Register Register

Author Topic: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?  (Read 3212 times)

Cambo

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 193
Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« on: 03 September 2013, 12:47:54 »
Granted this is probably a little bit late, but I figured it might be a good idea to ask this before the MUL update goes live.... even if Alexander Knight and nckestrel will want to kill me...  :-\

But the fact that the BF and now (assumedly) AS ignore rear facing weapons has always bugged me. 
There are plenty of favourites (Like the Atlas-7D as an example)that have enough rear firepower to warrant such a ruling, and it would help mitigate the absolute raping that can happen when a unit gets into another's rear arc.  In fact greping the SSW master file reveals 409 pieces of equipment with a Rear mounting - mainly weapons, in 270 unit files - and that's just Mechs, and some Vehicles.

This should also be a feature when using the aerospace rules.  In the classic designs there are plenty of fighters that mount a rear facing weapon to discourage tailing, but again this part of the game is sacrificed in the AS rules.  If you're being tailed you should be able to fire back with rear mounted weapons.

I've added the +1 as a concession to the secondary target thing, but i think that could easily be dropped.

So here's my suggestion.
REAR(X/X/X/X):
Mechs:
Rear mounted weapons are converted separately to determine a base rear mounted damage value.  If a unit with a REAR ability has an enemy unit within it's rear arc it may make an attack using the values listed in the Rear ability instead of a normal attack. (rear arc only, not units that are only outside of a unit's front firing arc).  Apply a +1 To Hit penalty when using this attack.  This attack may be made in conjunction to weapons in a TUR ability.
Aerospace:
Units with this ability may make attacks using the listed values in the REAR ability when being tailed, but at a +1 To Hit Penalty.

Thoughts?

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4908
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #1 on: 03 September 2013, 13:26:28 »
sorry, but no.  Rear weapons just aren't used as much, even in normal play.  Also consider that not only is the damage that rear-firing weapons do ignored, but so is their heat.  And AS damage values assume you're doing a full-movement alpha strike (or as best you can with your heat burden) every turn.  There is no "bracket fire" or "only one arc" fire.

Charlie Tango

  • Big Shoulders Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6416
  • See ya in the Drift...
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #2 on: 03 September 2013, 16:42:31 »
With Alpha Strike's " move any direction, end with any facing" thing and the massive forward firing arc, it makes mutual support and covering a teammate's rear a lot easier.

Just like in BT, if he's gotten into your rear arc unmolested, you've been unlucky or made a tactical error.

And +1 damage is not IMHO a massive raping. It's reasonable considering the weaker rear armor.
Catalyst Game Labs Demo Agent #310
MW Yuki Yamamori, WTH-1 Whitworth, 1st Striker Star, Alpha Trinary, Battle Corps Legion
"This is a war universe. War all the time. That is its nature.
There may be other universes based on all sorts of other principles, but ours seems to be based on war and games."
  
-- William S. Burroughs

Cambo

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 193
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #3 on: 03 September 2013, 19:06:21 »
It's not the +1 that bugs me, it's the inability to fight back.

It just seems weird to me that almost a third of the damage a Mad Cad D can do a short and medium range would be ignored.  I realise that certain mechs get nerfed by the conversion process but this seems rather egregious... Especially with the new Savage Wolf being such a prestigious unit in the new era.  (Look we've made one of our new show boat units unusable! YAY!).

Add on to that the aerospace concept of mounting rear firing weapons just to handle situations where you've been tailed and it seems to me at least, that we're nerfing a little to much, and this thought was an attempt to rectify that.

William J. Pennington

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1079
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #4 on: 03 September 2013, 19:27:11 »
I'm glad there's no rear firing. Its added to the game, the importance of maneuver and positioning.  There are tradeoff and compromises, but this has been for the good at this style of play.  It's keeping the overall feel of play, and making it fun, that is more important than trying to keep every detail of the game, even muted.

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4908
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #5 on: 03 September 2013, 19:32:02 »
It just seems weird to me that almost a third of the damage a Mad Cad D can do a short and medium range would be ignored.  I realise that certain mechs get nerfed by the conversion process but this seems rather egregious... Especially with the new Savage Wolf being such a prestigious unit in the new era.  (Look we've made one of our new show boat units unusable! YAY!).

Uh.  About that.  Yeah.  Not so much.  The Mad Cat Mk. IV Prime is a 6 / 6 / 3 damage line.  If we included the rear-firing Streak-6s, it would become a 5 / 5 / 3 with OV 2.

Why so low, you may ask?  Simple.  If we add the rear-firing streak racks to the equation, we have to supply ammo for them.  The Prime does not have sufficient ammo for 4 streak launchers.  So you get the firepower from 3 Streak-6 launchers, but pay for the heat buildup of 4 Streak-6 launchers.  Sadly, the Prime was overheating with the heat from just two launchers.

Mohammed As`Zaman Bey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2187
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #6 on: 04 September 2013, 01:01:51 »
What about 'Mechs that can flip their arms? In campaign gameplay, I have intentionally positioned my back to the enemy in order to temp them to risk facing a pair of Clan ERPPCs.

I have shot down ASF with rear-firing ASF weapons. Considering that losing initiative almost guarantees somebody getting a tail shot, rear-firing weapons oftimes pay for themselves.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 39085
  • Carpe Arcanum Cibum
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #7 on: 04 September 2013, 09:03:21 »
In AS(and in normal play, as well as the real world), a good subsitute for rear-firing weapons is a wingman. Have a buddy hang behind you, close enough to go after anyone that tries to tail you, but not so close that it's easy for the second bad guy to tail your buddy.

Same tactic works on the ground.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4908
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Should there be a REAR(X/X/X/X) Ability?
« Reply #8 on: 04 September 2013, 20:44:37 »
What about 'Mechs that can flip their arms? In campaign gameplay, I have intentionally positioned my back to the enemy in order to temp them to risk facing a pair of Clan ERPPCs.

Alpha Strike is all about simplifying and streamlining.  For firing arcs, you have a "front" and "rear" with the dividing line being drawn as if it was a wall the 'Mech had backed up to.  Anything in the "front" arc can be shot at with your entire firepower.  The only way to shoot into your "back" arc is if you have a turret.

Of course, it also doesn't cost movement to change facing, so....

 

Register