BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

BattleTech Game Systems => General BattleTech Discussion => Topic started by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 02:06:53

Title: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 02:06:53
TRO:3025, in their introduction to Assault Mechs says that there are "very few well designed assault mechs" saying that designers had focused mainly on the classes capabilities in physical combat and seemed to suggest the TRO authors hopes for more effective assault mechs in the future.

Now,  IIRC,  there were about 10 assault mechs listed in TRO: 3025. 

Of these, seven of the ten seemed to be considered good, solid, well conceived and built fighting machines.

The only really "bad" assault mechs were the Charger, Banshee, and probably the Goliath.

So what happened to all the "badly designed" assault mechs that the author seems to imply exist.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Orin J. on 14 January 2012, 02:16:26
Lesse...there's the Zeus which had an AC/5 instead of a PPC in the base design, I can see a lot of people calling that a lemon.

The Cyclops has a lacking ten tons of armor, a feeble ability to strike outside 9 hexes and enough ammo sitting in the torso to make anyone used to post-3050 play downright paranoid of getting blown to kingdom come.

and of course the Victor has no ability to fight outside of 9 hexes at all, with only a smidge more armor that the Cyclops.

TROs are pretty bad about having an instilled in-universe bias, so i'm guessing that the character that wrote that simply had a very low opinion of some of the 'mechs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: sillybrit on 14 January 2012, 02:28:33
Adding to the above, the Atlas isn't exactly a terror, possessing slow speed and only a single weapon able to hit outside of 270 meters.

Even the BattleMaster can be a little scary, with three out of eight of the LT criticals resulting in a boom, and it also had only a single weapon able to hit beyind 270 meters.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Stormfury on 14 January 2012, 02:43:37
Striker, Gargoyle, Executioner, Albatross, Banshee, Tai-Sho, Hatamoto-Chi, Cerberus, Grand Titan, Grand Crusader, Black Watch, Daboku, Mauler, Gunslinger, Longbow, Night Wolf, Ymir, Peacekeeper, Spartan, Berzerker...

While most of those received upgrades that corrected the more glaring deficiencies in design over the years, the base models are pretty insipid.

Not unusable, just poorly thought out and implemented considering the mass and cost of the 'Mechs.

Well-designed assault 'Mechs are the exception to the rule. Even the well-regarded Warhawk is deeply flawed, getting around the problem of so many fixed heat sinks by at least carrying a fair few enegery weapons in each configuration.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 14 January 2012, 03:16:42
Except for punching and kicking, none of the 4/6 assaults do anything that cannot be done cheaper (we are talking about an in-universe source, so c-bills matter) with a 75t heavy.  The Cyclops suffers the additional indignity of the 75t version having more armor.  The 75t Victor has the exact same armor and eight less points of internal structure, a fact useful only to the guy that salvages the wreck.

It is not that the 4/6 assaults are bad mechs, just that they are bad assault mechs
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 14 January 2012, 07:19:56
Isn't the Victor 80t?  Don't ever recall seeing a "heavy" Victor.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: GhostCat on 14 January 2012, 07:23:24
"Over weight, undergunned, too slow, and thin skinned" are the most common complaints of any battlemech, and the Assault Class is the most guilty because these flaws are even more glaring.

In lighter mechs, there is always the excuse that they are too small to have it all, so some trade off must be made.  Many are able to balance these issues without sacrificing too much, but the big mechs have too many fatal flaws that can be exploited by the smaller ones.

The bigger the Target, the faster it Dies.  I'll stay in something half as big and twice as fast, happy to hunt and kill the big bad slow Targets.

GC
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Stormfury on 14 January 2012, 07:46:03
Quote
Isn't the Victor 80t?  Don't ever recall seeing a "heavy" Victor.

It is; rbell's point was that 75 tons allows for a more efficient version.

Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: GhostCat on 14 January 2012, 07:48:39
Isn't the Victor 80t?  Don't ever recall seeing a "heavy" Victor.

If you've never explored the construction rules, you might never see one.  Simply put, use an engine rating of 300 instead of 320, shave a half ton from the internal structure and the weight you save on jump jets alone will be enough to add something interesting.  It still looks like a Victor and performs like one, but now it becomes a "good heavy" instead of a "weak assault" mech.

Quote
The 75t Victor has the exact same armor and eight less points of internal structure, a fact useful only to the guy that salvages the wreck.

There are plenty of designs in all the weight classes that waste weight or space in a similar fashion.  If they were all optimized to perform the same way, they'd all start looking the same, too.  That would be boring.  We don't need a TRO entry for each mech designed to fit in every weight class.

The Dark age will bring us a few interesting items along this line.  The 55 ton Miffed Kitty (MadCat III) will provide much amusement.

GC
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 14 January 2012, 08:49:57
TRO:3025, in their introduction to Assault Mechs says that there are "very few well designed assault mechs" saying that designers had focused mainly on the classes capabilities in physical combat and seemed to suggest the TRO authors hopes for more effective assault mechs in the future.

Now,  IIRC,  there were about 10 assault mechs listed in TRO: 3025. 

Of these, seven of the ten seemed to be considered good, solid, well conceived and built fighting machines.

The only really "bad" assault mechs were the Charger, Banshee, and probably the Goliath.

So what happened to all the "badly designed" assault mechs that the author seems to imply exist.

Let´s look at it...

Awesome and Stalker are very solid designs.

Atlas and BattleMaster are a little short - okay okay, VERY short - on long-range firepower, and the Victor doesn´t have any at all. That sort of thing is forgivable in the Hunchback, because it´s cheap and doesn´t have the mass for good long-range weapons in addition to the short-range punch - but it´s NOT forgivable in an assault-class design. The Atlas at least has the massive armor needed to get close enough for its main weapons, and the LRM-20 cannot be neglected, either.

The Cyclops has all the problems of the Atlas and BattleMaster, with the addition of also having the same armor as the Hunchback (which is little more than half the Cyclops´ weight).

The Zeus okay(ish), but it´s a bit of a "neither this nor that" design - neither the massive long-range firepower of the Awesome, nor the massive short-range firepower of most other assault-class design. Neither good nor bad, I´d say.

The Goliath lacks effective short-range weapons, and has the firing arc problems that all quads share - though that usually isn´t a great problem at long range. Its long-range firepower isn´t great, either, but still better at 16-21 hexes than any stock assault other than the Awesome.

The Charger and Banshee... the less said, the better. Now, the BNC-3S, that´s a great design on par with the Awesome and Stalker, though.

So, we have 2 terrible designs (stock Charger and Banshee), 3 problematic designs (Cyclops, BattleMaster, Victor), 3 useful designs (Zeus, Goliath, Atlas) and 2 very good designs (Awesome, Stalker).

Compare that to the heavies, where there are three terrible designs (JagerMech, Bombardier, Rifleman) out of more than twice as many models - and these three are not nearly as terrible, relative to the others, as the Charger and Banshee.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: guardiandashi on 14 January 2012, 08:59:12
nitpick the weight ranges for jump jets are 20-55, 60-85, 90-100

so the 75 tonner isn't actually saving any weight on the jump jets vs an 80 or 85 tonner they will save some weight on the engine however

there are some weights that work out to be more efficient however

to go with the "where are the well designed" assault mechs question I would argue there are 3 reasonably well designed assault mechs in the origional 3025

#1 on that list would have to be the awesome its only "real flaw" in my opinion is the limited speed 3/5/0
#2 is a tossup but I would likely have to go with the battlemaster, its not that it doesn't have issues but it is a fair design at range but it is really designed for short to medium range fighting
#3 IMO would have to be an atlas granted its long range firepower is somewhat lacking (for a mech of its size) and I really wish it had 1 more ton of lrm ammo but all in all it isn't as bad as a lot of people like to imply.

the horrible mechs for assaults IMO are
charger way too fast
banshee (base model)
stalker way too many weapons
the cyclops's biggest issues are its lack of armor and limited long range firepower
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Diamondshark on 14 January 2012, 09:23:50
IMO, the Stalker is the single best Assault mech. Yes, it has a crazy number of weapons, but if you learn to bracket fire them, there is a clear set of weapons for every range. It possesses a flexibility unrivaled by any other Battlemech in the era. It has indirect long-range weapons to keep distant targets honest, hole-punching medium-range weapons, and critseeking close-range weapons. As much as I've experimented with modifying the design, at that tech level the most you are going to get by modifying it is a trade-off.

The other best is the Awesome. It's like an early Hellstar.

Another honorable mention is the Atlas. Yes, it has poor ranged firepower, but it has unrivaled armor, and close-ranged firepower. Isn't there also a configuration with medium-ranged weapons based off the Atlas II?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 14 January 2012, 10:20:52
Just to point something out, when the Helm core is recovered and (slightly) more advanced components are available, how many of those 'crappy' designs suddenly become All-Stars?  The Charger gets an XL and suddenly it can mount some firepower, the Atlas gains a Gauss rifle and can be a long range killer and a beast up close.

The 'failed' assaults of 3025 are simply a product of the limitations of their tech base.  I'd take an Atlas over a Mackie-5S any day. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: guardiandashi on 14 January 2012, 10:42:32
you also have upgrades that are "lousy" that make you go what the heck were they smoking and where can I get some

one of my personal what the heck "upgrades" is the battlemaster one
now upgrading from a std ppc to an er ppc is pretty good, and dhs is great... but IMO it really doesn't need ALL 18 DHS it could stand to shave a few dhs and either add a second ppc, or add on even more close in firepower

example on the 3m battlemaster 1 full ton of ammo for 1 machine gun is beyond silly it is crazy, cut the mg ammo to 0.5 tons and put the second mg back on, usually 15 rounds of srm ammo should be plenty pull the second ton and 1 dhs and mount 2 more medium lasers or something or add the 1 ton of std armor its missing etc

the atlas could have been so much more effective with DHS etc
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 10:50:46
Since I was asking about assault mechs, isn't there a Clan Battlemaster that is five tons heavier (90) than the original and had a combat value rating higher than most omnimechs even?

I'm not talking about the Star League Royal Battlemaster or whatever it was called that mounted an all energy weapons battery.   Doubled ERPPCs,  large pulse laser et cetera.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Moonsword on 14 January 2012, 11:08:34
No.  The older Clan 90 ton standard 'Mechs are the Highlander IIC and the Supernova.  The Highlander IIC is their version of the Highlander and the Supernova has much more of a resemblance to a King Crab than it ever will to a BattleMaster.  The Mad Cat Mk. II, Onager, and Night Wolf aren't related to the design, either.

Are you thinking of the Reseen BattleMaster C built on Pandora after the Falcons captured it or the mixed-tech variant used by the Red Corsair?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Martius on 14 January 2012, 11:10:45
Since I was asking about assault mechs, isn't there a Clan Battlemaster that is five tons heavier (90) than the original and had a combat value rating higher than most omnimechs even?

No, not in any canon source I know about. The Battlemaster C (build by the JFs) still has 85t. The Battlemaster the Red Corsair used was mixed tech one (found in OTP The red Corsair).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 14 January 2012, 11:53:21
TROs are pretty bad about having an instilled in-universe bias, so i'm guessing that the character that wrote that simply had a very low opinion of some of the 'mechs.
Yes. J. Edgar Hovertank is prime example here: TRO3026 calls it bad hovertank, but in TRO3039 it is perfect recon vehicle.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 12:02:08
No, not in any canon source I know about. The Battlemaster C (build by the JFs) still has 85t. The Battlemaster the Red Corsair used was mixed tech one (found in OTP The red Corsair).

The little magazine called "Mechforce" IIRC that used to come out had all the combat value of the various mechs and configurations (in the case of Omnis) listed.

The highest listed regular IS mech was the Berserker (obviously this was just after TRO:3055).

The highest listed mech of all was the Widowmaker configuration of the Daishi.

All I remember was a Battlemaster (possibly called a Battlemaster IIC) that was listed as 90 tons, and had a combat value just short of a Dashi primary.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Jal Phoenix on 14 January 2012, 12:11:32
Yes, the Battlemaster IIC from MECH issue 10.  Scary was a good word for it.  90 tons, 4/6/4 2 ER PPC, six ER ML firing forward and two Streak 6. Oh, and 21 DHS.   
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 14 January 2012, 12:45:56
IMO, the Stalker is the single best Assault mech. Yes, it has a crazy number of weapons, but if you learn to bracket fire them, there is a clear set of weapons for every range. It possesses a flexibility unrivaled by any other Battlemech in the era. It has indirect long-range weapons to keep distant targets honest, hole-punching medium-range weapons, and critseeking close-range weapons. As much as I've experimented with modifying the design, at that tech level the most you are going to get by modifying it is a trade-off.

One man´s "crazy number of weapons" is the other´s "good firepower over all ranges".
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Centurion13 on 14 January 2012, 13:06:30
TRO:3025, in their introduction to Assault Mechs says that there are "very few well designed assault mechs" saying that designers had focused mainly on the classes capabilities in physical combat and seemed to suggest the TRO authors hopes for more effective assault mechs in the future.

So what happened to all the "badly designed" assault mechs that the author seems to imply exist.

The book was written back in 1989-1990.  The authors might have intended a later fleshing-out of poorer designs that never happened.  The books were just getting started and they may still have thought folks would pay to read about sub-standard designs.  Of course, many TROs ended up being filled with good designs and as that sold books, plans changed. 

It seems the only real place for less-capable machines that are essentially a footnote in history is: as a footnote (or fluff bit) in a TRO.  I am not surprised they get no more mention. 

Short answer: either the writer of that particular piece of TRO:3025 misspoke - or it is unrealistic to expect the company to devote more than a few paragraphs to failed designs in nearly thirty years of gaming materials. 

Take your pick.

Cent13   
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 14 January 2012, 13:51:26
Just to point something out, when the Helm core is recovered and (slightly) more advanced components are available, how many of those 'crappy' designs suddenly become All-Stars?  The Charger gets an XL and suddenly it can mount some firepower, the Atlas gains a Gauss rifle and can be a long range killer and a beast up close.


This is most telling for the 4/6 assaults.  Even IS ferro-fibrous is enough to push the sweet spot for 4/6 mechs to 85 tons.  Endosteel solidly plunks 4/6 assaults as more heavily armed and armored than 4/6 heavies.  Adding an XL engine pushes things to the point that the max payload for a 4/6 mech is 95t.  A Charger with a 400XLFE and endosteel may be on the sweetspot for 5/8 mechs (need to doublecheck).

The Stalker is a sweet machine for learning the game.  It has manageable heat problems and a weapons suite that screams 'This is how you bracket fire!'.  By admitting that staying heat neutral is not the be all and end all of mech design, it has the appropriate weapons for whatever the range to the target-- at the cost of speed.  While I am not going to say that it is the best balance of weapons heatsinks and armor, it is hard to design a larger assault that works the same way and adds a useful amount of weapons.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 14 January 2012, 15:13:02
No, not in any canon source I know about. The Battlemaster C (build by the JFs) still has 85t.
And then is BLR-1C from novel Heir to the Dragon which is described having Cockpit Command Console (not called such in the novel though). Do we have canon (or ANY) statistics for that?

As for TRO3025 claim about majority of assaults being bad designs, it could also mean those ones that were left out of that particular TRO: King Crab, Xanthos and whatnot.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Martius on 14 January 2012, 15:23:14
And then is BLR-1C from novel Heir to the Dragon which is described having Cockpit Command Console (not called such in the novel though). Do we have canon (or ANY) statistics for that?.

BLR-1G-DC is in RS 3039u (pg 501). It is a variant with a Command Console.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 14 January 2012, 17:19:50
Of course the stalker is incredibly flawed in that it looks like a turd on legs (literally).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: LordChaos on 14 January 2012, 18:27:31
Now,  IIRC,  there were about 10 assault mechs listed in TRO: 3025. 

Of these, seven of the ten seemed to be considered good, solid, well conceived and built fighting machines.

The only really "bad" assault mechs were the Charger, Banshee, and probably the Goliath.

So what happened to all the "badly designed" assault mechs that the author seems to imply exist.

Well, from my point of view, those "badly designed assault mechs" are right there in front of you.  The only good assault mechs are the Awesome, Stalker, and Atlas (though I don't like the Atlas).  There are 2 really bad assault class mechs (charger and banshee).  All the others are "meh".  They are nothing more then heavies (because they play exactly like heavies) that need a diet.  An assault mech should have capacities that lesser mechs can't come close to matching... and none of the 4/6 moving assaults in 3025 can do that.

That's my personal opinion of course...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nibs on 14 January 2012, 18:34:29
Remember, while we can look at the statistics for assault 'Mechs with our TROs, an actual in-universe examination doesn't have the same. Yes, technicians in that world can also look at armour and weapons, but there may be other facets, quirks, and implications beyond the stats. Maybe the unit just doesn't work as well as the stats imply. There are those 'Mechs that have fluff that portray them as poorly designed or performing, despite some of us who say that they are fine. It depends on an in-universe thought.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 14 January 2012, 18:51:45
Charger has been the only mech I would call a out right failure.
Berzerker...
I respectfully disagree, you just need to be in the mind frame of a axe murderer to use it properly >:D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Rorke on 14 January 2012, 20:44:33
It's all a matter of preference, that and working with whatever you have.

There's a ELH Thunderbolt variant from 3050 for example, on paper it looks
relatively rubbish.  In practice i found it usually superb, and insanely solid.

But i digress, half the beauty of the game is in triumphing with whatever you
can get/or can legitimately field.  People seldom remember that, it seems many
people think only in terms of raw power or flaws that they percieve.

More fool them.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 20:59:56
The 3025 assault mechs to me for the most part aside from the Awesome and Stalker don't seem to have any particular role in mind.   They're just loaded with whatever variety of weapons the designer fancied.

While I was fond of the Victor for its "more humanoid" look,  it did look hideously underarmed for my taste.     

I think you can't really consider the later variants of the Charger and Banshee as even being the same mech because in many ways, they are completely different aside from the basic external structures.

I've got a question regarding assault mechs and I'll bring it up here instead of starting another thread.

A common thought of mine is "how many energy weapons does an assault mech need to have to make it worth keeping in a battle?"

I know that it was said about the King Crab was that despite having its large laser,  once it ran out of AC ammunition that it was best to retire from the battle.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 14 January 2012, 21:27:43
I think one of the problems with assault mechs of the era (leaving the Banshee and Charger out of it, since they're *designed* to be crappy by having way too big of an engine for the frame), is that they don't take advantage of the AC10 enough.  It's a weapon that gains a lot as you approach your heat sink limit, and can make it difficult for light mechs to rush you (due to no minimum range) or 5/8 or 4/6 mechs from staying outside the range for an AC20.  Give me a Victor, Atlas, or Banshee with an AC10 and a few other upgrades instead of the AC20, and you're looking at a really solid "mid range brawler" as the AC10 in particular can work well with both the LRM20 and the shorter range complement on the Atlas, for example.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 14 January 2012, 21:30:40
I think one of the problems with assault mechs of the era (leaving the Banshee and Charger out of it, since they're *designed* to be crappy by having way too big of an engine for the frame), is that they don't take advantage of the AC10 enough.  It's a weapon that gains a lot as you approach your heat sink limit, and can make it difficult for light mechs to rush you (due to no minimum range) or 5/8 or 4/6 mechs from staying outside the range for an AC20.  Give me a Victor, Atlas, or Banshee with an AC10 and a few other upgrades instead of the AC20, and you're looking at a really solid "mid range brawler" as the AC10 in particular can work well with both the LRM20 and the shorter range complement on the Atlas, for example.

Good point.

I think there was a real tendency to put the "really big cannon" on the assault mechs of that era (Atlas, Victor, Cyclops) rather than look at more common sense options.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 14 January 2012, 21:40:39
Good point.

I think there was a real tendency to put the "really big cannon" on the assault mechs of that era (Atlas, Victor, Cyclops) rather than look at more common sense options.
Best way I made sense of this was that the machines where geared to close quarters City fighting during the 1st-2ed SW, why cities where being nuked in the first place.

In realty, it was just a big mech= big guns formula
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 14 January 2012, 22:00:29
Here is the Atlas AS7-D done right (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,15066.0.html)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 14 January 2012, 22:12:33
The Striker wasn't all that hot, either. A contemporary of the Banshee, it's write-up didn't show up until half a dozen TROs later.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 14 January 2012, 22:17:20
The Striker wasn't all that hot, either. A contemporary of the Banshee, it's write-up didn't show up until half a dozen TROs later.

Looking at it, I'd say it's a really decent 80-tonner.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 14 January 2012, 22:27:33
Looking at it, I'd say it's a really decent 80-tonner.

Its all subjective.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 14 January 2012, 22:39:53
Its all subjective.

Well, I think people expect too much out of any mech labeled "assault mech."  The Striker is pretty comparable in capability to intro-tech 75 tonners, and since it is only 5 tons more this should really be the expectation.  To be clear, I'm looking at the -2S variant in SSW, and it seems like it's pretty capable at medium and short ranges, fairly heat efficient, decently armored, its ammo is well crit-packed, and doesn't waste any space with the rear-firing weapons that plague intro-tech designs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 14 January 2012, 22:51:57
It's all a matter of preference, that and working with whatever you have.

There's a ELH Thunderbolt variant from 3050 for example, on paper it looks
relatively rubbish.  In practice i found it usually superb, and insanely solid.

But i digress, half the beauty of the game is in triumphing with whatever you
can get/or can legitimately field.  People seldom remember that, it seems many
people think only in terms of raw power or flaws that they percieve.

More fool them.

Well said.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Orin J. on 15 January 2012, 00:05:47
One man´s "crazy number of weapons" is the other´s "good firepower over all ranges".

and a third's "I will alpha strike your 'mech so hard it vaporizes!"  :D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Stormfury on 15 January 2012, 02:18:22
Quote
Well, I think people expect too much out of any mech labeled "assault mech."

I think it has less to do with that and more to do with looking at the 'Mech and its cost in mass, BV, or C-Bills as compared to what it actually brings to the table. Particularly when you put it beside the better-designed machines in the class, even at that era.

The Striker or Charger, and even the "improved" Charger in the Hatamoto-Chi, for example, are up against the Awesome in 3025.

One of those designs is clearly making good use of the available technologies, and it's not the Charger.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Demos on 15 January 2012, 02:27:28
Here is the Atlas AS7-D done right (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,15066.0.html)
You need to take a look at the canon AS7-RS. Supports your petition for AC/10, but I like the additional two LL more than your ML battery.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 15 January 2012, 05:43:27
I think it has less to do with that and more to do with looking at the 'Mech and its cost in mass, BV, or C-Bills as compared to what it actually brings to the table. Particularly when you put it beside the better-designed machines in the class, even at that era.



If you're balancing by mass (which is a horrible idea anyways) the Striker is not much different than a Marauder -3D, but has significantly more armor, similar firepower, and better physicals.  Balancing by BV the Striker -2S is similar to the Warhammer 6D or the Marauder 3D, with similar firepower, better physicals, and slightly less armor than the Warhammer, and because the AC10 is so much more heat efficient than PPCs, a pretty similar heat curve. Sure, it costs significantly more C-bills, but if you're not playing a game that cares (which I often do, and I'm sure many others do as well), it is very similarly costed to mechs with similar capabilities, despite those mechs being on one side of the arbitrary 80-ton line.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 15 January 2012, 06:12:33
Balancing by tonnage is for quick and dirty pick-up games.

Balancing by BV is more for tournaments.

C-Bill cost only seems to come into it during campaigns.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: BlazingSky on 15 January 2012, 06:20:13
Good point.

I think there was a real tendency to put the "really big cannon" on the assault mechs of that era (Atlas, Victor, Cyclops) rather than look at more common sense options.

You've apparently never encountered a military full of lobbyists and procurement offices promised wunder waffen. Just because it "doesn't make sense" for these armies to put units into production that obviously shouldn't have been (The original Charger and Banshee, spring, nay leap to mind) doesn't mean someone didn't throw a good pitch to the Quartermaster Corps, or caught a procurement officer while he was totally blitzed and got him to sign a bunch of orders for a mech.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 15 January 2012, 12:17:00
I think it has less to do with that and more to do with looking at the 'Mech and its cost in mass, BV, or C-Bills as compared to what it actually brings to the table. Particularly when you put it beside the better-designed machines in the class, even at that era.

Well yeah.  If you're constantly playing people who have to field nothing but the best variants of course the "crappy" variants are going to look bad.  If someone spams the good stuff you have to do the same thing or you will be bitter about them.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 15 January 2012, 13:43:06
Well yeah.  If you're constantly playing people who have to field nothing but the best variants of course the "crappy" variants are going to look bad.  If someone spams the good stuff you have to do the same thing or you will be bitter about them.

Or you could just use BV2 :D I know it's not perfect, but it lets you take the cappy stuff without being at a huge disadvantage, generally.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Danger UXO on 15 January 2012, 15:04:36
Of course the stalker is incredibly flawed in that it looks like a turd on legs (literally).

We used to call it the Homewrecker in my group...

IMHO you're absolutely correct though, other than its appearance the Stalker is a great assault machine in the Succession Wars era.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: snewsom2997 on 15 January 2012, 18:40:15
Here is the way I kook at it, the SL would have had regiments upon regiments of Long Range specialists designs, Archer, Longbow, Rifleman, Bombardier, Galahad. Designs like the Altas, Battlemaster, Victor, and other designs with sparse long range weaponry would be supported. Battlemechs were designed to be composes of at companies. Not the Lance on Lance play that most players do. When you have a Company of Atlases, and a Company of Archers, it makes more sense, while you can get sort of the same effect by 1 Atlas and 1 Archer, it isn't quite the same. So most designs are specialized in one way or another and crippled in one way or another. The Cyclops was a command mech, not intended to wade in the midst of battle so it sacrificed armor for comms equipment. Also in my opinion pre SW that DHS were the front line standard, and not SHS, that alone fixes almost all problems in 3025 mechs, with few notable examples, Charger cannot be fixed without XL Engines, and in my opinion quad designs are more suited 60 tons or less because of space restrictions. The Atlas was designed to wade into battle, and can shoot on its way there with its LRM, the Stalker and Awesome are the best 3025 Stock Assault Mechs, with the Battlemaster near the top. But take into account these were the Mad Max Mechs from Pre Core, and post 3rd SW, Not the Star League versions, which would have been the standard at manufacture, not after 250 years of war. Most of the 3025 mechs would have been in militias at the time of the Star League, These are Reunification Wars Designs for the most Part, but the 2750, 3050, and 3055 mechs would have been in front line units House, and House SL Units.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 15 January 2012, 19:03:03
I think the early assault mech designers much have figured that assault class machines would be prone to engage in physical attacks.

Because they have two fully manipulative hands on the Atlas,  Battlemaster,  Cyclops,  Banshee, and Charger and one on the Victor.     I think the Zeus and Awesome have what amounts to fists for punching as well.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 15 January 2012, 19:09:36
The Zeus, no but the Awesome 8q did have a battlefist/clubfist

There is a great pick of a Zeus face to face Hunchback, to bad I can't find the pick anywhere.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 15 January 2012, 19:10:43
the charger is missing a hand actuator for basically no reason as well.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 15 January 2012, 19:13:00
The Zeus, no but the Awesome 8q did have a battlefist/clubfist

There is a great pick of a Zeus face to face Hunchback, to bad I can't find the pick anywhere.

I was thinking about the "armored core" on the Zeus's hand that sticks out ahead of the LRM-15 tubes.   According to TRO:3025 it is supposed to be used for "bludgeoning" smaller mechs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 15 January 2012, 20:22:26
I was thinking about the "armored core" on the Zeus's hand that sticks out ahead of the LRM-15 tubes.   According to TRO:3025 it is supposed to be used for "bludgeoning" smaller mechs.

While nice writing, the rules are no different from any other 'Mech without a hand actuator.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Orin J. on 15 January 2012, 20:39:57
I think the Zeus and Awesome have what amounts to fists for punching as well.

Zeus has  that club thing that's just treated as a normal fist in the rules, but the Awesome has one of the rare clamp-looking manipulators.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: daeceg on 16 January 2012, 01:30:11
The Zeus, no but the Awesome 8q did have a battlefist/clubfist

There is a great pick of a Zeus face to face Hunchback, to bad I can't find the pick anywhere.

The original fluff for the Zeus mentions the LRM-15 is mounted back on the core to allow the Zeus to engage in physical combat without damaging the launch tubes.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 16 January 2012, 01:39:15
Like the battering rams that were supposed to slide down over the Behemoth's lasers, they don't have any in game effect.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 16 January 2012, 06:11:31
They look good in the fluff.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 16 January 2012, 08:42:13
I think one of the problems with assault mechs of the era (leaving the Banshee and Charger out of it, since they're *designed* to be crappy by having way too big of an engine for the frame), is that they don't take advantage of the AC10 enough.  It's a weapon that gains a lot as you approach your heat sink limit, and can make it difficult for light mechs to rush you (due to no minimum range) or 5/8 or 4/6 mechs from staying outside the range for an AC20.  Give me a Victor, Atlas, or Banshee with an AC10 and a few other upgrades instead of the AC20, and you're looking at a really solid "mid range brawler" as the AC10 in particular can work well with both the LRM20 and the shorter range complement on the Atlas, for example.

You make a good point. See, for example the Banshee -3S - in my opinion, it´s right up there with the Awesome and Stalker as the holy trinity of well-designed assaults.

I think it is the misfortune of the AC/10 that, in many designers´ minds, it falls victim to the "for just two more tons I can get twice the firepower" lure of the AC/20.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MadCapellan on 16 January 2012, 08:42:36
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. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 16 January 2012, 13:43:19
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?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 16 January 2012, 14:43:39
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).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Diamondshark on 16 January 2012, 14:47:06
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).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 16 January 2012, 14:54:16
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Orin J. on 16 January 2012, 15:00:24
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 16 January 2012, 15:02:39
Large Lasers also have good range for the era. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 16 January 2012, 15:06:38
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?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Diamondshark on 16 January 2012, 15:15:57
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 16 January 2012, 15:17:20
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 16 January 2012, 15:29:31
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 16 January 2012, 15:31:26
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?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 16 January 2012, 15:36:11
No, they'd be heavies. Maybe bump "medium" up to include 60-tonners, as they work well for 5/8 movement.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 16 January 2012, 15:38:40
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". (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,15122.0.html)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 16 January 2012, 15:38:56
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hellraiser on 16 January 2012, 15:39:14
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 16 January 2012, 15:44:53
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hellraiser on 16 January 2012, 15:49:16
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.

Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 17 January 2012, 05:50:53
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 17 January 2012, 07:28:20
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 17 January 2012, 09:41:37
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...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: JPArbiter on 17 January 2012, 09:53:11
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: snewsom2997 on 17 January 2012, 11:48:11
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 17 January 2012, 11:51:38
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MadCapellan on 17 January 2012, 12:08:54
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 17 January 2012, 12:27:27
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.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 17 January 2012, 12:29:20
And heatsinks.

More armor, more heatsinks, and jump jets... that's actually bringing a lot "to the table."
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 17 January 2012, 12:34:48
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?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 17 January 2012, 12:58:43
"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).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 17 January 2012, 13:26:58
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 ;)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Lorcan Nagle on 17 January 2012, 14:15:21
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?

The official explanation was gratitude on the part of the Dragoons for Colonels Miller and later Barber helping them out while they rebuilt from Misery and the 4th Succession War.  But I like that alternative :D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: va_wanderer on 17 January 2012, 14:26:58
the charger is missing a hand actuator for basically no reason as well.

For much the same reason as it packs that piddling small laser array rather than at least a pair of mediums- to encourage people NOT to fight in it.

Go in, get the recon, trust in your decent armor and heavy internal structure to take the hits, get out. Yes, it's the 80-ton recon 'Mech. If you're doing anything but charging out of there, you're doing it wrong in the Charger user's manual. :)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: JPArbiter on 17 January 2012, 14:29:54
The official explanation was gratitude on the part of the Dragoons for Colonels Miller and later Barber helping them out while they rebuilt from Misery and the 4th Succession War.  But I like that alternative :D

the point is that Miller/Barber's Marauders was one of the most awesome Merc Units around simply for being an entire battalion of 75/100 ton identical mechs
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 17 January 2012, 14:42:44
The official explanation was gratitude on the part of the Dragoons for Colonels Miller and later Barber helping them out while they rebuilt from Misery and the 4th Succession War.  But I like that alternative :D

Specifically,  Miller's Marauders loaned Zeta Battalion the dropships that allowed the hastily rebuilt Zeta Battalion (rebuilt with mechs and pilots from other crippled Dragoon units) to rescue what was left of the Dragoons on the final planet where they made their stand against multiple regiments of the Draconis Combine.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Banzai on 17 January 2012, 15:03:09
Yes, at Crossing.  Per the 4th War Atlas, it was a secret loan, and Jamison rented a ride from a shipping company.  FedComEx to the rescue...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 18 January 2012, 03:30:46
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...

Actually, my thought lines are perfect for a Clanner. They believe in taking the perfect mix of force to achieve their objective, the best clanners can simply do it with less and, having the odds stacked against them, still walk away with the victory. To do this, you need to choose the units best suited to the combat environment, not weaker than necessary units. I reiterate my previous point: If you don't win, you don't win, doesn't matter that you took under optimised units to the battle.

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.

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).

Agree one hundred percent, non optimal designs require more skill, or luck, than optimised designs. I find it pretty amusing the concept that an Awesome or Stalker are optimised, they aren't. The MadCat was optimised, good speed, good armour, and massive fire power. Runs a bit hot, but otherwise capable of being where you want it, when you want it.

Awesomes and Stalkers are great at what they do, but they are limited by slow speed, and heat issues. You need to know how to play them well to get the most out of them. The good thing about them, is that you can play one poorly, and still be quite effective. They are great trainers, but even an Awesome or Stalker will still fall to a superior player.

I would actually say that know when to not take any given design, including your favourites, is a sign of a good player, not winning with sub optimal designs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 18 January 2012, 04:07:21
Some people don't care about factional accuracy when playing.
They should.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 18 January 2012, 04:52:29
They should.

Why?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 18 January 2012, 05:52:29
Why?
Because.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: ANS Kamas P81 on 18 January 2012, 06:08:53
Because.
Really?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 18 January 2012, 06:09:53
Really?
Sure.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greyhind on 18 January 2012, 06:30:58
Sure.
Awesome.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 18 January 2012, 08:36:03
Awesome.
Nah. I'm not a fan of the Awesome.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Diamondshark on 18 January 2012, 08:43:00
Really?

yes
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 18 January 2012, 09:17:17
yes

Are not.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Banzai on 18 January 2012, 09:25:18
Because.

I've had this conversation with my 6-year old.  It ends badly...  :D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greywind on 18 January 2012, 10:20:49
I've had this conversation with my 6-year old.  It ends badly...  :D
That may be true, but when the question is 'why', the only valid answer is 'because.'
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Charlie Tango on 18 January 2012, 11:20:16
 [copper]

Ahem.

Back towards the topic please.

/  [copper]
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 18 January 2012, 13:09:37

Agree one hundred percent, non optimal designs require more skill, or luck, than optimised designs. I find it pretty amusing the concept that an Awesome or Stalker are optimised, they aren't. The MadCat was optimised, good speed, good armour, and massive fire power. Runs a bit hot, but otherwise capable of being where you want it, when you want it.



Apples to oranges.  Redesign the MadCat with only inner sphere tech available in the intro box rules, and then tell me its optimised.  Keeping the speed requires removing most of the weapons/armor.  Keeping the two LRM20's requires losing most of the lasers.  You are looking at a 4/6 mech with two LRM10's, 2LL, 3ML, and serious heat issues.  It can run from a Stalker, but it needs luck to kill one and is no better than many IS 75t heavies.

It takes some work to design a crappy clan mech.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 13:15:51
Like the Fire Scorpion?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 18 January 2012, 13:22:29
Apples to oranges.  Redesign the MadCat with only inner sphere tech available in the intro box rules, and then tell me its optimised.  Keeping the speed requires removing most of the weapons/armor.  Keeping the two LRM20's requires losing most of the lasers.  You are looking at a 4/6 mech with two LRM10's, 2LL, 3ML, and serious heat issues.  It can run from a Stalker, but it needs luck to kill one and is no better than many IS 75t heavies.

It takes some work to design a crappy clan mech.

But even in the context of SW-era IS designs, a 100-ton Awesome would do the same job better than the 85-ton awesome, so it's not really "optimized."
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 13:24:43
Hey, instead of all this circular argument about optimization when it's pretty clear that different people mean different things, let's actually hammer down some criteria for what counts as optimization vs not optimization.

I think the conversation might become a little more productive.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 18 January 2012, 13:30:57
Eh, but even that is a place where people will disagree.

I guess for me "optimized" means: has the most tonnage leftover for for weapons/armor/equipment after purchasing its engine *for the desired mobility.*

So for pre-XL engines:

35 tons 8/12 speed

40 tons 7/11 speed

45/50 tons 6/9 speed

55 tons 5/8/5

60 tons 5/8

75-85 tons 4/6

100 tons 3/5

That being said, I don't suffer under any illusion that a mech needs to be "optimized" in order to be useable, or even good.  In fact, I would say that the Awesome is very good, but not "optimized" because a design with the same weaponry and same movement could be made better.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 18 January 2012, 13:51:48
As for Stalker being best and most optimized assault 'Mech, I know few cases where it has lost to Atlas.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 18 January 2012, 13:59:17
But even in the context of SW-era IS designs, a 100-ton Awesome would do the same job better than the 85-ton awesome, so it's not really "optimized."

The 85t Awesome probably has a better ratios of PPC's/ton, PPC's/c-bill, and PPC's/BV2.  Getting a fourth PPC onto a mech requires dropping the speed even lower and precludes mounting much thicker armor.  In a tonnage balanced game, or even  BV2 balanced game, the 100t 3/5, 3 PPC mech does not bring much extra to justify its additional cost.  I have found that a 3/5 assault that emulates the Stalker on a 100t frame does not add much, besides a lot of armor.

As for Stalker being best and most optimized assault 'Mech, I know few cases where it has lost to Atlas.

The Atlas is a niche mech, and "Abandone hope, yee who enter here" is all that can be said of other mechs that enter that niche while the Atlas is home.  Any mech surprised by an Atlas while within the Bubble of Doom deserves all that it gets.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 18 January 2012, 14:07:56
The 85t Awesome probably has a better ratios of PPC's/ton, PPC's/c-bill, and PPC's/BV2. 

I don't know of any 85 ton Awesomes...are you guys talking about the 80 ton one?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 14:12:36
No, they've moved on to hypothetical mechs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: elizibar on 18 January 2012, 14:28:36
No, they've moved on to hypothetical mechs.

The best kind.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: rlbell on 18 January 2012, 14:32:01
I don't know of any 85 ton Awesomes...are you guys talking about the 80 ton one?

My bad.  Good thing that I never waxed poetic about the virtues of the 80t Stalker.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Thatguybil on 18 January 2012, 14:50:39
No, they've moved on to hypothetical mechs.

I just laughed so hard at that line that i may have hurt myself.

 O0
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kit deSummersville on 18 January 2012, 15:09:30
My bad.  Good thing that I never waxed poetic about the virtues of the 80t Stalker.

There are some 75 (or 70?) ton Stalkers....
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 15:29:55
Well, from my point of view, those "badly designed assault mechs" are right there in front of you.  The only good assault mechs are the Awesome, Stalker, and Atlas (though I don't like the Atlas).  There are 2 really bad assault class mechs (charger and banshee).  All the others are "meh".  They are nothing more then heavies (because they play exactly like heavies) that need a diet.  An assault mech should have capacities that lesser mechs can't come close to matching... and none of the 4/6 moving assaults in 3025 can do that.

That's my personal opinion of course...

IIRC, the BNC-3E is capable of something that no other TRO 3025 era heavy is capable of.

Alpha striking and punching in the same turn on a heavily armored 4/6 chassis.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Downslide on 18 January 2012, 15:37:48
Not much of an "Alpha Strike," as it stands.

That being said, my "Against the Bot" campaign company leader is a Banshee 3E driver, and he's been quite successful at slugging people's heads off.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: BlazingSky on 18 January 2012, 16:19:24
That being said, my "Against the Bot" campaign company leader is a Banshee 3E driver, and he's been quite successful at slugging people's heads off.

If you use the creative ignorance of the rules that my group does, you can violence people with up to 45 tons of a mech! (Namely the misreading of the "Heavy Lifting" Piloting Ability in AToW to mean that a mech could lift 50% of it's total mass... It's far more hilarious that way)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 17:15:24
Not much of an "Alpha Strike," as it stands.

That being said, my "Against the Bot" campaign company leader is a Banshee 3E driver, and he's been quite successful at slugging people's heads off.

I will say that the BNC-3E's well known weapon deficiency and the fact that it's not a CGR-1A1 make quite a few players dismiss it out of hand. The bargain basement BV (for an assault) is just icing on the cake.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 18 January 2012, 17:51:52
IIRC, the BNC-3E is capable of something that no other TRO 3025 era heavy is capable of.

Alpha striking and punching in the same turn on a heavily armored 4/6 chassis.

You are aware that there are light mechs, at 1/3 the weight and price, that can deliver a stronger Alpha strike that the BNC-3E?

My mercs are currently fielding a single BNC-3E, and so far, it´s capable of no more than being an outsized, poorly designed medium Mech. Any decently designed heavy is preferable to the Banshee.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 18:05:55
You are aware that there are light mechs, at 1/3 the weight and price, that can deliver a stronger Alpha strike that the BNC-3E?

My mercs are currently fielding a single BNC-3E, and so far, it´s capable of no more than being an outsized, poorly designed medium Mech. Any decently designed heavy is preferable to the Banshee.

The strength of the BNC-3E isn't only the damage output of its alpha strike, it is also the huge potential for significant close range damage (on the punch table!) and the armor to see that it actually could survive an attempt to close and capitalize on said potential. TRO 3025 era light 'Mech chassis may have the speed to get into a position to get to point blank range, but they don't have the potential for such significant close range punch table damage that the BNC-3E does.

It's not that the BNC-3E is the paragon of efficiency, but rather that it is more uses in combat than the WorkMech that some claim it is. I guess it shouldn't be a surprise that it isn't a popular 'Mech, given the presence of an AC/5. ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 18:08:35
I'd much rather have a Banshee 3M or 3MC than the 3E.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 18:14:04
I'd much rather have a Banshee 3M or 3MC than the 3E.

I think I'd rather have a 3Q than a 3E, because the modification emphasizes what a Banshee should be doing...making other slow long ranged adversaries worry about the closing short ranged assault, rather than on taking out MY long ranged fire. ;)

Of course, my memory's a bit vague about how much ammo the 3Q actually has, but I'm assuming 10 or more shots. ;P

I mean, if you're trying to stay at range for a PPC duel with a WHM-6R, then yeah, the BNC-3E sucks, but partially because one of the BNC-3E's strengths is being completely ignored.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: LordChaos on 18 January 2012, 18:25:11
Nightlord, you will never be a Clansman then. 


You say that as if it is a bad thing... not everyone wants to be clan.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 18:30:43
I think I'd rather have a 3Q than a 3E, because the modification emphasizes what a Banshee should be doing...making other slow long ranged adversaries worry about the closing short ranged assault, rather than on taking out MY long ranged fire. ;)

I mean, if you're trying to stay at range for a PPC duel with a WHM-6R, then yeah, the BNC-3E sucks, but partially because one of the BNC-3E's strengths is being completely ignored.

In theory, but the lack of range really hurts it, as does the lack of any secondary weaponry.  It's got good armor, but not good enough to withstand the level of punishment that it can expect to receive when the other side sees it coming.

You say that as if it is a bad thing... not everyone wants to be clan.

He also seems to have the Clans confused with Cassie Suthorn.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 18:43:11
In theory, but the lack of range really hurts it, as does the lack of any secondary weaponry.  It's got good armor, but not good enough to withstand the level of punishment that it can expect to receive when the other side sees it coming.

I'm working on the assumption that I'm playing in a two vs. two or four vs. four game with some kind of balancing metric in place, 4-6 canon mapsheets, tech levels are roughly even, and the opposition doesn't have gunnery better than 3 or 4.

In my experience, games with those kind of restrictions tend to devolve into short range slugfests, because the TNs for long ranged attacks suck so much AND because it's rare to have LOS even close to the maximum range of 3025 era long ranged weaponry on canon mapsheets.

I mean, sure, if the BNC-3Q is stuck in clear terrain, with LOS of 50 hexes being extremely common, and being the only unit closing against 30 Archers, then yeah, it's going to get eaten alive.

However, under the assumptions I made, I don't think it's too much to assume that a BNC-3Q will be able to survive long enough to bring its strengths to bear...or at least force adversaries to divert their attention. :: shrugs ::

Do I dispute that other 'Mechs from the era could do this? No, not really, but most 'Mechs are better kept in ranged combat.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SCC on 18 January 2012, 19:30:39
Quick point on the OP: that's part of the fluff, the same fluff that pictures a BattleMaster holding it's PPC in it left hand when the stat block has it in it's right
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 18 January 2012, 19:37:33
I'm working on the assumption that I'm playing in a two vs. two or four vs. four game with some kind of balancing metric in place, 4-6 canon mapsheets, tech levels are roughly even, and the opposition doesn't have gunnery better than 3 or 4.

In my experience, games with those kind of restrictions tend to devolve into short range slugfests, because the TNs for long ranged attacks suck so much AND because it's rare to have LOS even close to the maximum range of 3025 era long ranged weaponry on canon mapsheets.

I mean, sure, if the BNC-3Q is stuck in clear terrain, with LOS of 50 hexes being extremely common, and being the only unit closing against 30 Archers, then yeah, it's going to get eaten alive.

However, under the assumptions I made, I don't think it's too much to assume that a BNC-3Q will be able to survive long enough to bring its strengths to bear...or at least force adversaries to divert their attention. :: shrugs ::

Do I dispute that other 'Mechs from the era could do this? No, not really, but most 'Mechs are better kept in ranged combat.

I think MegaMek has really tested this game to the limit because of how you can basically drag a game on for well over 15-20 turns.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 19:49:36
Want to make me think that the BNC-3E is a piece of crap?

Force me to use a variant that puts the PPC in an arm location. ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 18 January 2012, 19:59:52
Want to make me think that the BNC-3E is a piece of crap?
3M just does it better.
Force me to use a variant that puts the PPC in an arm location. ;D
It's called a Awesome ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Drasius on 18 January 2012, 20:07:15

Awesomes and Stalkers are great at what they do, but they are limited by slow speed, and heat issues. You need to know how to play them well to get the most out of them. The good thing about them, is that you can play one poorly, and still be quite effective. They are great trainers, but even an Awesome or Stalker will still fall to a superior player.

I would actually say that know when to not take any given design, including your favourites, is a sign of a good player, not winning with sub optimal designs.

They are fantastic at what they do and for the most part, they are about as optimised as you can get for their intended role. They are assault mechs for crying out loud, they are made for assaulting things, usually bases that move 0/0, and as such, they have more than sufficient mobility advantage. Againt a mobile force, or for anything that requires you to move quickly, then no, they aren't going to be great, but you wouldn't use a knife to build a house either if you had other tools to chose from would you?

Taking the right mech/tank/aero/whatever for the job is certainly one aspect of being a good player and a very large part of being a good general whereas, winning with an inferior line-up is the other side of the coin to choosing forces for deployment and is a very large part of being a good commander. Certainly having both makes you better than only one or the other?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 20:08:00
3M just does it better.

Sure, but it's just more satisfying to see the look on an opponent's face when you score a kill with a BNC-3E. ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 18 January 2012, 20:16:47
Sure, but it's just more satisfying to see the look on an opponent's face when you score a kill with a BNC-3E. ;D
The Banshee 3E and the Zeus 6S are not bad mechs when compared to the all the other base tech mechs that also use the AC5s (Dragon, Rifleman, Jagermech, ect. ) it just makes soooo much more sense to slap a PPC on that machine all fluff aside.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 20:22:28
The Banshee 3E and the Zeus 6S are not bad mechs when compared to the all the other base tech mechs that also use the AC5s (Dragon, Rifleman, Jagermech, ect. ) it just makes soooo much more sense to slap a PPC on that machine all fluff aside.

Agree.

Hmm...makes me think I need to start up the Poor Man's PPC Mafia aka the AC/5 Fan Club, ha! ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 18 January 2012, 20:45:42
You say that as if it is a bad thing... not everyone wants to be clan.

Some days, I am not certain that I *like* being Clan anymore.  But, given the breakup of the FedCom, I do not have a home to return to...

He also seems to have the Clans confused with Cassie Suthorn.

Who?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Downslide on 18 January 2012, 21:26:38
Yes the Banshee isn't the end all be all. Yes, there are lights and mediums with similar or better loadouts. I get that.

Toe-to-toe Banshee 3E versus a Vindicator 1R? I'll take the big, "crappy assault 'mech," thankyouverymuch. ;)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 18 January 2012, 21:51:46
Yes the Banshee isn't the end all be all. Yes, there are lights and mediums with similar or better loadouts. I get that.

Toe-to-toe Banshee 3E versus a Vindicator 1R? I'll take the big, "crappy assault 'mech," thankyouverymuch. ;)

All it takes is one good FALCON PUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNCH!!!!
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 22:10:13
Who?

Infantry scout.  Member of the 17th Recon aka Camacho's Caballeros.  Took out a Battlemech by herself while on foot.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 18 January 2012, 22:33:16
Infantry scout.  Member of the 17th Recon aka Camacho's Caballeros.  Took out a Battlemech by herself while on foot.

Didn't she also question the motives of Subhash Indrahar at one point?  I think someone posted that quote.

Pretty neat job, taking out a mech while afoot.  Good for her. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: BlazingSky on 18 January 2012, 23:28:29
Pretty neat job, taking out a mech while afoot.  Good for her.

Meh, the GDL's infantry did it while being half trained backwater militia. With homemade plastique, none of your fancy lightning from God here!
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Jal Phoenix on 18 January 2012, 23:51:24
Pretty neat job, taking out a mech while afoot.  Good for her. 

Not mentioned: she did it with a broomstick.  A broomstick.  That goes beyond cheese into the realm of craptastic anime BS.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 18 January 2012, 23:52:05
Not mentioned: she did it with a broomstick.  A broomstick.  That goes beyond cheese into the realm of craptastic anime BS.

Hey, don't forget the twine and paper clips she used.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 18 January 2012, 23:53:40
And IIRC she was wearing an evening dress at the time. :P
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 19 January 2012, 00:54:44
Yes the Banshee isn't the end all be all. Yes, there are lights and mediums with similar or better loadouts. I get that.

Toe-to-toe Banshee 3E versus a Vindicator 1R? I'll take the big, "crappy assault 'mech," thankyouverymuch. ;)
Thats because the Vindicator is awesome! O0
But as Fear Factory pointed out, one punch/kick (or DFA) from a Banshee would TKO a Vindi real quick.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 01:05:58
But I'd take the Vindy any time...

On the River Delta map ;)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 19 January 2012, 02:23:18
They should.

I've never been a subscriber to the idea that everyone has to play for the same reasons as me.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sharpnel on 19 January 2012, 02:24:46
I'd much rather have a Banshee 3M or 3MC than the 3E.
QFT
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 19 January 2012, 02:54:58
But as Fear Factory pointed out, one punch/kick (or DFA) from a Banshee would TKO a Vindi real quick.

It's really overlooked.  If I had to pick an old school Assault for a ride I would take a Banshee 3E or 3Q and use specialty autocannon ammo (the 3Q has the right amount to abuse the hell out of Precision and AP rounds).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sharpnel on 19 January 2012, 03:11:36
Infantry scout.  Member of the 17th Recon aka Camacho's Caballeros.  Took out a Battlemech by herself while on foot.
While she was a teenager, IIRC
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 19 January 2012, 03:13:00
While she was a teenager, IIRC

Ah.  It all makes sense now!
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 19 January 2012, 05:49:42

He also seems to have the Clans confused with Cassie Suthorn.

How so? Did Cassie Suthorn choose the best mech to fight in her battles? MY point is that the Clans need to show ultimate skill to advance, from my reading of the Clans, they value pin point use of minimal force guaranteed to get the job done. No self respecting Clanner would ever try to pull off the incredible BS attributed to Cassie Suthorn, hell, she makes Dirk Pitt and James Bond seem paragons of realistic capability.

My point about optimising was actually to highlight that you literally can't do it with 3025 tech. There are too many parts of the mech needing attention to make one that is truly optimal. An optimal mech is one that can move swiftly, say at least 5/8, have adequate armour to survive a pummeling from lost initiative/poor tactical maneuvers, and deliver enough punch to seriously threaten assault mechs from medium to long range. Essentially, a min/maxed design, not necessarily the best design in any given scenario, but always able to make its presence felt. The best designs in 3025 tech are the ones that can match two of those criteria, you couldn't have your cake and eat it too.

A big part of why I loved Battletech originally was that, by knowing how my brothers (the only people I had to play against) thought, and how they played, I could design a force to undermine their strengths and focus on their weaknesses. This was made far more difficult after the coming of the Clans. A bigger part of why I stopped playing during puberty was because I was sick of being bashed by my older brother every time I won :P :P
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Dayton3 on 19 January 2012, 08:20:55
And IIRC she was wearing an evening dress at the time. :P

That was years later.   

She jumped off the balcony several stories up onto the cockpit of a Battlemaster,  pressed the emergency release switch on the canopy (there so rescue personnel can easily extract injured mechwarriors) lunged in and stabbed the mechwarrior to death. 

She then fired the BMs PPC into the back of another mech and destroyed it.

Suthorn's abilities (aside from the first bizarre "broomstick kill" when she basically got very lucky against an incompetent mechwarrior) were largely a result of intimate knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of each type of mech.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kovax on 19 January 2012, 10:47:37
Q: "Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?"
A: Dead, I brought a Locust to the fight.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 11:09:01
How so? Did Cassie Suthorn choose the best mech to fight in her battles? MY point is that the Clans need to show ultimate skill to advance, from my reading of the Clans, they value pin point use of minimal force guaranteed to get the job done. No self respecting Clanner would ever try to pull off the incredible BS attributed to Cassie Suthorn, hell, she makes Dirk Pitt and James Bond seem paragons of realistic capability.

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.

See bolded text.  And if the Clans were really about pulling things off with the minimum force required so as to show off their superior skill, they wouldn't use Clantech, they'd have gone back to Primative Battlemechs or something.

That was years later.   

She jumped off the balcony several stories up onto the cockpit of a Battlemaster,  pressed the emergency release switch on the canopy (there so rescue personnel can easily extract injured mechwarriors) lunged in and stabbed the mechwarrior to death. 

She then fired the BMs PPC into the back of another mech and destroyed it.

Suthorn's abilities (aside from the first bizarre "broomstick kill" when she basically got very lucky against an incompetent mechwarrior) were largely a result of intimate knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of each type of mech.

Or authoral fiat.  Battlemechs have been subject to infantry swarm attacks for centuries, the idea that the designers would leave such a glaring weakness as a quick-release button for the cockpit hatch some place where a hostile infantry trooper could access it is laughable.

Q: "Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?"
A: Dead, I brought a Locust to the fight.

I like the way you think. O0
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 11:25:51
See bolded text.  And if the Clans were really about pulling things off with the minimum force required so as to show off their superior skill, they wouldn't use Clantech, they'd have gone back to Primative Battlemechs or something.

I've been saying that for YEARS. I'm glad to see that someone thinks the same way.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MadCapellan on 19 January 2012, 11:47:13
I've been saying that for YEARS. I'm glad to see that someone thinks the same way.

Well, there's two sides to that coin.  This first most important thing to the Clans is to win.  If you can win with inferior equipment, than more glory and power to you.  There's no glory to be had rocking out in a Mackie unless you win with it.  If you do, then hell yeah, you're the baddest ass on the block, but not many could pull it off against modern weaponry.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: BlazingSky on 19 January 2012, 13:09:16
That was years later.   

She jumped off the balcony several stories up onto the cockpit of a Battlemaster,  pressed the emergency release switch on the canopy (there so rescue personnel can easily extract injured mechwarriors) lunged in and stabbed the mechwarrior to death. 

She then fired the BMs PPC into the back of another mech and destroyed it.

Suthorn's abilities (aside from the first bizarre "broomstick kill" when she basically got very lucky against an incompetent mechwarrior) were largely a result of intimate knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of each type of mech.

??? <- MFW BattleTech turns into Gundam. I remember why I couldn't actually read those books. That's honestly the dumbest sack of crap I've ever read. "Intimate knowledge" of these mechs sounds like the author just luuuuurved having their pet character do stupid 80's action movie shit.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 13:20:50
Well, there's two sides to that coin.  This first most important thing to the Clans is to win

If that's true, why even bother with bidding at all? Clearly not the most efficient way to do the most important thing to the Clans.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 19 January 2012, 13:30:28
If that's true, why even bother with bidding at all? Clearly not the most efficient way to do the most important thing to the Clans.

The better your tech, the fewer units you need to bid.  The whole point of the bidding and trials when they were instituted was to reduce the amount of mass destruction that occured, wasn't it?

Against the inner sphere forces, better weapons means you risk even fewer of your numerically inferior forces.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 13:31:25
If that's true, why even bother with bidding at all? Clearly not the most efficient way to do the most important thing to the Clans.

Because Clan philosophy is deeply hypocritical- they claim to abhor waste but employ an excessively wasteful system of trial by combat for determining who's selected as a warrior and considering warriors to be too old if they haven't won a Bloodname by the age of about 30 despite the medically inferior Inner Sphere seeing warriors who pull 50+ years of active military service on an apparently regular basis, ect.

The Clans talk big but their actions rarely follow through, though we're getting badly off topic here.

BTW, to move this back on subject, what about the Longbow?  Wasn't that supposed to be an exceedingly common mech in 3025?  Could that qualify as a "crappy" assault due to having excessive specialization as a fire support machine despite offering only slightly better performance at the roll than an Archer?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 19 January 2012, 13:35:09
Speaking as a Clan player (well, also an IS player), I think it's really funny that Clan mechwarriors often are portrayed as acting like whiny teenagers.

"Hey, tech caste here, we've designed you warriors a sweet new mech that has everything you asked for on a mobile, durable platform"

"But it's not an omni, waaaaaah"
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 14:03:18
Because Clan philosophy is deeply hypocritical

Thank you.

I love asking extremely leading rhetorical questions.  ;D

BTW, to move this back on subject, what about the Longbow?  Wasn't that supposed to be an exceedingly common mech in 3025?  Could that qualify as a "crappy" assault due to having excessive specialization as a fire support machine despite offering only slightly better performance at the roll than an Archer?

Some might disqualify the Longbow because it didn't canonically appear in a TRO 'til 3058.

:: shrugs ::
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 14:05:35
But it had appeared in the game before that.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 14:06:03
Speaking as a Clan player (well, also an IS player), I think it's really funny that Clan mechwarriors often are portrayed as acting like whiny teenagers.

"Hey, tech caste here, we've designed you warriors a sweet new mech that has everything you asked for on a mobile, durable platform"

"But it's not an omni, waaaaaah"

It shouldn't be terribly surprising, given the penchant for making as many inuniverse references as possible to the real world BattleTech player base. ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 14:07:25
But it had appeared in the game before that.

So did 'Mechs like the Mackie, but it usually isn't considered in the topic of 'Mechs circa 3025.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 14:27:40
The Mackie was extinct in the Inner Sphere by 3025, the Longbow wasn't.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 14:31:22
The Mackie was extinct in the Inner Sphere by 3025, the Longbow wasn't.

:: shrugs ::

Don't blame me. I didn't make the condition of the player base that for a 'Mech to be considered 3025, it HAS to show up in some edition of TRO: 3025.

I've had the same arguments with a GM who wouldn't allow me to use a WLF-1 or STC-2C in a 3025 game specifically because they haven't been in any edition of TRO 3025.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 19 January 2012, 14:51:40
I'm part of the player base and I don't use that condition.

Heck, I'd think a player was being clever if they did something like that.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 19 January 2012, 15:29:30
I've had the same arguments with a GM who wouldn't allow me to use a WLF-1 or STC-2C in a 3025 game specifically because they haven't been in any edition of TRO 3025.
Counter argument against your GM: "You make it sound like this isn't about year 3025 but TRO 3025."

But your GM is right about Wolfhound: it won't be available until in 3028 and in so small numbers that its availability can be discounted from players who don't play with Kell Hounds or Wolf's Dragoons.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 19 January 2012, 15:33:31
Counter argument against your GM: "You make it sound like this isn't about year 3025 but TRO 3025."

But your GM is right about Wolfhound: it won't be available until in 3028 and in so small numbers that its availability can be discounted from players who don't play with Kell Hounds or Wolf's Dragoons.

I think you're giving this particular GM way too much credit, as I doubt his objection was because the WLF-1 was first produced around 5 years after TRO: 3025. 'D

Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Banzai on 19 January 2012, 16:42:20
Not mentioned: she did it with a broomstick.  A broomstick.  That goes beyond cheese into the realm of craptastic anime BS.

Well, a broomstick and a city power grid.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 20 January 2012, 06:43:45
See bolded text.  And if the Clans were really about pulling things off with the minimum force required so as to show off their superior skill, they wouldn't use Clantech, they'd have gone back to Primative Battlemechs or something.

And look who wrote that line, wasn't me :P Tongue in cheek or no, please don't try to attribute that sort of statement to me.

As for using Inner Sphere tech, hmm, yes and no. Minimal application of force does not mean "equal tech" it could mean being out numbered, or any number of things. If you look at the battles in Operation Revival, the only time the Clans brought maximum force to bear from the outset was when the opposition refused to give them information on their OpFor.

There are many ways of balancing forces, and the Clans are by no means stupid. They want a fight they could lose, should their enemy be deceitful, but will definitely win should the enemy be honest. Mostly though, the Clans have a superiority complex, according to the average Clanner, everything and everyone in the Clans is superior. Given this attitude, a Clanner would see fighting in anything other than Clan Tech as beneath them.

Everything the Clans do makes sense from a certain point of view. They are internally consistent if nothing else. I personally don't like the Clans, but I do try to understand them.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 20 January 2012, 11:35:13
And look who wrote that line, wasn't me :P Tongue in cheek or no, please don't try to attribute that sort of statement to me.

I didn't attribute that sort of statement to you, I replied to that statement.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: guardiandashi on 20 January 2012, 14:09:22
and with the cassie technically it wasn't a broomstick it was a mop
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hersh67 on 20 January 2012, 21:18:03
Anyhow, what did she take down, a crappy assault mech?  (Just trying to get a little closer to on topic.)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 20 January 2012, 21:24:35
Anyhow, what did she take down, a crappy assault mech?  (Just trying to get a little closer to on topic.)
A Wolverine
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Hawktel on 21 January 2012, 00:38:57
Other than the Stalker, Banshee 3s, and Awesome, nearly every other original 3025 design can be manhandled by a good heavy (Warhammer d, Grasshopper, Guillotine, Thunderbolt, Orion)

Well except the Atlas.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SCC on 21 January 2012, 03:07:14
As another factoid about TRO3025 containing "interesting" statements, the entry on the Atlas makes mention of 'Mechs heavier the the Atlas, and somehow I doubt it was referring to the super-heavies that I believe are mentioned in Liberation Terra
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 21 January 2012, 04:53:18
Keep in mind that TRO 3025 also lists the Zeus's introduction date as before Battlemechs were invented, so take that line with a grain of salt or two.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 21 January 2012, 08:43:21
Keep in mind that TRO 3025 also lists the Zeus's introduction date as before Battlemechs were invented, so take that line with a grain of salt or two.
Yes, and BattleMaster is the largest and most powerful, introduced in 2830 to the Star League armies. And J. Edgars is poor hovertank.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MadCapellan on 21 January 2012, 11:16:17
Well except the Atlas.

That one gets manhandled by a good medium!   ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 21 January 2012, 14:22:51
That one gets manhandled by a good medium!   ;D
Vindicator is called good medium, some call it best medium. But I doubt it could get even internals of Atlas without help... or elite MechWarrior in cockpit ::)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 21 January 2012, 14:27:57
I would *maybe* try to fight an Atlas with a WVR-5M (way better than a vindicator BTW ;D ), but I think you'd have to get lucky and be playing on a well-forested map to have a good chance.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Ian Sharpe on 21 January 2012, 16:30:15
Did pretty well with an Enforcer against an Atlas.  It was untouched but out of LRMs, and the ENF outranged it and had better movement. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 21 January 2012, 16:59:46
Vindicator is called good medium, some call it best medium. But I doubt it could get even internals of Atlas without help... or elite MechWarrior in cockpit ::)

Depending on how good the Atlas pilot is with the LRM, it is pretty likely that he will run out of ammo for them before having done crippling damage to the Vindicator - in particular, knocked out the PPC. With the LRM-20 out of ammo and the PPC still active, it´s just a matter of (lots of) time until the Atlas is down.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Greyhind on 21 January 2012, 17:12:40
On a salt flat a 3/5 'mech can close faster than a 4/6 can back up. Terrain can elongate the process but I wouldn't put money on the Vindie...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 21 January 2012, 19:13:32
The Atlas does have better range than the Charger ;D

LRMs+Med Laser seemed to be a popular weapons combo for early mechs, from the Valkyrie to the Whitworth to the Archer to the Atlas.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 21 January 2012, 19:14:10
On a salt flat a 3/5 'mech can close faster than a 4/6 can back up. Terrain can elongate the process but I wouldn't put money on the Vindie...

Who said anything about backing up?

The Vindie can always turn around, run away and torso-twist to bring the PPC to bear.

And in any kind of terrain, the Vindie can jump over an obstruction and open the range while the Atlas plods through it.

I´m not sure I´d put even money on the Vindie, but I´d put more than the 3.2 million the Vindie costs against the 9.6 million the Atlas costs.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Fear Factory on 21 January 2012, 19:23:55
I'll go with miniThug (2 Panthers).
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SCC on 21 January 2012, 21:54:29
Who said anything about backing up?

The Vindie can always turn around, run away and torso-twist to bring the PPC to bear.
And expose it's rear armor the the Atlas?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 21 January 2012, 22:42:45
And expose it's rear armor the the Atlas?
Run like hell and hope it doesn't bite you in the rear ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 21 January 2012, 23:02:26
Run like hell and hope it doesn't bite you in the rear ;D

That's pushing a +2 TMM for all it's worth.  :P

Sooner or later, you will be caught. People seem to forget that the weapons ranges were made the way they are so that you could play on a reasonably sized table. Try that on a 2 x 2 table, you are going to run out of room before the Atlas runs out of armour.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 22 January 2012, 00:22:46
It's not about keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of armor, it's keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of ammo.  At long range, the Atlas needs a 10 to hit (I'm assuming gunnery of 4) if it stands still and a 12 if it runs.  It might work, but trying that strategy works much better if you've got a faster mech.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 22 January 2012, 00:54:27
It's not about keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of armor, it's keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of ammo.  At long range, the Atlas needs a 10 to hit (I'm assuming gunnery of 4) if it stands still and a 12 if it runs.  It might work, but trying that strategy works much better if you've got a faster mech.
Yes. And there GRF-1N Griffin beats Vindicator and Atlas both! Could lose against BNC-3E Banshee though...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Nightlord01 on 22 January 2012, 04:57:10
It's not about keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of armor, it's keeping it up until the Atlas runs out of ammo.  At long range, the Atlas needs a 10 to hit (I'm assuming gunnery of 4) if it stands still and a 12 if it runs.  It might work, but trying that strategy works much better if you've got a faster mech.

 ::) My point is that the Atlas doesn't need to use its LRMs at all. All it needs is the threat of them to keep the Vindi moving. If the Vindi tries to stop and assure a shot, the Atlas also has a better shot. Eventually, the Vindi will be trapped against a map edge, and get hammered from short range. Hell, the Atlas could likely have a full LRM ammo bin at the time, it doesn't need to shoot them, just to have them available if a sweet shot comes up.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Sir Chaos on 22 January 2012, 05:07:34
And expose it's rear armor the the Atlas?

Against 12 LRM-20 shots? I´ll risk it. I´d probably dump the LRM-5 ammo first, though.

That said, if I could pick a medium to go against an Atlas in, I´d probably pick a Griffin, for its higher speed.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 22 January 2012, 13:03:26
::) My point is that the Atlas doesn't need to use its LRMs at all. All it needs is the threat of them to keep the Vindi moving. If the Vindi tries to stop and assure a shot, the Atlas also has a better shot. Eventually, the Vindi will be trapped against a map edge, and get hammered from short range. Hell, the Atlas could likely have a full LRM ammo bin at the time, it doesn't need to shoot them, just to have them available if a sweet shot comes up.
I second this! And I've done that with crippled Highlander (Succession War variant) against BLR-1D: BLR moved only little, I walked HGN within 7 hexes and fired last LRM load (I had saved for several turns), hits to head and BLR blacked out. By the way, legless BNC-3E was great PITA as it could still push itself up and fire its arsenal. Good thing I had artillery to put it down.

Of course if Rolling Maps rule is used, then map edges won't be a problem and Atlas has much more difficult time of catching up anybody. In that instance I sure would love to have something faster with reach to go with Atlas, like Banshee and Zeus ;)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 22 January 2012, 13:52:06
::) My point is that the Atlas doesn't need to use its LRMs at all. All it needs is the threat of them to keep the Vindi moving. If the Vindi tries to stop and assure a shot, the Atlas also has a better shot. Eventually, the Vindi will be trapped against a map edge, and get hammered from short range. Hell, the Atlas could likely have a full LRM ammo bin at the time, it doesn't need to shoot them, just to have them available if a sweet shot comes up.

Unless you're playing on a single mapsheet, the Vindicator is going to have enough room that it can turn and continue to retreat in a different direction from the Atlas any time it gets too close to a map edge.  Even on a single map, it's going to be difficult for the Atlas to pin the Vindicator.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: SteelRaven on 22 January 2012, 14:17:24
If you have to run away, the Atlas is doing it's job.

You can win with ether mech if you play it right, the question is weather the assault would be up to the game and so far the machine listed clearly are. Well... except for the Charger A1, still hate that guy ;D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: va_wanderer on 25 January 2012, 10:54:29
A Vindicator is the same as the umpteen-pages Warhammer/Atlas argument, only in this case the lighter 'Mech can now utterly hose the process with it's jump jets.

All you have to do is keep jumping over rough terrain to get your distance back and keep pecking away with the PPC. You'll run the poor assault 'Mech in circles till it drops and unless it gets lucky and takes the (well-armored) arm off at range with it's LRM rack, you win. It's just a matter of time.

The Atlas is the hammer you apply when the enemy is on the anvil to begin with. Using a close-combat assault to pin someone is like trying to squeeze a fist full of sand, the enemy can slip away.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 25 January 2012, 13:17:25
A Vindicator is the same as the umpteen-pages Warhammer/Atlas argument, only in this case the lighter 'Mech can now utterly hose the process with it's jump jets.

All you have to do is keep jumping over rough terrain to get your distance back and keep pecking away with the PPC. You'll run the poor assault 'Mech in circles till it drops and unless it gets lucky and takes the (well-armored) arm off at range with it's LRM rack, you win. It's just a matter of time.
Griffin (any model with PPC and LRM) can do that better.

Quote
The Atlas is the hammer you apply when the enemy is on the anvil to begin with. Using a close-combat assault to pin someone is like trying to squeeze a fist full of sand, the enemy can slip away.
Excellent point O0
Though some here say that anvil is the edge of the map...
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Diamondshark on 26 January 2012, 10:06:02
The way I've usually used Assault mechs is to have two of them in my company, and a lot of fast(er) flankers to surround the enemy and slowly draw the noose until the enemy either breaks or has to face the big guns of the Assaults.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 26 January 2012, 12:07:04
Personally there are three types of assault mechs I use.  I will list an example unit that typifies the role.

1) AWS-8Q.  Slow, powerful, well armored, and enough range to reach out and touch someone.  Often has the longest or close to longest range hammers that the era allows (ER LL/ER PPC / Gauss in later eras).  More than happy to walk 3 hexes every turn and take some punishment while dishing some out in return.  Usually used in lance in pairs, with a pair of slightly faster mediums or heavies.  Honorable mention: Thug, MAD II.

2) STK-3N.  Relatively cheap, mixed weapon loadout.  Good trade off of BV cost to armor.  BV savings are usually at the expense of long range weapons (which tend to be more expensive).  Can be fielded in larger numbers than higher quality assaults, but are generally expendable.  Opponents either have to spend a lot of effort to bring them down, ignoring the more dangerous, but softer targets (like the WHMs that are behind them), or if neglected, will do serious damage once they get close.  Honorable mention: BLR.

3) VTR-9B.  Urban terrors.  Long range is completely neglected in favor of devastating close range firepower.  Who cares if you have no LRMs or PPCs if every fight is at 6 hexes or less?  Jump jets are ideal, but not required.  AC20 is a necessity.  Honorable mention: BNC-3Q, KGC.



If I can't fit an assault into one of these roles (long range blaster, expendable trooper, or urban terror) I am almost always happier fielding more, faster heavies and mediums instead.  Bigger is great, but not always better.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 26 January 2012, 12:14:16
If I can't fit an assault into one of these roles (long range blaster, expendable trooper, or urban terror) I am almost always happier fielding more, faster heavies and mediums instead.  Bigger is great, but not always better.
So how about BNC-3E? Its weapons put it to first category, but it's faster than that... has less BV tho, so maybe your second category?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 26 January 2012, 12:16:38
So how about BNC-3E? Its weapons put it to first category, but it's faster than that... has less BV tho, so maybe your second category?

I would guess that it would fall into the "I would rather use a faster medium or heavy" category.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 26 January 2012, 12:26:34
I would guess that it would fall into the "I would rather use a faster medium or heavy" category.

Exactly.  Not enough long range firepower for category 1, not enough short range firepower for category 2.  Rip out the AC 5 and replace it with four ML and some extra HS and we could talk.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 26 January 2012, 12:31:19
Exactly.  Not enough long range firepower for category 1, not enough short range firepower for category 2.  Rip out the AC 5 and replace it with four ML and some extra HS and we could talk.
That's BLR-1G
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Matti on 26 January 2012, 12:34:15
I would guess that it would fall into the "I would rather use a faster medium or heavy" category.
BNC-3E can put up a fight against those, even against the infamous GRF-1N. Been there, done that.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 26 January 2012, 12:52:24
BNC-3E can put up a fight against those, even against the infamous GRF-1N. Been there, done that.

I'd take the WVR-6M instead of a BNC-3E any day.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 26 January 2012, 12:55:36
That's BLR-1G

Which you notice I actually listed at the end of the category 2 description. :)
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 26 January 2012, 13:56:39
I'd take the WVR-6M instead of a BNC-3E any day.

I think most people would prefer to use a design with no AC/5\AC/2 over a design that does. Would you still take a WVR-6R over a BNC-3E?
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 26 January 2012, 14:04:25
I think most people would prefer to use a design with no AC/5\AC/2 over a design that does. Would you still take a WVR-6R over a BNC-3E?

As a general purpose unit in a generalist lance that has no idea what mission it is going on or what the enemy forces are?  Maybe.  Depends on the rest of the lance.  If I am trying to build a force to defend a fixed position, probably not.

I'm not saying that every mech is better than a BNC-3E, I'm just saying that in the roles that I would ever consider using an assault mech, the BNC-3E is not very good.  In any other role, there are cheaper (c-bill, if not necessarily BV) mechs that would do the job better. 
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 26 January 2012, 14:09:43
Ironically, the WVR-6R is still more useful at short range, though it's not one that I would use frequently, because like the Banshee, it's weapons just don't really fit its role.

While I realize that the AC/5 is a horribly weight-inefficient weapon, it still enjoy it on my favorite MAD variant, the 3L, because it has range that matches the rest of the weapons and the role of the mech.

The problem with the Banshee -3E is that, in addition to it's inefficient engine, its weapons just don't sync well with it's movement profile, mass, inclusion of hand actuators, and torso-mounted weapons, which would indicate that it's intended to close to melee range and pound the crap out of the enemy.  Give me a 4/6 banshee with a Large Laser in place of the PPC, and an AC/10 in place of the AC/5, and drop a couple heat sinks to make the mass work, and you have a winner, IMO.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: va_wanderer on 26 January 2012, 15:28:27
The -3MC variant actually is pretty close. Drops five sinks and trades up from an AC/5 to an AC/10 with 20 shots. An AC/10 + large laser version wouldn't be bad, though. It certainly can be tinkered with, but for what it does the AC/5 isn't unreasonable.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 26 January 2012, 15:39:46
The problem with the Banshee -3E is that, in addition to it's inefficient engine, its weapons just don't sync well with it's movement profile, mass, inclusion of hand actuators, and torso-mounted weapons, which would indicate that it's intended to close to melee range and pound the crap out of the enemy.  Give me a 4/6 banshee with a Large Laser in place of the PPC, and an AC/10 in place of the AC/5, and drop a couple heat sinks to make the mass work, and you have a winner, IMO.

Yeah, there's a lot of design decisions that don't synergize very well in TRO: 3025, like the combination of the HCT-3F's thin armor and its melee weapons.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 26 January 2012, 15:41:38
Yeah, there's a lot of design decisions that don't synergize very well in TRO: 3025, like the combination of the HCT-3F's thin armor and its melee weapons.

You mean how the same design could have been actually good if it were 75 tons instead of 45 :D
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: Kobold on 26 January 2012, 15:41:55
Yeah, there's a lot of design decisions that don't synergize very well in TRO: 3025, like the combination of the HCT-3F's thin armor and its melee weapons.

I tolerate the HCT because it brings a good amount of firepower for its BV.  The key is to use it as an urban backstabber exclusively.  It is too slow to run across open terrain.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: deathfrombeyond on 26 January 2012, 15:58:13
You mean how the same design could have been actually good if it were 75 tons instead of 45 :D

I guess?

EDIT: removed unnecessary rant on customizing.
Title: Re: Where Are All the Crappy Assault Mechs?
Post by: willydstyle on 26 January 2012, 16:04:39
I don't care about the novels.  I like the history, I like reading TROs, but I also play the game primarily because I like the people I play with, and the mechanics of the game are good at turning matches into a spectacle.