon lance averages low-end medium as well (40 tons, rounded up to the nearest five).

A pair of Uziels matched with a pair of Scorpions creeps into the Heavy lance range, even though they're if anything closer to a Scout lance for operational purposes.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

master arminas

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2231
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #46 on: 17 June 2012, 18:29:28 »
Every single one of these designations matches up to the average size of the 'Mechs included.  Command lance averages mid-range Heavy (70 tons, rounded up to the nearest five), Fire lance averages low-end Medium (40 tons), Recon lance averages low-end medium as well (40 tons, rounded up to the nearest five).

A pair of Uziels matched with a pair of Scorpions creeps into the Heavy lance range, even though they're if anything closer to a Scout lance for operational purposes.

Two Uziels and two Scorpions definately (in my opinion) should be considered a heavy lance.  Why?  Six PPCs.  When you are talking about Light, Medium, Heavy, and Assault lances, speed is a non-factor.  So, you could classify those four 'Mechs as a Scout Lance, a Recon Lance, a Striker Lance . . . I would call 'em a Fire Lance myself. 

Let me ask you this?  How many rules in the game are based upon the tonnage of your lance?  I'll wait.  I mean, you can't have a Heavy Lance because you are building a high-speed light/medium-weight battalion?  There aren't such rules.  Instead, your Pathfinder battalion might well have a couple of Heavy Lances, serving as Command, Fire, Support, Assault, Battle, Scout, Recon, Striker . . . whatever their designation is.  You already pay for each 'Mech seperately, so why the angst over a piece of fluff that plays absolutely no role in playing the game?

MA

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #47 on: 17 June 2012, 18:42:45 »
Two Uziels can just as easily be carrying a pair of LB-2Xs and a pair of large pulses instead of a quartet of PPCs.  If anything, that's more common, and the Scorpions could be carrying large lasers.  It's more likely for the unit to have two PPCs or no PPCs at all than for there to actually be six PPCs in the lance.

I could also field the example of the trio of Wraiths plus a Cicada.  Or a Clint.  It's still technically a Heavy lance.

Quote
You already pay for each 'Mech seperately, so why the angst over a piece of fluff that plays absolutely no role in playing the game?

Amazing, it's as if whether your 'Mech is classified Light, Medium, etc, had any effect on the game either!  The issue is a fluff issue, true, but that doesn't make it any more sensical to call an entire lance of Medium 'mechs a Heavy lance.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Greywind

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 848
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #48 on: 17 June 2012, 19:43:47 »
This is how lance weights officially break down.  Whatever else they are, Fire, Support, Command, or what have you, they are also Light, Medium, Heavy, or Assault size.

The problem being, It is entirely possible to have Medium lance made up of entirely light 'Mechs, a Heavy lance made up of entirely medium 'Mechs, and an Assault lance made up of entirely Heavy 'Mechs.  Hell, it's possible to have a Heavy lance made up of 3 mediums and a light 'Mech.  That doesn't seem off to you?
Assault isn't always a "weight" classification.  It is also a lance "job" description.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #49 on: 17 June 2012, 19:45:47 »
Meanwhile, in the exact same sentence, I point out how Medium and Heavy lances have the same issue.  "Medium" is not a job description.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Greywind

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 848
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #50 on: 17 June 2012, 20:06:15 »
And a fire lance is what tonnage range?
The fire lance in my personal unit weighs in at 320 tons.

A. Lurker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #51 on: 18 June 2012, 00:34:27 »
To be fair, weight already doesn't tell you much about a unit's capabilities. Going for the low-hanging fruit, the 1A1 Charger is clearly just an 80-ton medium 'Mech overall, while things like the Wolfhound or the Panther can readily punch a bit above their notional abstract "weight class" (admittedly in part because they're already on top of its tonnage range, but that itself just tells you how little information the "light 'Mech" tag really contains).

Expanding from there to lances and even larger forces things simply get even more vague, up to the point where about the only thing calling a group "light", "medium", or "heavy" might be good for is eyeballing its actual transportation needs (and even that gets heavily abstracted out in the game, what with one-size-fits-all cubicles and such).

Greywind

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 848
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #52 on: 18 June 2012, 03:50:11 »
To be fair, weight already doesn't tell you much about a unit's capabilities. Going for the low-hanging fruit, the 1A1 Charger is clearly just an 80-ton medium 'Mech overall, while things like the Wolfhound or the Panther can readily punch a bit above their notional abstract "weight class" (admittedly in part because they're already on top of its tonnage range, but that itself just tells you how little information the "light 'Mech" tag really contains).

Expanding from there to lances and even larger forces things simply get even more vague, up to the point where about the only thing calling a group "light", "medium", or "heavy" might be good for is eyeballing its actual transportation needs (and even that gets heavily abstracted out in the game, what with one-size-fits-all cubicles and such).
Absolutely.  What I didn't say is that my fire lance also has 5 'Mechs in it.  Just giving the tonnage someone may decide to average the weight against a standard lance, making it an Assault-class fire lance.  Once they realize that there's 5 and average that, it comes out to a reinforced Heavy fire lance.  A person would make an assumption on how it would be for the first case, since 80 ton 'Mechs tend to be a bit slow.  Their battle plan would shift once they realized it averaged out to 65 tons.

It's all a matter of expectations.  You give a weight and it'll be "oh, these 'Mechs might be in it" if you aren't told up front.

Matti

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5085
  • In Rory we trust
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #53 on: 18 June 2012, 15:38:13 »
Let me ask you this?  How many rules in the game are based upon the tonnage of your lance?  I'll wait.  I mean, you can't have a Heavy Lance because you are building a high-speed light/medium-weight battalion?
Can I have Charger in that? :D
You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights errant, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

Gryphon

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 325
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #54 on: 18 June 2012, 22:04:15 »
So what characteristics would you enumerate to represent such a mech unit then?

Fun Facts: I can make a Charger for 55 tons and be only a single point less between structure and armor, 2,960, 292 C-Bills less, and a mere 9 BV1 less total!

Question 1: Is the loss of 2 points of damage from a punch and 5 form a kick worth 9 less BV1?

Question 2: What sorts of hells are reserved for the chog that shows up at a game with a 55 ton Mini Charger?    :D


Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13676
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #55 on: 18 June 2012, 23:14:40 »
Well, you lose roughly a third of your charge power, which on an 80 ton 'Mech moving 8 hexes is not small. :P

I believe I also already presented a more sensical method upthread, matching the descriptions of unit weight to the actual unit weight.  Up to 140 tons for Light lances (35 tons x 4 'Mechs = 140 tons.  Granted, you can call a lance of seven Wasp/Stinger/Locusts a Light lance at that point, but that's still pretty damn light :D), above 140 and up to 220 is Medium (55 tons x 4 'Mechs = 220 tons), above 220 and up to 300 is Heavy (75 tons x 4 'Mechs = 300 tons), and anything above 300 tons is an Assault lance.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

MOrab46019

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 389
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #56 on: 18 June 2012, 23:36:44 »
If anyone has a first ed mechwarrior book. I do belive it used weight as BV. Since there was no BV at that time. When I get out of work. In there will be examples of what types of the unseen mix to make the three type of Lances.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8378
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #57 on: 19 June 2012, 00:12:49 »
Well, you lose roughly a third of your charge power, which on an 80 ton 'Mech moving 8 hexes is not small. :P
Given the name of the 'Mech that sounds like a real loss
Any one got an idea of what the Charger looks lie as a super-heavy 80-ton Hovercraft?

Gryphon

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 325
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #58 on: 19 June 2012, 00:42:36 »
Is that legal?

Not within the rules, but by Ares Conventions!  :D

A. Lurker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
Re: What constitutes a "Light Assault Group"
« Reply #59 on: 19 June 2012, 02:30:31 »
Given the name of the 'Mech that sounds like a real loss
Any one got an idea of what the Charger looks lie as a super-heavy 80-ton Hovercraft?

Well, according to my preliminary calculations you can build it. ;) Using a standard fusion engine, you can make an 80-ton super-Hover go up to 8/12...9/14 with an XL, though the latter doesn't leave enough tonnage free to also really install Charger-level armor, to say nothing of weapons. Given the whole minimum engine weight rule on hovers and assuming you don't want to gimp yourself on purpose, you'll start out faster than a Charger in any case -- you gain nothing for going below 6/9, and the half ton or so you lose in terms of "free" weight for going 7/11 is probably handily compensated for by the added mobility.

That said, the Charger has one major advantage over any hovercraft: it doesn't have to roll for motive system damage each and every time its charge actually hits...