Register Register

Author Topic: (Research) BA Questions Continued  (Read 8531 times)

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
(Research) BA Questions Continued
« on: 19 February 2013, 21:01:32 »
Recreated from http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,23450.new.html to clean things up a bit.
===
List of equipment in need of AToW scale Rules
The following Mech scale weapons have an AI tag so they need AToW AP/BD values:

ER Flamer
Heavy Flamer
Small ER Pulse Laser
Small, Medium and Large VSPL
Small X-Pulse Laser

The Following Weapons are available to BA in TO but lack AP/BD values:
BA LB-X AC
BA Tube Artillery (though thinking maybe unnecessary here)
Heavy Flamer
Small and Medium ER Pulse Lasers
Small and Medium Variable Speed Pulse Lasers
Battle Armor Taser
Advanced Alternate munitions (if  the answer to 2C is yes)

The Following Items may have other assorted effects but are not covered in AToW scale:
BA Myomer Booster  (encumberance and strength bonus in AToW, but needs eratta to the effect on stealth rating. BA MP not covered yet)
Detachable Weapon Pack (do they modify the martial arts roll like unjettisoned DMPs?)
Reactive Armor
Reflective Armor
BA C3 Systems (see 3.)
Mechanical Jump Boosters (assuming standard MP conversions apply)
Mine Dispensers Minefield rules AToW pg. 277

Currently 8 Questions Pending
Post 2: 1, 2A, B, C, 3, 4, 5
Post 3: 6
1 Discussion Pending:
Post 3
« Last Edit: 16 August 2015, 09:26:47 by Xotl »

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #1 on: 21 February 2013, 02:24:55 »
1. 
Yup. Still bleeding. Good thing Clan suits have HarJel, huh?
Does HarJel stop bleeding (and where does it mention this?) or was herb referring to something else?

2A.   By the tables on AToW pg 217 (also there is a note that sates " 'These weapons are “heavy” versions of personal combat weapons mounted on battle armor only.')and pg.274 SRM and MRM launchers, as well as Recoiless rifles and Mortars share the same ordinance classes between equivalent BA and infantry carried versions, does this mean that ammunition is freely exchangeable between the BA mounted and handheld vesions of these weapons (Example BA SRM uses Class E ordinance as do all three infantry SRM launchers; can I use the same missiles on all of them?)  Also is this the same ammunition as would be used in the mech scale versions of these weapons (as well as mech and BA rocket launchers)?  (eg. I have a ton of mech SRM ammo, can I draw from that to keep my infantry troops loaded up?)

2B.   BA LRM launchers use type D ordinance while man protable versions use class C ordinance, in the case the above weapons can share ammo between versions, is this difference in ordinance types a mistake, or is ammo not sharable between LRM systems?  Again can mech ammo be shared with either the BA or infantry LRM launchers?

2C.  Pursuant to the above, are any of the new ordinance types found in TacOps (missiles pg. 367-373) available to BA and infantry support weapons?

3.    How does BA C3 (TO pg.297) function under AToW scale?  FOr other units on the network, is distance to target measured from a specific trooper or the center of the formation, and does BA C3 provide any benefit to members of the same formation (ie. can the furthest member of the squad use the range to target of the closest member)

4.     Do BA Squad Support mounts (TW pg.229, TM pg.270) have any requirement for the weapon to be assembled to fired and dismantled to move?

5.    Would space operations adaptation (TM pg. 269) provide any bonuses to Zero-G Operations (similar to the +2 bonus Marine Combat Suits [AToW pg.295] provide)

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #2 on: 21 February 2013, 02:51:14 »
6.
In battle armor combat, the operator's STR does not affect the damage the suit will do.
This contradicts the example on AToW pg. 218 which mentions the operators STR of 7 producing a BD bonus of 2 for a strike with an Elemental's battle claw.  Which one is correct?
=====
I figured this discussion was complex enough to warrant it's own post.

For future reference:
For ATOW, the cargo carrying capacity of Battle Armor units is based on the STR of the user, plus any bonuses provided by the suit, plus a bonus based on the type of suit:
PA(L) = +1 STR
Light = +2 STR
Medium = +4 STR
Heavy = +6 STR
Assault = +8 STR

That will be errata'd into p. 169 of ATOW, under encumbrance.
So, an STR 10 guy in an assault suit would math to STR18 for encumbrance purposes, so at 270kg, the encumbered penalty starts kicking in.

A Myomer Booster adds +4 STR.
In combat, it's a +0M/12 advantage.
emphasis mine
First off, I am confused how +4 strength equates to +12BD; an assault BA suit has a bonus of 8 strength and only gets an AP/BP bonus of +3M/+3 (medium suits with 4 strength get a bonus of +2M/+2), and melee attacks only get a damage bonus of STR/4.
Second, should that line be added to the table on pg. 216
In battle armor combat, the operator's STR does not affect the damage the suit will do.
The example on page 218 (PDF printing) disagrees with this statement and given the nature of what a battle armor suit is, I wouldn't have thought to question that fact; being worn it would stand to reason the operator's traits and abilities directly affect the aggregate performance of the suit.

Quote
The disconnect between +4 STR for carrying purposes and +12BD is because there is a difference between faster motion and lifting capability. Nearly all the strength from the myomers in a suit is utilized to cancel out the significant mass of the suit itself, leaving very little in the way of actual lift capability. A major component of the damage enhancement from suit types is due to their bulk.
Myomer boosters are not designed to help the suit carry more, so it doesn't.
I understand that, and get that there are going to be some differences between the strength ratings used to determine melee damage, and carrying capacity (and movement), but the way melee damage works, that damage bonus is equivalent to boosting the strength by 48 points, which is why it seems so extreme.  I thought it might be a mistake, and I appear to not be the only one (see similar post in TW questions).  I am actually interested to hear how you came up with that number.

While I do understand the strength BA Myomer Boosters and much of the damage done by a larger suit is from the mass part of the  F=MA equation, a BD bonus of 12 seems to be rather on the extreme side, since the standard strength bonus is STR/4 meaning a bonus of 12 would come from a strength of 48!  I don't remember seeing anything that indicates myomer booster equipped BA are gods at smacking around infantry so a BD of 12 seems extreme against infantry (Vibroclaws, which do 1 point of damage to infantry per claw have AP/BD of +4M/5) while at the same time Myomer boosters add +2 damage (per trooper) to swarm attacks which would be a higher +20 BD bonus since damage is divided by BAR 10 for mechs and combat vehicles (for comparison 1 vibroclaw adds 1 point and 2 vibroclaws add 2 points of damage TOTAL to an anti-mech attack).

THe current eratta would seem to have the effect of adding quite a bit of unwarranted anti infantry power while not living up to its ability to increase the hurt put on mechs.  I would definitely like a look into the though process that came up with that.
« Last Edit: 21 February 2013, 03:03:51 by BirdofPrey »

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #3 on: 19 May 2013, 13:14:43 »
Quarterly bump:
I haven't found any additional problems.
Has any progress been made on answering at least SOME of these questions/issues?

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15058
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #4 on: 19 May 2013, 18:06:35 »
Nope, other matters continue to take priority. But perhaps soon, a clearing might emerge.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #5 on: 19 May 2013, 18:41:45 »
That's unfortunate, but understandable, I'm amazed how much already gets done considering you have such a small staff and BT isn't your only IP.

It's fairly trivial to houserule the stuff in the second post easily (I even houserule the BA movement modes, and that's a huge omission; Speaking of which, you said there was errata planned, but I haven't seen that yet), It's the missing stuff mentioned in the first that's the big problem, but I guess that's actually the harder one to fix with all the time spent putting out new books.  Is AToW getting the errata cleanup treatment after TW gets done or is it still too soon for that?

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15058
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #6 on: 19 May 2013, 18:50:38 »
That's unfortunate, but understandable, I'm amazed how much already gets done considering you have such a small staff and BT isn't your only IP.

It's only possible due to several platoons worth of volunteers who take on a lot of the load of the various mundane and less mundane work.


Quote
It's fairly trivial to houserule the stuff in the second post easily (I even houserule the BA movement modes, and that's a huge omission; Speaking of which, you said there was errata planned, but I haven't seen that yet), It's the missing stuff mentioned in the first that's the big problem, but I guess that's actually the harder one to fix with all the time spent putting out new books.  Is AToW getting the errata cleanup treatment after TW gets done or is it still too soon for that?

Generally speaking, errata doesn't exist in official format until vetted by Herb. He generally can't crowbar that in to his schedule until a reprint requires a refresh of the errata, so we can make the new printing as error free as possible.
So, what will likely happen is that we devise the errata when we find the bandwidth (TW and TM errata/reprints are imminent and absorbing a lot of time, as is TRO3145) and post them in the errata forum. That'll have to be 'official enough' until Herb can properly vet a fresh errata document.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #7 on: 19 May 2013, 19:09:33 »
It's only possible due to several platoons worth of volunteers who take on a lot of the load of the various mundane and less mundane work.
Wish I could help, but all I've done so faris bug you guys because you missed a spot (or twelve).

Quote
Generally speaking, errata doesn't exist in official format until vetted by Herb. He generally can't crowbar that in to his schedule until a reprint requires a refresh of the errata, so we can make the new printing as error free as possible.
So, what will likely happen is that we devise the errata when we find the bandwidth (TW and TM errata/reprints are imminent and absorbing a lot of time, as is TRO3145) and post them in the errata forum. That'll have to be 'official enough' until Herb can properly vet a fresh errata document.
I didn't think you meant an entire errata document, I figured you were going to slide a bit on converting movement into the errata thread like you did with myomer boosters.  The way you worded your statement, I was under the impression you already had something to work with.

So in order to get this check engine light to go out, I need to get people to buy out your entire stock of AToW books?

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15058
Re: BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #8 on: 19 May 2013, 19:19:11 »
Wish I could help, but all I've done so faris bug you guys because you missed a spot (or twelve).

Don't look down on giving us purpose in life. ;)



Quote
So in order to get this check engine light to go out, I need to get people to buy out your entire stock of AToW books?

Nah, I think we'll get it up in the errata thread before that.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: Research - BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #9 on: 18 June 2013, 02:47:07 »
It's a bit early for a bump, I know, but there has been a call for errata here.
Ignoring equipment for now, would you be able to answer the questions posted in post 2?

At the very least, can you take a look at my concerns from post 3 since those are already pending errata?
Again, my primary concern is that the errata to damage does not seem in line with the actual abilities of the myomer booster (notably, the errata lets it do far more damage to infantry than vibroclaws do while adding negligible damage when fighting mechs; a complete reverse of the situation at TW scale

A BA Myomer booster only ends up adding 1 damage to melee attacks vs mechs (since you subtract by BAR then divide by tactical armor BAR, even an assault BA with heavy battle claws fails to do damage to a mech while a booster gives all sizes of BA just enough extra damage to hit 1 damage but even a 2 ton BA fails to reach 2 damage).  Vibroclaws end up allowing  a PAL with a heavy battle claw or a light with a battle claw to do 1 damage to a mech, which is only slightly worse than a myomer booster.


edit: and I just now notice the research tag was actually added recently, so I guess you are looking at this.

On a side note, do BA Myomer boosters have modifiers to the martial arts and melee weapons skills (table pg. 216); I'm missing those in the pending errata posted.
« Last Edit: 18 June 2013, 02:55:53 by BirdofPrey »

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15058
Re: Research - BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #10 on: 18 June 2013, 16:52:43 »
We've improved the errata a little bit, to now include those modifiers. I realize that doesn't resolve all questions, just keeping you updated.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5954.msg617350.html#msg617350
The solution is just ignore Paul.

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: Research - BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #11 on: 18 June 2013, 17:54:54 »
Good to at least keep chipping away bit by bit.  I know I gave you a ton of stuff.

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15058
Re: Research - BA Questions Continued.
« Reply #12 on: 18 June 2013, 17:56:09 »
Good to at least keep chipping away bit by bit.  I know I gave you a ton of stuff.

Yep, and we're taking forever, so thanks for the continued patience, especially in the face of errors on our part.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #13 on: 15 January 2014, 15:20:26 »
Anybody looked at any of the questions?
They have been up quite a long while.

Also a small note.  I noticed with the recent AToW errata the vehicular stealth table on pg. 218 got an update, but I should note BA Myomer boosters are supposed to prevent BA from hiding due to the heat output so for the next eratta round (whenever that is) you should probably add a note that BA with a myomer booster always have 0 for their I rating.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2014, 15:23:45 by BirdofPrey »

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #14 on: 28 July 2014, 11:04:08 »
Any updates?

On a side note, is there a specific formula for converting TW scale weaponry to ATOW scale, and would you be willing to share it?

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #15 on: 18 February 2015, 17:33:03 »
Any updates?

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5802
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #16 on: 19 February 2015, 00:41:11 »
Any updates?

On a side note, is there a specific formula for converting TW scale weaponry to ATOW scale, and would you be willing to share it?

See pp. 168-171, AToWC covers conversion from AToW to TW.

For the other way, use pp. 211-218, AToW.

Worth noting: As can be seen from the sheer page count devoted to these, there tends to be a lot of exceptions to any general rule, to account for special effects and places where we simply opted to give RPG characters a chance to survive the onslaught of a 'Mech-scale gun. There has been over 25 years of evolution for both the BattleTech game and its role-playing component, both of which are tailored to different styles of play, which thus makes it challenging when one straddles the line between the two.

-

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #17 on: 19 February 2015, 01:59:23 »
I guess I should have been more specific (figured it was implied by the topic).  I meant converting the BA weaponry presented in Tactical Operations, into AToW stats.

The conversion rules only cover converting vehicular weaponry to damage against unaugmented infantry and always has an AP of 10 and a BD of 6 times the TW scale damage.  BA Weaponry is covered by a table (AToW 215-216)with varying levels of AP/BD, along with an ammo count and burst fire stats weapons (effectively, BA weaponry has all of the stats used by infantry weaponry while heavy weapons are just huge damage).  Said table only covers Tournament legal weaponry (as presented in TW/TM).

I was wondering if there is a formula for converting the damage of BA weaponry into AP/BD values and finding burst fire rate, number of shots, etc.


Though it is out of the scope of the questions I am asking.  I think there are some mech scale weaponry with anti infantry and/or rapid fire capabilities in TacOps as well, which aren't covered in the tables in AToW (p 212-213)
« Last Edit: 19 February 2015, 02:01:35 by BirdofPrey »

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5802
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #18 on: 19 February 2015, 02:57:13 »
Oh, those battle armor-only guns? Nope. I think we started with the BT-to-AToW conversion, then fudged a little, because technically speaking, the MG on a Toad, the MG carried by a MG foot platoon, and the MG carried on a BattleMech, are all different weapons entirely.

-

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Answered) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #19 on: 04 July 2015, 18:26:02 »
Just remind you folks, this is still here.

You may continue to hate me for bothering you with so much stuff at once.

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5802
Re: (Answered) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #20 on: 04 July 2015, 18:56:50 »
It's flagged as answered. As noted above, there are no formulas to convert BA only guns to AToW.

-

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Answered) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #21 on: 04 July 2015, 19:14:38 »
I know it's flagged as answered,  but it really hasn't been answered.
The original questions I asked haven't been answered, eve if the one I asked later about conversion rules was (was hoping to eventually, have full stats for TO BA equipment in AToW scale, anyways, though) and this was mainly a, "are you working on", thread.
I am patient, so th only thing thing I am actually bothered about not having been answered is how to convert BA movement from TW to AToW scale.
« Last Edit: 04 July 2015, 19:29:05 by BirdofPrey »

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5802
Re: (Answered) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #22 on: 04 July 2015, 19:34:28 »
I know it's flagged as answered,  but it really hasn't been answered.
The original questions I asked haven't been answered, eve if the one I asked later about conversion rules was (was hoping to eventually, have full stats for TO BA equipment in AToW scale, anyways, though) and this was mainly a, "are you working on", thread.
I am patient, so th only thing thing I am actually bothered about not having been answered is how to convert BA movement from TW to AToW scale.

Erm, battle armor converts as a Mech, so each MP of TW-scale movement translates to 15 m/turn at the AToW scale. This, unfortunately, does not cover the difference between walking and running, since those units don't HAVE a walk and run rate. The easiest is to presume the MP rate at the TW scale is running (a maximum MP rate for BA), as we would presume the same for conventional infantry. That would suggest a walk rate equal to 2/3rds (round down) of the run. Ergo, a BA that runs 1 MP on the ground (15 m/ AToW turn, would have a Walk of 10 m/ AToW turn).

-

BirdofPrey

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: (Answered) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #23 on: 05 July 2015, 01:58:21 »
See, I thought as much, and that's what I have been doing, but it wasn't clarified in the book, and last time I asked you said you didn't know.  Then I was told there was errata to come.
That was a few years ago.
Hence the mention (again).  I like to be sure I'm actually doing it right, not just making a bad assumption. 
Would BA springing be twice the calculated walk MP (ie. what 'mechs use? infantry sprint is 2x run speed).  Also can BA climb, crawl and evade (I'm assuming swimming is out), and is any part of the table on AToW pg, 168 applicable to BA.


Anything in post 2 you can answer?

Thanks for the patience, though.  I know this is probably annoying, me asking a half dozen questions about one thing.
If you get tired of it, though, remember I won't accept any gifts under 5 megatons

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10969
  • Professor of Errata
Re: (Research) BA Questions Continued
« Reply #24 on: 31 March 2017, 19:50:24 »
Bumping this for Paul.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

 

Register