The Free Worlds League: Winning with what we've got!

[Kit deSummersville]

I know the Moltke is scary in TW rules, how does it fare in AS?

[Weirdo]

This'll be my first time using them in AS, so I can't be sure. I'm expecting a solid multipurpose MBT.

[Weirdo]

Okay, the more I look at FWL Anvil Lances, the more I think Moltkes (M2s and M3s at least) may be utter BEASTS in such a formation. Long story short, every turn half the tanks can stand still for a damage bonus, or get a to-hit bonus in exchange for a very slight damage reduction while still moving.

This works for any lance where at least half the units mount cluster cannons, SRMs...or LRMs. If you don't care about indirect fire as much, imagine what your missile lances can do... >:D

[Colt Ward]

I have wanted to field companies of Moltkes just to see how they tear into mechs under advanced veh rules, but its a matter of time & opponent.

Juliano
Orion 2M
Ostwar
Patriot

Havoc
Hermes

Trebuchet
Quasimodo
Calliope
Wolverine 7M

Achileus BA
Longinus BA
Phalanx BA
IS Std BA
Merkava Mk IX

I have everything but the Wolverine, and I am waiting for the new Classic one to make a -7M.  I got a new Shadow Hawk but its the RAC version and I have a MAD-4X I will turn into a -9M2 that could be fit in.  I have been thinking about adding a Tufuna and Moltke to add to the armor section.  I also have more generic armor in woodland camo- Hetzer, Rommel, Po, and some hovers.

[The Eagle]

Hello chaps.  I took a sabbatical there for a while.  Did I miss anything?  How's 2SW?  I need to find the cash to buy that one.

[Colt Ward]

Well, the Prim Orion is out and I heard it look real nice- some folks use it to stand in for the old sculpt.

[MarikMilitaMan]

Hello chaps.  I took a sabbatical there for a while.  Did I miss anything?  How's 2SW?  I need to find the cash to buy that one.

Welcome back, it's my first time back on here in several months as well and was wondering what i've been missing, just ordered 2nd SW so looking forward to it arriving.

[GespenstM]

I've been gone for months too and it looks like we didn't miss much at all. I'm getting the impression this game is effectively dead.

[Weirdo]

Games die when people stop talking about or playing them. Production or publication rates have nothing to do with it.

[Colt Ward]

I think a lot of it has to do with things being spread out . . . no specific FWL news means little to talk about or even re-hash.  I would also expect a lot of people talking on the MWO & HBS forums.

[The Eagle]

I've been gone for months too and it looks like we didn't miss much at all. I'm getting the impression this game is effectively dead.

So long as we still play it, it's not dead.  I'm trying to get a game together with a couple of locals some time soon, in fact.  I'm sure we'll see a surge in activity hereabouts when ilClan and the HBS game hit the streets.  Those may not arrive soon, but they're coming.

[GespenstM]

Games die when people stop talking about or playing them. Production or publication rates have nothing to do with it.

Level of material output to keep them interested goes a long way, though. Compare first edition D&D's current player-count to, oh, 5th Edition's current player count. Extreme example, but it's relevant.

[Weirdo]

I've got a game this weekend, that's all I care about. Reminds me, I need to print out my SHDL sheets. Wraith, Prowler, and Morpheus, with a Dixon on overwatch. Should be fun. :)

[Scotty]

Level of material output to keep them interested goes a long way, though. Compare first edition D&D's current player-count to, oh, 5th Edition's current player count. Extreme example, but it's relevant.

2nd Succession War
TRO: Succession Wars
BattleMech Manual

In the last four months.  CGL is putting out more material per year in the last five years than FASA did per year in its entire existence.

[GespenstM]

One of those, based on the description I read, seems like a reprint set. The rest I'll grant you, though.

Those I have to admit are meaningful activity, just not in the areas I'd like to see, and that falls into personal preference.

[GespenstM]

In honor of how bad last night's 'giant robot duel' was, I'm bored and figure we should discuss another robot duel.

In pure fighting capability, how do you think our Mad Cat Mk. IV stacks up to the original Mad Cat? Or the Warwolf for that matter? Both of those are 75 ton, 5/8/0 movement units fielded by one of our major neighbors (the klingons). Do you figure the tougher armor but weaker engine can stand up to either of these in a head-on fight?

[worktroll]

Mad Cat/Mad Cat IV? Too close to call. The Mad Cat Pryde has an edge, if only because of jump-jets. Although the raw firepower of the Mad Cat IV C can be intimidating.

Warwolf? Nah. Same crunchy shell, half the damage potential.

[Colt Ward]

Warwolf has notoriously bad configuration b/c that is what MWDA gave them, 30t of pod space gives it some excellent options . . . for instance, since Reactive is IMO better against long range duels with the LRM-equipped FWL forces you can nearly replicate the Timberwolf C with the Warwolf- the ERML b/c a ERSL and you are missing 2 DHS.  In fact you can duplicate most of the Timberwolf configurations though a short range weapon or two might be missing and some DHS, not sure about crits b/c HMP does not let me put reactive on a Omni.

One of my biggest gripes is the Warwolf does not have its legs open, waste of Clan DHS potential.

With that said, if I saw it I would let the LRMs rain elsewhere and give it energy & gauss attention.

[GespenstM]

Well, let's assume non-Unique configs (does anyone still use Pryde in-universe since its creator died?). Same deal with the Warwolf, let's go with good ones like Warwolf A since there are obviously garbage ones nobody would ever use.

[Colt Ward]

You are talking about 3 Omni-chassis, only comparison for which is better is what they are empty especially since at the same weights and movement profile you can mostly duplicate any one of the configs between the other 2 chassis.

[Deadborder]

You are talking about 3 Omni-chassis, only comparison for which is better is what they are empty especially since at the same weights and movement profile you can mostly duplicate any one of the configs between the other 2 chassis.

And contrary to popular fan belif, not every Omni will sport a custom configuration. 99% of the time, an OmniMech will be running around in a stock configuration. When you're evaluating an Omni's capabilities, you take the stock Configs into account. You can't just dismiss them as they're just as much a part of what defines them as their fixed components.

Let's keep this on stock configurations and not turn this into yet another "My custom config can beat up your custom config" fart-fest.

[Colt Ward]

Its not about custom confirgurations- the whole point is that Omnis are changeable which you want to dismiss . . . With these 3 designs you are not talking about chassis where one has a XL and another does not, weight or speed differences, or they have a huge differences in crits.  And I also did not say anything about custom configurations, I pointed out that what you could put on one chassis can mostly be put on another.  My simple example was the ability to put (mostly) the Timberwolf C on the Warwolf- the change is in a secondary close in weapon and heat sinks.  As such that weapons loadout IMO against the FWL is superior b/c its a fire support and unlike facing the Lyrans with their gauss the Wolf warrior will mostly be facing LRMs that could reach out to that range and the reactive armor will work better for a Warwolf than the regular FF armor on a Timberwolf.

[GespenstM]

A lot of play venues such as MegaMek.net campaigns do not allow custom Omnis either; you run stock on those, so stock configs definitely matter in some areas.

[Scotty]

If you don't want to discuss stock configs, then you don't have to discuss stock configs.

In the meantime, I'm actually partial to the Warwolf.  It's going to be significantly less expensive to maintain with all that cutting edge equipment, even if XXLs aren't as mind-bogglingly expensive as they are in print.  Plus I'm a sucker for Reactive, which pays in dividends against League favorite LRMs.

Being functionally immune to artillery is also pretty nice.

[GespenstM]

It's funny, I've never really felt like we're the 'LRM Faction.' Well, we might be that but I've always been more used to using them as a minor component of my forces; a Yeoman for fire support while the rest of my units are more mobile, mid-range fighters. My reaction to Reactive Armor is thus "okey-dokey, you have fun with that; most of my other guns ignore it."

[Colt Ward]

League fire support is UAC/5s, LGRs, ERLLs and various types of LRMs . . . normal LRMs are the most common.  With it being the most common the armor on the Warwolf lets them shrug off a lot of the fire support while they could slug it out with your brawlers if they are carrying a configuration that works that way . . . or they can get into a long range duel with your Yeomen & Stalker IIs and they will give larger TH mods & when you do hit with the LRMs it will not matter as much.

[Wrangler]

Maybe we could do what "What We Got" per era?

[Dies Irae]

Maybe we could do what "What We Got" per era?

58-67 can be pretty much summed up with 'Screwed'.

[GespenstM]

Followed by 3085 reading 'Playable units once again'

And 3085+ reading 'legitimately GOOD units for once. Unusual ones, but genuinely good and strong to the point where we're no longer a low tier faction... just one with a very high skill ceiling and unintuitive play at lower levels.'

[The Eagle]

Or as I prefer to call it, "The thinking man's army."