Author Topic: (Answered) Re: Technical Readout: 3085  (Read 2126 times)

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
(Answered) Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« on: 05 November 2011, 16:24:03 »
TRO3085, RS3085, & RS3085 Unabridged - The Cutting Edge


I have the PDF version of RS3085 and RS3085 Unabridged-The Cutting Edge is ONLY available as a PDF ... neither have the DT on them.
I've recently heard from another member of the forums that the print version of RS3085 includes the Damage Threshold information from TRO3085 for the LAMs.  However, it's not simply the fact that the information isn't present on the RS3085 pdf or the RS3085 Unabridged - The Cutting Edge pdf, but the information provided in the print version of RS3085 and TRO3085 leaves Us unable to use the LAMs.

The way I interpret the rules on pg. 239 of TW "Each armor facing has a Damage Threshold equal to 10 percent of its full armor value, rounded up." when compared to a record sheet like that of the SYD-Z2B Seydlitz from RS3039 Unabridged for example where the Damage Threshold/Total Armor for each location are as follows:
Nose = 3/26
Right Wing = 2/16
Left Wing = 2/16
Aft = 3/22
is that the DT is calculated by dividing the LOCATIONS AF by ten and rounding up.  Otherwise with an overall AF of 80, each location would have a DT of 8; but clearly this isn't the case.  (This version of the Seydlitz is not the only one; MANY fighters from RS3039 Unabridged follow this same format, as do the record sheets that print from Heavy Metal Aero) (Chunga posted a confirmation of this while I was typing this up: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,12373.0.html)

Another problem with using the TOTAL armor factor for instance can be found in the case of the Wasp mk I.  According to TRO3085 it has a TOTAL AF of 64 and a DT of 10; 64/10 = 6.4 rounds up to 7, 64/10 ≠ 10.  But regardless of whether We use 7 or ten, neither of these numbers can be divided and distributed evenly among the four locations of a fighter.  Applying Our expanded understanding of how each individual locations AF/10 rounded up = each corresponding locations DT, then We see that We MUST know which mech body parts correspond to which fighter locations.  So, unless the math is wrong for all of the LAMs in 3085 (Stinger LAM mk I's 80AF/10 ≠ 10DT, Wasp LAM mk I's 64AF/10 ≠ 10DT, and the Phoenix Hawk LAM mk I's = 128AF/10 ≠ 16DT) and RS3085 (I'm just assuming that the print version denotes the same incongruous DT info as the TRO since My PDF copy doesn't even include DT) then their construction rules must be different than those of aerospace fighters in regard to DT.

Regardless of what the explanation for this ultimately ends up being ... it seems clear to Me that in regard to DT if LAMs are going to be used before IO is published, We're forced to create house rules for the following points regarding DT:
1.)  determine if the calculation used in TRO3085 for LAMs is different
2.)  determine which mech body parts convert to what fighter locations
3.)  determine how to allocate DT to each location
« Last Edit: 20 August 2012, 05:29:40 by Xotl »

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #1 on: 05 November 2011, 20:30:52 »
Hello,

LAMs in fighter mode suffer critical damage only when all armor is destroyed (like a BattleMech), not like a fighter. (See p. 9, RS 3085.) LAMs thus do not have Damage Thresholds the way fighters do. After all, they are not truly BattleMechs that become fighters; they are BattleMechs that only masquerade as fighters when in fighter mode.

Hopefully, that helps.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #2 on: 05 November 2011, 20:56:13 »
Why do they have DT listed in the TRO? pg. 18 of RS3085 there is discussion of the need to make a control roll when the damage threshold has been exceded.  How and when will that happen?

And since you mentioned critical damage ... from pg. 9 "Furthermore, a LAM’s structural integrity can be reduced while in Fighter Mode only when its center torso suffers a loss of internal structure points through damage (including damage from high-thrust maneuvers; see Movement Phase, p. 8)."; how exactly does this work?  Does this mean that each pt of damage to the internal structure of the center torso is also a pt of damage to Structural Integrity? The pts seem to match up that way.  And if this is infact the case, does that mean there are two possible critical rolls to be made (one for the internal structure and one for the Structural Integrity)?

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #3 on: 06 November 2011, 02:22:39 »
Hello,

Correct, the Center Torso Internal Structure value equals the SI of the LAM in fighter mode.

The rules on p. 18 are essentially a verbatim quote from the advanced aerospace movement rules found in Strategic Operations (p. 97). But, for those rules, the Damage Threshold of an LAM equals the number of remaining internal structure points in the affected location.

Hopefully, that helps.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #4 on: 06 November 2011, 16:02:00 »
Yes, it helps so far and I'm glad to see that although LAMs are going to be MUCH more difficult to force into making control rolls than their equal tonnage fighter counterparts, they aren't completely removed from this rule either - it does raise other questions though.

Because this means that LAMs do not abide by the rule on pg. 239 in TW (in more than one way) which states, "Each armor facing has a Damage Threshold equal to 10 percent of its full armor value, rounded up. If the damage from a single hit exceeds this threshold, critical damage can result. (On Large Craft, a single hit means the damage from all the weapons in a bay.) Damage Thresholds are fixed values; they do not change regardless of how much armor damage a location receives during a game." I bring this up NOT in regard to critical hits (I understand that the rule for LAMs protects them from this situation) but rather for control rolls as the advanced rules on pg. 97 in SO describe for aerospace fighters, "...Control Rolls are made in every turn where a unit takes an Avionics or Control critical hit (per standard rules) or where a unit sustains a hit that exceeds its Damage Threshold. If a threshold-exceeding hit occurs that also causes critical damage, two individual Control Rolls are made. The +1 modifier for 20 points of damage does not apply when using advanced atmospheric Control Rolls."

Before starting this thread My friends and I used the following method to address this issue:

1.)  We use the standard calculation from TW for LAMs the same way We do for Aerospace Fighters.
2.)  (Assume that all mentions of "torso" mean both front and rear torso locations.)  Associate the following mech body parts with the corresponding fighter armor locations:
       a.)  head & center torso/nose
       b.)  right arm & right torso/right wing
       c.)  left arm & left torso/left wing
       d.)  right leg & left leg/aft
3.)  Assign DT to each location (by adding the armor value of the two mech body parts together, dividing by ten and round up) and record this info on the record sheets.  ex:



Using the method above actually gives the LAM (which has historically been considered to be a little fragile) a little less DT than a fighter of equal tonnage; what do you think of that method?

But if We use IS for DT, then We still need to know which of the mechs body parts serve as which corresponding fighter armor location (and if the IS values for each of those body parts are added together and/or divided as normal).  Mind letting Me in on that one?
« Last Edit: 06 November 2011, 16:33:42 by GOTHIK »

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #5 on: 06 November 2011, 17:06:55 »
Hello,

It is not for me to comment on house rules. Sorry.

Where internal structure is used for Damage Threshold only primarily applies to the use of advanced aerospace fighter maneuvering rules (referenced in Strategic Operations). LAMs in fighter mode do not actually use the Fighter Hit Locations Table. Where locations need to be known while the LAM is in fighter mode, use the LAM Fighter Hit Locations Table (p. 10, RS: 3085).

Hopefully, that helps.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #6 on: 06 November 2011, 17:50:36 »
Ok, I get it.
The head, center torso, r/l torsos, etc. each have a DT in that case.  Got it.

Thank you for your help with this, Herb!!!

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #7 on: 06 November 2011, 18:03:13 »
Hello,

You are welcome.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #8 on: 06 November 2011, 20:17:39 »
Hey Herb, one last thing which been brought on by another member of the forums:

And by the way, it's considered extremely poor form to ambush the developers with house rules. Herb's commentary should not be taken as tacit nor implicit approval for your ideas beyond "whatever works for your games."

I sincerely hope that you did not take what I presented as the solution to this question as Me "ambushing" you.  I've simply just been looking for clarification on this.  I only mentioned what We came up with just to get feedback on it.  I wasn't looking for you to canonize it or anything, just thought you might find the thought-process to be cool or whatever.  I understand your position and you declining comment, completely and have taken no offense.  I understand.  And that's why I never said anything else about it.

If I made you feel "ambushed", I'd really like to apologize.  I truly hope that has not been the case.

Thank you again for taking the time to personally answer My questions and to gain a better understanding of this exciting expansion to the game!!!

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #9 on: 07 November 2011, 04:52:22 »
Whoops!  I do have another question...

Do LAMs in fighter mode abide by all the basic rules for control rolls and random movement from Total Warfare?

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #10 on: 07 November 2011, 16:08:14 »
Hello,

What specific rule(s) are you looking at that would prompt this question? After all, it has been stated in the rules presented that, with the exception of the modifications given in the LAM rules, fighter-mode LAMs would behave in accordance with all of the established aerospace fighter rules.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #11 on: 25 January 2012, 01:02:08 »
the Damage Threshold of an LAM equals the number of remaining internal structure points in the affected location.
I was looking over the entries for LAMs in TRO3085 and noticed something that confused Me; take the Shadow Hawk LAM for instance, the DT is listed as 18.  I did notice that the DT value matches the Internal Structure of the Center Torso (which also dictates the Structural Integrity), but wasn't sure if this was merely a coincidence.  Is there a different explanation? and, why is only one value for DT listed in the TRO?

Also, My group has been learning the Aerospace rules and I ran across something on p.239 in TW that made Me wonder about something from your response here.
Quote
"Damage Thresholds are fixed values; they do not change regardless of how much armor damage a location receives during a game."
This passage refers only to the armor, but you refered to the Internal Structure so I just wanted to be certain I understand correctly that IF the Internal Structure changes for a given location that the Damage Threshold changes to be equal to the remaining number of Internal Structure points for that location as well; is that right?

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #12 on: 25 January 2012, 07:49:13 »
Hello,

I was looking over the entries for LAMs in TRO3085 and noticed something that confused Me; take the Shadow Hawk LAM for instance, the DT is listed as 18.  I did notice that the DT value matches the Internal Structure of the Center Torso (which also dictates the Structural Integrity), but wasn't sure if this was merely a coincidence.  Is there a different explanation? and, why is only one value for DT listed in the TRO?

As indicated earlier, Damage Thresholds on LAMs are considered only for maneuvers and such (not critical hit purposes; as LAMs are BattleMechs in fighter drag, not fighters pretending to be BattleMechs). The Damage Threshold of a given location in a Fighter-mode LAM is equal to the original Internal Structure value of the location. For the Center Torso, the original Internal Structure value defines both a Fighter-mode LAM's Damage Threshold to the Center Torso location as well as the LAM's Structural Integrity in fighter mode.

Quote
Also, My group has been learning the Aerospace rules and I ran across something on p.239 in TW that made Me wonder about something from your response here.This passage refers only to the armor, but you refered to the Internal Structure so I just wanted to be certain I understand correctly that IF the Internal Structure changes for a given location that the Damage Threshold changes to be equal to the remaining number of Internal Structure points for that location as well; is that right?

Nope. As TW says, Damage Thresholds do not change with armor damage. For LAMs in fighter mode, Damage Thresholds also do not change with armor or internal structure damage. This is to avoid accounting headaches. BattleTech tracks quite enough figures as it is...

Hopefully, that helps.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs

GOTHIK

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 758
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #13 on: 25 January 2012, 21:14:13 »
Damage Thresholds on LAMs are considered only for maneuvers and such (not critical hit purposes; as LAMs are BattleMechs in fighter drag, not fighters pretending to be BattleMechs).

The Damage Threshold of a given location in a Fighter-mode LAM is equal to the original Internal Structure value of the location ... As TW says, Damage Thresholds do not change with armor damage. For LAMs in fighter mode, Damage Thresholds also do not change with armor or internal structure damage. This is to avoid accounting headaches."

Got it! We were adjusting the DT for each location as the IS was reduced due to damage as you indicated back in November but you're right, keeping it constant just like the way ASF's are with their armor-calculated DT will be much easier.  Thanks.

HABeas2

  • Line Director Emeritus
  • Catalyst Game Labs
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2987
Re: Technical Readout: 3085
« Reply #14 on: 26 January 2012, 02:02:04 »
Hello,

You are welcome.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs