Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?

[MadCapellan]

I'm going to parrot what many have already said: If you're just looking at the base 3025 Assault 'Mech designs (nominally the most common), then Assault 'Mechs on the whole are pretty terrible and specialized in the era.  The only two really worth their weight are the Awesome & Stalker.  Most of the rest are either Heavy 'Mechs with a thicker skin on them (Zeus) or more commonly are a ponderous AC/20 platform with an ill-thought out battery of seconday weapons.  Even the vaunted BattleMaster is really something of a joke, with it's slow speed and token long-range gun.  Outside of the Stalker and Awesome, all the best Assault 'Mechs of the era tend to be less common variants like the CGR-1A5 Charger or AS7-RS Atlas. 

[Matti]

Y'all Stalker & Awesome lovers, I counter you with MAD-4A Marauder II >:D

IMO Stalker isn't all that great as you make it sound. Great variety of weapons isn't bad, but I wouldn't want take it against Longbow (ANY model) or even GRF-1N Griffin. Its LRMs aren't enough in ranged combat and it's lacking speed to bring its shorter ranged weapons to bear. Heavier assaults with greater short range arsenal AND armor can easily take plinks and then deliver at short range. I know from experience with Stalker against Atlas.

I know the model with pair of LRM 20, but that is lacking ammo. I've ran out of LRMs with it. I've got good amount of playtime with Stalkers... but maybe I've used them wrong?

[rlbell]

Snippage for emphasis:

Most of the rest are either Heavy 'Mechs with a thicker skin on them (Zeus)

They would not be so bad if they actually had a thicker skin, but they don't.  IIRC, the Zeus does not have a single point more armor than an Orion.  If a Battlemaster has more armor than an Orion, it is because the Orion has a different balance of weapons.

I do not think that it is a coincidence that most of the really good 3025 era assaults are 3/5 (Awesome, Stalker, Marauder II).

[Diamondshark]

The idea is to just keep trudging forward. Most anything that is fast enough to stay away will either have to close with the Stalker, or else can actually be threatened by 20 LRMs (or at least loses out in the damage/armor ratio).

[Fear Factory]

What ever happened to getting praise for taking out a queen with a pawn?  It's like all people want to play a bunch of queens then brag about who did it the best.

[Orin J.]

Y'all Stalker & Awesome lovers, I counter you with MAD-4A Marauder II >:D

IMO Stalker isn't all that great as you make it sound. Great variety of weapons isn't bad, but I wouldn't want take it against Longbow (ANY model) or even GRF-1N Griffin. Its LRMs aren't enough in ranged combat and it's lacking speed to bring its shorter ranged weapons to bear. Heavier assaults with greater short range arsenal AND armor can easily take plinks and then deliver at short range. I know from experience with Stalker against Atlas.

I know the model with pair of LRM 20, but that is lacking ammo. I've ran out of LRMs with it. I've got good amount of playtime with Stalkers... but maybe I've used them wrong?

yeah. they're not fire support 'mechs, they're ASSAULT 'mechs. the LRMs are for softening up the enemies, so your laser batteries and SRMS can gut anything fool enough to stand and fight you. if you're fighting an Archer, you want to close with it, and if you're fighting a Griffin you're honestly going to get backshot a lot, so be glad for arm flipping.

[willydstyle]

Large Lasers also have good range for the era. 

[Kobold]

What ever happened to getting praise for taking out a queen with a pawn?  It's like all people want to play a bunch of queens then brag about who did it the best.

Just to be clear:  Are you implying that there is something wrong with wanting to compare the skill of players on a level playing field?

[Diamondshark]

No, it's more like when everyone wants the very best all the time at everything that's the problem. All the strategy and skill goes away if everyone tries to go all THOMAS HOGARTH!!! on each other.

[Dayton3]

Large Lasers also have good range for the era.

Makes me wonder.

The Awesome worked pretty well as a PPC platform.

I wonder why they didn't have a 3025 era assault mech that was a "laser boat" armed entirely with lasers?   Kind of an assault verson of the Flashman.

[willydstyle]

You can basically make the Flashman at 85 tons with about the same capability anyways :D  IMO the "assault" class would have been better defined as 90-100 tons, since that's the weight range where 4/6 movement just doesn't make sense any more.

[Dayton3]

You can basically make the Flashman at 85 tons with about the same capability anyways :D  IMO the "assault" class would have been better defined as 90-100 tons, since that's the weight range where 4/6 movement just doesn't make sense any more.

Would you have made a separate class for 80-85 ton mechs distinct from heavies & assaults?

[willydstyle]

No, they'd be heavies. Maybe bump "medium" up to include 60-tonners, as they work well for 5/8 movement.

[willydstyle]

Makes me wonder.

The Awesome worked pretty well as a PPC platform.

I wonder why they didn't have a 3025 era assault mech that was a "laser boat" armed entirely with lasers?   Kind of an assault verson of the Flashman.

Not quite what you were asking for, but has a similar "flavor".

[Dayton3]

No, they'd be heavies. Maybe bump "medium" up to include 60-tonners, as they work well for 5/8 movement.

Personally,   I wish the mechs didn't have to be at five ton increments.

[Hellraiser]

Just to be clear:  Are you implying that there is something wrong with wanting to compare the skill of players on a level playing field? 

I'd point out that assaults lacking mobility is not the best way to measure "SKILL" its the best way to measure dice luck.
If you want to measure skill instead of luck you should pick a lighter, faster, category of mech.

[Fear Factory]

Just to be clear:  Are you implying that there is something wrong with wanting to compare the skill of players on a level playing field?

Not all all.

No, it's more like when everyone wants the very best all the time at everything that's the problem. All the strategy and skill goes away if everyone tries to go all THOMAS HOGARTH!!! on each other.

Basically.  It seems like this is where BattleTech is heading.  It used to be a lot like Chess with a piece for anything, "crappy" or not, and those who only knew how to win the game with a queen got schooled.  Now it seems like checkers.  Everything has to work the same and no one wants to move the back row anymore, so to say.

EDIT:  Seems there is more of a focus on "Unit Selection" over "Skill" today.

[Hellraiser]

You can basically make the Flashman at 85 tons with about the same capability anyways :D  IMO the "assault" class would have been better defined as 90-100 tons, since that's the weight range where 4/6 movement just doesn't make sense any more.

Would you have made a separate class for 80-85 ton mechs distinct from heavies & assaults?

No, they'd be heavies. Maybe bump "medium" up to include 60-tonners, as they work well for 5/8 movement.

Interestingly, if you look at the various "ability ranges" for lack of a better term based on movement profile a mech breakdown would look more like this.

20-25 = Super Light       (Can't do what a 30 tonner can)
30-40 = Light               (Best Option for 7+ movers)
45-60 = Medium           (6/9 to 5/8 Brackets w/ Moderate firepower)
65-85 = Heavy          (Standard 4/6 Movers w/ Good Firepower)
90-100 = Assault    (3/5 only w/ Heavy Firepower)

Though in the end, I think the 20 ton brackets works just fine, I kind of like the fact that 55 is more efficient than 60, while 65 is the least effective tonnage in the game, it creates "flavor" & variety.
Its nice to take those unoptimized designs and use them to abuse you opponent who is only using the "best" mechs.

[Greywind]

Not all all.

Basically.  It seems like this is where BattleTech is heading.  It used to be a lot like Chess with a piece for anything, "crappy" or not, and those who only knew how to win the game with a queen got schooled.  Now it seems like checkers.  Everything has to work the same and no one wants to move the back row anymore, so to say.

EDIT:  Seems there is more of a focus on "Unit Selection" over "Skill" today.

One of the main reasons I prefer the 3025 era.

[Nightlord01]

Not all all.

Basically.  It seems like this is where BattleTech is heading.  It used to be a lot like Chess with a piece for anything, "crappy" or not, and those who only knew how to win the game with a queen got schooled.  Now it seems like checkers.  Everything has to work the same and no one wants to move the back row anymore, so to say.

EDIT:  Seems there is more of a focus on "Unit Selection" over "Skill" today.

"Unit selection" over "Skill?" "Unit Selection" is a part of "Skill." If your application "Skill" starts at the deployment phase of the game, then you are tying one arm behind your back.

Please note: I do not disagree with your sentiment, but I do not agree with your phrasing. Unit selection aligns with flavour, choosing units commonly used by your chosen faction, as opposed to the latest and greatest. Skill tends to more align with tech base, where some players want to use uneven tech bases, or use the use the extended range and greater hitting power of clan gear to make up for their lack of ability to position intelligently or formulate and revise plans while in game.

What ever happened to getting praise for taking out a queen with a pawn?  It's like all people want to play a bunch of queens then brag about who did it the best.

I don't see taking a queen with a pawn as any more prestigious than taking a queen with a rook, bishop or queen. The skill and prestige is there because you out maneuvered your opponent, not because you did it with the weakest piece on the board (you didn't, queens are a team effort, never a single kill.) And if you lose the match, where's your prestige? Gone, because you gained an advantage, and then lost it again.

[Hersh67]

Nightlord, you will never be a Clansman then. 

Taking a butter knife into a mech fight and walking away with a mech and a bondsman is what gets you a Bloodname and starts your legend.  If you are that good, you might still be in service when you sibko spawn start dominating the weaklings of the Inner Sphere and restore the Star League in Kerensky's True Vision!

Excuse me, just had a Clan moment...

[JPArbiter]

I think the big problem is that the Assault mech has this aura of invulnerability, so ANY assault save the charger is good and people have learned how to effectively deploy their favorites.

case in point for me is the ZEU-6S Zeus.  roughly comparable to a Marauder in terms of battle value, I can use it better then most marauder jocks use their mechs, in the same role, and last longer.

[snewsom2997]

Y'all Stalker & Awesome lovers, I counter you with MAD-4A Marauder II >:D

IMO Stalker isn't all that great as you make it sound. Great variety of weapons isn't bad, but I wouldn't want take it against Longbow (ANY model) or even GRF-1N Griffin. Its LRMs aren't enough in ranged combat and it's lacking speed to bring its shorter ranged weapons to bear. Heavier assaults with greater short range arsenal AND armor can easily take plinks and then deliver at short range. I know from experience with Stalker against Atlas.

I know the model with pair of LRM 20, but that is lacking ammo. I've ran out of LRMs with it. I've got good amount of playtime with Stalkers... but maybe I've used them wrong?

In 3025 this would be a wolfs dragoons only mech, there would not be copies floating around for others to use, Not until Barbers Marauders a few years later.

[willydstyle]

In 3025 this would be a wolfs dragoons only mech, there would not be copies floating around for others to use, Not until Barbers Marauders a few years later.

Some people don't care about factional accuracy when playing.

[MadCapellan]

The original post was about text found in TRO: 3025, however.  The Marauder II wasn't in that book and didn't exist at the time it was published.

I've never been overly impressed by the MAD-4A.  It doesn't really bring much to the table a MAD-3D doesn't already have save more armor.

[Kit deSummersville]

The original post was about text found in TRO: 3025, however.  The Marauder II wasn't in that book and didn't exist at the time it was published.

I've never been overly impressed by the MAD-4A.  It doesn't really bring much to the table a MAD-3D doesn't already have save more armor.

And heatsinks.

[willydstyle]

And heatsinks.

More armor, more heatsinks, and jump jets... that's actually bringing a lot "to the table."

[Hersh67]

Thinking of Barber's Marauder IIs, might it be that having their Omni factory up and running, they decided it was time to jettison some 'old tech' for the revenue?

[Fear Factory]

"Unit selection" over "Skill?" "Unit Selection" is a part of "Skill." If your application "Skill" starts at the deployment phase of the game, then you are tying one arm behind your back.

Please note: I do not disagree with your sentiment, but I do not agree with your phrasing. Unit selection aligns with flavour, choosing units commonly used by your chosen faction, as opposed to the latest and greatest. Skill tends to more align with tech base, where some players want to use uneven tech bases, or use the use the extended range and greater hitting power of clan gear to make up for their lack of ability to position intelligently or formulate and revise plans while in game.

I actually agree here.  All I'm really saying is that someone who selects the best of each class is like the same person who can only play the queen well on the chess board.  It may look like your opponent is crippling him/herself by selecting the less than optimal choice but in reality that person probably knows how to use it.  It may be the Clan player in me but this is the same feel I have for the game just because I started playing in the Succession Wars era.  Fluff wise, you had to make due with what you had, and even without fluff these types of selections show tremendous skill over the typical Awesome thrown on the board because it's the "best" Assault.

I don't see taking a queen with a pawn as any more prestigious than taking a queen with a rook, bishop or queen. The skill and prestige is there because you out maneuvered your opponent, not because you did it with the weakest piece on the board (you didn't, queens are a team effort, never a single kill.) And if you lose the match, where's your prestige? Gone, because you gained an advantage, and then lost it again.

Yeah it's not a very clear example.  I was just trying to say people who know how to use every piece to their advantage are much better players than those who know how to use only one to win.  I'm not even that good but I can make due with a crappy/less than optimal opfor setup (which is how I actually prefer to play this game).

[Matti]

I wonder why they didn't have a 3025 era assault mech that was a "laser boat" armed entirely with lasers?   Kind of an assault verson of the Flashman.

Try CGR-SB ;)