Author Topic: Infantry Support Options  (Read 1797 times)

Daryk

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3536
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #60 on: 29 November 2017, 01:31:09 »
Yeah by 500 C-Bills... one more E damage.

Marx 5E/3
Intek 4E/3

TT
500 becomes quite a bit more once you throw in the multipliers for customization, then the price formula for infantry...

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29129
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #61 on: 29 November 2017, 01:40:03 »
Nyet.  "Shoot or scoot" to the best of my knowledge refers to Foot platoons with 1 MP that are equipped with two Support weapons per squad.  At no point is there a mod to allow three weapon choices per platoon.  (Unless you could one-shot disposable weapons, or field guns.  Neither of which were under discussion)

Exactly this. You choose one weapon to be your primary, you choose one weapon to be your secondary, and at this point you are done choosing weapons. If you keep going, it means you're talking about disposables or field guns. That's it.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
Battleforce Space is too bulky. I vote we start calling it BattleFace.

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 479
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #62 on: 29 November 2017, 11:46:20 »

Bean counters unite, NO!

Common practice is best for bang, per buck.


Theres often truth in this, but it is not always the over riding concern. For example there are a number of reasons why the US uses a relatively complex weapon like the M4/16 rather than a simpler/cheaper weapon like the AK74. It might be that some militaries decide that the advantages of lasers outweigh the costs.

There is also prestige to consider, if the DCMS have swanky new laser rifles you can guaranty that the AFFS will want some too.

Challenger

boilerman

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 661
  • Spinning wrenches since 1968.
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #63 on: 30 November 2017, 01:45:36 »
To the OP I go with a generic version of the M&G G-150 rifle with an attached 3-round grenade launcher like several of the canon combination weapons. Damage 0.58, base range of 2 so it can reach out to 6 hexes and combined cost of about 750 c-bills. I generally forgo secondary weapons; total potential damage for a 28-soldier platoon is 16. I fluff in 2 support grade weapons in the fourth squad, but it's total fluff. I add in a generic version of the LAAF 3060+ armor kit with its damage divisor of 2, only 730 C-bills. Foot platoon: 2,150,000 C-bills.
Simple, relatively cheap.

If I want a heavy weapons platoon I use heavy support lasers, 2 per squad of course, and just fluff the platoon as I wish. Infantry are so abstract in BT it really doesn't matter to me, just as long as the stats and cost are accurate.
Avatar by Wombat. Thanks Wombat!

boilerman

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 661
  • Spinning wrenches since 1968.
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #64 on: 02 December 2017, 14:46:17 »
Heavy Weapons Platoon Option

I've been thinking about the BA Tube Artillery lately, using it as infantry field artillery. The BA Tube Artillery is what a heavy mortar should've been when stats for infantry mortars where introduced in TRO3026.

If you use the TO Field Artillery rules, and ignore intro dates, the BA Tube Artillery only requires 2 adaptations in my opinion; weight and cost. Heavy class weapons cut down for BA usually weight a fraction so let's say the heavy weapon class version of the BA Tube Artillery weights 10 times the BA version, so 5 tons. Reducing an artillery piece's mass is more about advanced metallurgy than anything else, so I say cut the cost in half.

Vehicle version of BA Tube Artillery (AKA Heavy Mortar):
Type: AE, S, F
Heat: who cares?
Damage: 3/1
Range: 2 Boards
Ammo per ton: 60 (nice round number)
To-hit mod: 0
TC: No
Rules level: Adv
Tech base: IS/Clan
Tech Level: B/D-D-D
Intro: Pre-space flight, never went extinct
Cost:
Item: 100,000 C-bills
Ammo: 900 C-bills
Weight: 5 tons
Spaces: I don't care
BV: 27
Ammo BV: 4


I've never really liked field guns or or field artillery in BT but the BA Tube Artillery at least makes me rethink it for creating a mortar platoon.

Sorry for the threadjack.   :-[
« Last Edit: 02 December 2017, 14:57:12 by boilerman »
Avatar by Wombat. Thanks Wombat!

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29129
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #65 on: 02 December 2017, 21:30:30 »
Hey, remember when a moderator told you that customs and fan rules belong in the Fan Designs and Rules sections? Despite how lax said mod was in the discussion after that regarding platoon loadouts, there are limits.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
Battleforce Space is too bulky. I vote we start calling it BattleFace.

Daryk

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3536
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #66 on: 02 December 2017, 21:38:49 »
Perhaps the thread should be moved down there?

boilerman

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 661
  • Spinning wrenches since 1968.
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #67 on: 03 December 2017, 00:06:40 »
 ::)
I thought we were talking support infantry. Field artillery infantry...
Avatar by Wombat. Thanks Wombat!

truetanker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4580
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #68 on: 03 December 2017, 17:20:57 »
My bad... been a busy week at work and only had time to post a bit there.

I meant using the Medium Variable-Speed-Laser as a field gun.

Now what I would like to see is more on Clans and less IS tech... just wish we could see a more general basis, and not just " These get this, while they get so and so... "

Or even just a generic trooper, where we, the players, could add the weapons. As Infantry is way limited and abstracted than aerotech rules, I for one wish there was such a design package.

Inner Sphere Generic has < insert weapon > Armor Divisor of 1 ( can upgrade for " X " )
Clan Generic has < insert weapon > Armor Divisor of 2
House Specific has < insert weapon > Armor Divisor of 2 ( can outfit with " X " for lost MP )

Something like this... pick Primary, Secondary and Field Gun ( optional ).

Example:
Clan Generic Platoon, Foot ( 25 ), Primary: Mauser IIC, Secondary: Gauss Pistol, Armor Divisor: 2, Movement Point(s): 1
Clan Generic Platoon, Jump ( 20 ), Primary: Mauser IIC, Secondary: Gauss Pistol, Armor Divisor: 2, Movement Point(s): 3

Something like this.

TT

EDIT:

But I can now, thanks to the AToW Companion, make a better Draconis Foot Platoon using the Snibbie PPC Support as a Field Gun.

TT
« Last Edit: 03 December 2017, 17:38:48 by truetanker »
Khan,Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse

That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29129
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #69 on: 04 December 2017, 00:10:58 »
No energy weapon can be used as a field gun. That's a very hard no, per the rules.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
Battleforce Space is too bulky. I vote we start calling it BattleFace.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4095
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #70 on: 04 December 2017, 11:34:40 »
So I've been looking over the infantry again recently, and while I'm not sure if I've asked this before, its worth asking again. Are the various standard weapons that do around 1 point of damage (or more) just too good for the system? I mean, if you want to choose between a AC2 and an AC20, you trade off damage for range, heat, size, crit slots, etc.

Under Conventional Infantry rules, often you get the damage, and the range. The downside is BV, c-bill cost, weight, fluff and factionalism.

BV matters, but in the case of BT and its BV, you pay for what you get. You pay for the high damage, long  range unit, but you also get the high damage and long range. Maybe if you have less than 100 BV and you're looking to squeeze something in it would be an issue, but most of the time its going to be accepted because of its effectiveness.

C-bill cost could be a possible limiter. Obviously there's a difference between a 10,000 c-bill Mauser 1200 and a 30 c-bill auto-rifle. And in campaign play or something, I could see that being a problem, but the other half of the time, someone's talking about how costs in BT are messed up and doesn't apply to the era they're in or what not.

Weight..well, they're not factored in as part of the calculation for unit weight under TW. It might matter if you're going to work in the RPG or something, but under the basic rules it doesn't really come into play. (As an aside, I notice the latest Infantry Table I'm looking at (v3.0) is using the pre-errata weight of the M61-A). So its kind of a wash.

Fluff and Factionalism work for some people, but they're not really a coded limiter on gameplay/construction. There's a thread about how a rarity table would be bad because people would use it to prevent you from playing with what you want, so yeah. Factionalism as a break isn't really effective. Fluff would place an artificial limit when making a unit, but again, its arbitrary, and not a hard break.

So we really only have BV as a limit, and in BT's "You pay for what you get," its not a very good one. So what do y'all think? Are the "good" weapons just too good?

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 479
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #71 on: 05 December 2017, 15:21:50 »
I tend to design a infantry platoons as if it was a real platoon and then try to make something like it with the construction rules.

I don’t think we need to worry about infantry platoons being too good, they are so fragile its hard to make something too broken. Nor are the realy good platoons particularly cheap.

I think there are weapons that obviously outshine the others, but I think it is a case of many weapons being too weak rather than a few being too strong!

Challenger


Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4095
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #72 on: 06 December 2017, 13:05:34 »
I don’t think we need to worry about infantry platoons being too good, they are so fragile its hard to make something too broken. Nor are the realy good platoons particularly cheap.

I think there are weapons that obviously outshine the others, but I think it is a case of many weapons being too weak rather than a few being too strong!

Oh, I'm not saying that infantry platoons are too good for the game. Battle Value theoretically takes care of that. I'm wondering if certain infantry weapons are too good compared to other infantry weapons.

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 479
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #73 on: 06 December 2017, 15:05:40 »
Definitely, but I would suggest the problem is too many weapons are too weak and need a buff, rather than any particular weapon needing a nerf.

Challenger

Kovax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1504
  • Taking over the Universe one mapsheet at a time
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #74 on: 06 December 2017, 17:53:38 »
In my opinion, there's simply not enough difference between some of the basic choices to provide any "flavor".  Either you're fielding "basic" infantry with auto-rifles, or you're using something exotic and expensive.  There's nothing in that "marginally better" class, with something like 1/3/4 or 1/3/5 range bands, or something that does 25% more damage at short range.  Laser rifles are about the only available "step up".  If you resort to field guns for a touch of uniqueness, that's a whole different animal, with setup times and fixed facings.

truetanker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4580
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #75 on: 06 December 2017, 18:18:30 »
Well Auto-Rifle (.58 ) is the default Generic... but how many of you make use of Rifle (.14 ) or Ancient AR (.17 )?

Also, WOB also used the Variable Pulse Laser Rifle (.33 range 1 6kg / .3kg (6/1)). SO imagine 36 troopers w/ these and Inferno Grenade Launchers?!?

 }:)

TT
Khan,Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse

That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29129
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #76 on: 06 December 2017, 18:30:19 »
Which book has the TW-scale stats for that? I don't remember seeing it in Tech Manual.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
Battleforce Space is too bulky. I vote we start calling it BattleFace.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4095
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #77 on: 06 December 2017, 19:05:39 »
The A Time of War Companion. And the WoB probably wouldn't use it since the Davions produced the handheld version late in the Jihad.

But here we go. Modern weapon. Damage value of .33. Range of 1. Why not take the Mauser at 3 times the damage, and IIRC, a base range of 2.

truetanker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4580
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #78 on: 06 December 2017, 19:27:43 »
True... was thinking for portability and you could hide it under clothes ala sawed-off style.

Bulk vs Compact.

TT
Khan,Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse

That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4095
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #79 on: 06 December 2017, 19:52:02 »
Eh, it looks kind of bulky, but hard to tell. Only 6kg though, compared to the 1200's 11.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6851
Re: Infantry Support Options
« Reply #80 on: 08 December 2017, 15:52:33 »
Definitely, but I would suggest the problem is too many weapons are too weak and need a buff, rather than any particular weapon needing a nerf.

Challenger
This, next time you see someone complain about infantry swarms point this out to them, if infantry had better damage and range they'd have a higher BV and thus you couldn't buy as many of them for a given BV.