Mercenary Recruitment - Mech Ownership

[carl_s_Z]

Greetings looking for some thoughts/suggestions on mercenary recruitment and ownership of mechs. 

The Field Manual Mercs Revised is set in 3067 and provides constraints on the number of pilots that can be recruited per month based on 2D6 roll and then goes though rolls on the weight class and skill level of the recruits.  But it also lists mech ownership under the recruit ID table where dispossessed recruits occur on a roll of 2 or 3...doing the math it yields 8% (see page 146).  This would suggest that 92% of mercenary recruits come with their own ride.  That seems like a shockingly high number of recruits coming with their own kit. 

The newer book, campaign operations, no specific setting date, is much more vague on mech ownership with recruits.  They are acquired in a less random and more targeted way, have no real limit on how many could be found etc (page 14).  Vastly differently than Field Manual Mercs. Additionally mech ownership of the recruits is not specified and specifically stated as up to the players to decide.  Hmm...thats less than satisfying. 

Are there any other books that go over random recruitment and mech ownership when running a mercenary unit?...and what do folks normally do when running mercenary campaigns (long adventures) and mech ownership over time?

[SCC]

Very few merc units ever get to the point where the unit itself owns 'Mechs. Units like the Dragoons, ELH and even the Big Mac will have stables of 'Mechs for pilots that join them without rides and those without rides probably flock to them, not other units.

[pheonixstorm]

Yeah one thing CO isn't good for is how to replace a downed pilot or a downed mech. It assumes you purchase both.

[Archangel]

It should be noted that many mercenary units fold within months of forming due to financial issues so a MechWarrior who joins such a unit with his 'Mech might suddenly find himself back on the market looking for a new unit to join.

It should also be noted that unit creation/running rules err on the side of playability rather than realism.  After all having a "'Mech" company with 12 MechWarriors but only 5 'Mechs kinda saps a lot of the fun out of the game.

Occasionally my group uses the 'MechWarrior's experience to help determine whether a new recruit comes with his/her own ride.  The more experienced the warrior the more likely they have their own ride.  It may be beaten up from his last unit's final battle but its still his.

[Kovax]

My assumption is that there's a big difference between hiring dispossessed MechWarriors and hiring "owner-operators".

In the former case, the mercenary unit needs to have a supply "spare" 'Mechs, or else needs to be willing to pay the extra personnel while they're not yet in any position to contribute to combat operation.  The mercenary company would be in a superior bargaining position because the MechWarrior hasn't got a lot to offer UNTIL he or she has a 'Mech to pilot, making for a more financially profitable arrangement if the mercenary unit has or can get the extra 'Mechs.

In the latter case, the mercenary unit needs to have enough reputation and/or financial solvency to attract people who could go practically anywhere else instead to sell their services.  "Life is cheap, battlemechs are expensive", which means that anyone with a 'Mech should be able to command top dollar (or C-Bill).  That leads to very competitive salaries and consequently low profit margins.

A hiring system where 80%+ of the 'Mechwarriors available for recruitment randomly have a 'Mech makes little sense.  They should be in two totally different pools: Dispossessed Mechwarriors, and Battlemechs with a pilot included.  Depending on needs, one would recruit from one, the other, or both.

[Colt Ward]

Mechwarriors with their own rides was also a problem for the contract payouts which is why it has changed.

If you are not a fan of that generation method, and some people are not, then you also have the Supplementals which introduces a different way of building a unit.  I think Campaign Operations, great in PDF, has the latest version which is more like what is introduced in the Supplementals.

I think the original FM Mercs set in 3055 has a different method as well.  The important thing is that for whatever timeframe you want your merc command set up you do your random rolls for mechs/armor/etc on the era appropriate charts.  They can be found in books like FM Updates, Shattered Sphere (3059?), Era Reports 3052 and 3062 . . . I think.

One other thing to think about, is that generally the merc generation rules assume you ended up (somehow) with a wad of cash- or at least you and your friends who are starting the unit.  It has rules about going into debt as well, and depending on what you try you can definitely go in debt.  My unit did not, but I did not pay for upgraded equipment in 3062- my mercs planned to work the Chaos March where they would not face the Clans or even top of the line equipment.  My CO's ride was a Battlemaster 1D (his) and I randomly ended up with 3 Watchmen (company assets) in the company funny enough.  But having looked through the rules, I found ways to avoid going into debt from the beginning knowing the tradeoffs . . . so my mercs are one of the weird ones- they did not start off in debt.  They did go into debt about 4 or 5 missions in to buy a cursed (found out after buying it) Warhammer 7M that had already been modified.  The note was held by some bank on Outreach.  The starting mech company was half owned and half company bought, had a DS (why I saved cash), had a lance of ASF, some tanks, infantry and a squad of BA.  This was after the 'roll for mission' phase where I picked up tanks & infantry along with success.

[Occilion]

I think this would be addressed on a per warrior basis. A merc unit is a business after all so a real life contemporary would be a trucking company. If you own your own rig the company typically pays to "rent" it while you drive it. Owner operators can make ~200k a year while someone driving a company rig only makes 45k a year.

In universe you've got the Lone Wolves, in which every 'Mech is independently owned but the owners pay the unit for parts, maintenance, transport, etc and get a share of every contract.

The Gray Death on Verthandi had a situation where one of the pilots wants to leave the unit but his 'Mech is owned by the unit (salvage from Trelwan). It is made very clear that he can quit but that the 'Mech stays. I don't think one of the owner-operators would have had a similar conversation.

There is also something I read in one of the sourcebooks about how Lyran warriors were upset because the government issued them new 'Mechs and took the old one. When the warrior tried to leave the military s/he wasn't allowed to take the machine because the new one belonged to the state but no recompense was made for the family owned machine that had been replaced.

If you think about a merc unit like a standard business in the U.S. then the sky is the limit. Some guys are independent contractors (Lone Wolves), others are W-2/paystub (Wolf's Dragoons), you have owner-operators (McKinnon's Raiders), subcontractors (think Ace Darwin's Whipits), etc.

[Wotan]

@Occilion:
I see it the same way. Sadly all salary tables i have found for running a merc unit only contains payment for the warrior alone. So it is assumed that the mech is owned by the unit.
I've never seen calculation charts for payments when the mech is private property. Would be interesting to find something like that.

[Colt Ward]

Well, at least the contracts started changing to include the value of the assets.

Personally I include the employer funding ammo expenditures in the course of the contract- to include exercises in certain situations.

[Wotan]

Well, at least the contracts started changing to include the value of the assets.

You refer to the contract payment calculation in the FM:Mercs line? For that calculation i always included warrior owned mechs. But i'm looking for the payment to the warrior himself. He should get more money when he brings his own mech.
On the other side the unit could offer full compensation for any losses. But this can often result in a bankrupt unit.

[Colt Ward]

No, look at Campaign Operations . . . iirc contract pay out terms changed in that to base the amount on the capital/assets represented in the equipment- no longer just salaries for them as warriors.

[Wotan]

You are right. On p41 the base rating is added by 5% of the total cost of combat units.
So it could be considered if that "bonus" is partly (or totally) payed to the warrior with own equipment.