BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

BattleTech Game Systems => Alpha Strike => Topic started by: wildkadabra on 28 March 2021, 00:39:07

Title: Water Hull Breach
Post by: wildkadabra on 28 March 2021, 00:39:07
Hi, I'm new to Alpha Strike, I had a question regarding hull breaches. If your mech is in level 1 water (partially submerged and getting partial cover), do hull breaches apply, or does your mech need to be fully submerged in water of depth 2 or more for it to happen?
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Inspector2311 on 06 April 2021, 22:46:31
I would also like to know this.  The book makes it clear that "fully submerged" and "partially submerged" are two very different things, but then goes on to use the term "submerged" ambiguously, particularly in the sections where it describes the criticals related to being in water...
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 07 April 2021, 06:41:03
If it just says submerged, then it means partially or fully submerged.
Partially submerged units do check for hull breach.
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/alpha-strike/answered-partially-submerged-units-critical-hits/msg1554731/#msg1554731
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Inspector2311 on 13 April 2021, 12:02:05
Thank you!  I had tried searching, but for whatever reason did not find that.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Kell on 04 May 2021, 16:26:36
Why would anyone go into water then? Risk is too high
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Minnow on 04 May 2021, 16:30:12
I am sorry but I don't understand why we are continually taking away every advantage of using terrain in Alpha Strike. Fist it was trees, now water. Submerged has a definition and units in 1" of water are not submerged.

Why get partial cover if it's assumed the locations in cover are the only ones getting hit?

I can understand getting a hull breach roll in 1" of water if you don't have armor left but every hit... This ruling doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 04 May 2021, 19:37:47
There was no change within versions of Alpha Strike.
Alpha Strike 1st printing:
Quote
"To be considered underwater, a unit must be completely submerged"
"Mech units that are standing in Water terrain at a depth (negative elevation) level of 1 inch will receive partial cover benefits from the water. Because the water surrounds the ’Mech, this partial cover applies even if the attacker is standing at a higher level than the target and would ordinarily be able to see the target’s legs. If a unit is completely submerged within water (such as a ’Mech unit standing in water features 2 or more inches deep), LOS to (and from) the submerged unit is considered to be blocked." 

We've clearly already have a difference between the concepts of completely submerged and (merely) submerged.  In water, submerged, gets partial cover.  But you have to completely submerged (therefore something different) to block LOS completely. You are not underwater if you are merely in water, you must be completely submerged.

Quote
"Attacks against submerged units can only be made between units that are also submerged (see the To-Hit Modifiers Table, p. 37), or by between submerged units and units operating on the surface of the same water feature using torpedoes (see TOR# special ability,p. 48)."
If we take submerged to mean completely submerged only, then unit completely submerged cannot attack a unit in level 1 water (those units are not completely submerged). But they can attack units on the surface, so implying this weird you put a foot under the water and you can't be attacked, but if you are floating on top you can be.  So it must mean (merely) submerged as it says, not completely submerged, which it doesn't say.  Again we already have a split in the two terms, submerged means partially or completely submerged.

So we come to hull breaches
Quote
"However, to reflect the danger of flooding due to hull breaches, every successful attack against a submerged unit generates a Critical Hit chance, even if there is no structure damage (see Step 7: Roll for Critical Hits, p. 40). If a submerged unit loses all of its armor, it automatically sinks and is considered destroyed."

Doesn't require completely submerged.  Any type of submerging counts.

The change made was to specifically define everywhere that had exclusively the (merely) submerged as "partially submerged", to more clearly separate it from "completely submerged".  It did not take anywhere that said completely submerged and change it to apply to partially submerged.  Anywhere that says completely submerged now has said it since the 1st printing. 

Why allow 'mechs in level 1 water to take hull breaches?  Alpha Strike doesn't have falling, but falling in level 1 water does cause hull breaches. So if you are attacked while in water, it assumes you will fall at some point (AS turns are roughly three total warfare turns of attacks) and therefore suffer the hull breach. 
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Minnow on 05 May 2021, 07:50:02
Thank you for the explanation.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Crackerb0x on 05 May 2021, 08:18:50
Why would anyone go into water then? Risk is too high

If you move at least 1" or more you get your full TMM, right? So with that in mind, I could see scenarios where water would be advantageous to high TMM, low armor IF or Artillery spotter Mechs for extra defensive bonuses with minimal risk of something horrible that would happen anyway if they get hit for any significant damage.

If I had a water feature or a woods and wanted a light mech to spot for IF, the IF would take penalties from the spotter in woods, which would not be applicable in water, I'd choose the water for my spotter.

Really any high TMM unit that can move in water and doesn't care about how far they go can use water with less risk because of how few hits they can take regardless of the terrain they're in.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Crackerb0x on 05 May 2021, 08:36:42
In the same paragraph quoted from page 48 about crits and hull breaches, it says the following

Quote
With the exception of damage from energy attacks (weapon attack from units that have the ENE special ability), all damage from underwater weapon attacks that hit a submerged unit is reduced by half (round down, to a minimum of 1).

Are all weapon attacks against a submerged unit an "underwater weapon attack" or are "underwater weapon attacks" attacks performed by a unit that is fully submerged.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 05 May 2021, 08:45:53
Underwater is defined as completely submerged (in the underwater section?).  If the attacker is completely submerged, it’s an underwater attack.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: The Wayfarer on 17 May 2021, 23:04:47
This ruling is discouraging.  I agree with the previous posters; who in there right mind would move into water? 

I would argue that the rules clearly differentiate between “completely submerged” and partially submerged.  Only submerged units are subject to the hull breach rule.   “To be considered underwater, a unit must be completely submerged. For ’Mechs, that means the unit must be in water at least 2 inches in depth, (35). 

This difference is clearly stated on page 41, “Submerged Units: A unit in water deep enough to cover the unit’s entire height, such as a ’Mech unit standing in water 2 or more inches in depth, is completely submerged (see Unit Heights Table, p . 157) . A unit in water at least 1” deep, but less than the unit’s height (such as a ’Mech unit standing in 1”-deep water) is partially submerged”.

The difference is again stated on page 43, “ Water: ’Mech units that are standing in Water terrain at a depth (negative elevation) level of 1 inch will receive partial cover benefits from the water.  If a fully submerged ’Mech (standing in water features of 2 or more inches in depth), attacks a ’Mech standing in Depth 1 water, the target still has partial cover”.

Finally, page 48, “ Underwater Damage:... However, to reflect the danger of flooding due to hull breaches, every successful attack against a submerged unit generates a Critical Hit chance, even if there is no structure damage (see Critical Hits, p . 49) . If a completely submerged unit loses all of its armor, it automatically sinks and is considered destroyed.” 

If this ruling equates partial and complete submersion why do partially submerged mechs not sink or get destroyed when they lose all their armor like completely submerged units?  Submerged is submerged, right?

Mike

Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Son of Kerenski on 19 May 2021, 02:22:28
While I also dislike the new official ruling I don't see it changing anytime soon.

But you can always rule it how you like it in your own games as that's what we do.

"While the mech has armour in water, it's fine. If it has no armour then if it ends the turn in water it's destroyed."
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Fear Factory on 20 May 2021, 08:37:34
I'm just chiming in to address the naysayers... If you don't have the breaching rule, everyone runs for the pool.

My group ran a campaign for a full year. About halfway through, we realized that 'Mechs spent a heck of a long time in water for the reasons in this thread. There is no reason NOT to enter water because there is zero risk for doing so. Fast moving units can abuse the heck out of it. TMM's of 4 become 5 with no downside.

However, the rule might be a little too crippling. Just add a check of 10+ (in line with breaching in Total Warfare) before rolling the actual critical hit.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 20 May 2021, 08:43:50
While I also dislike the new official ruling I don't see it changing anytime soon.

Less time arguing what the rule is, more time offering opinions on how the game plays, is much more effective.
We have changed multiple rules because of player feedback. 
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 20 May 2021, 08:53:03
Water is partial cover and free heat dissipation.  The drawbacks are reduced movement (which doesn't matter all that much in many games if water is the ultimate terrain position) and possible hull breaches. 
I dislike the water not reducing TMM, but I haven't had much success dealing with that issue in general (fast units in woods has the same issue).  But that makes the partial cover from water very powerful on some units.  I've had a Spider in water taunt multiple companies of enemies without getting hit.

I like the general idea of the breach roll, but a 10+ makes it very unlikely in an AS game.  You're likely to be destroyed anyway by the time a hull breach happens?   But perhaps an 8 or 9.  I'm not sure how well that would go over since it's effectively restoring piloting skill checks into AS.. though bogged down sort of did that already?  A literal slippery slope (of falling in water..)
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Fear Factory on 20 May 2021, 10:48:19
I like the general idea of the breach roll, but a 10+ makes it very unlikely in an AS game.  You're likely to be destroyed anyway by the time a hull breach happens?   But perhaps an 8 or 9.  I'm not sure how well that would go over since it's effectively restoring piloting skill checks into AS.. though bogged down sort of did that already?  A literal slippery slope (of falling in water..)

Eh, you can lose a 'Mech pretty fast if you fall in water. Doesn't matter how much armor you have because water will still find a way.

In regards to a rule... you still have the "no critical hit" result so I think an 8+ would be fair and a number we're used to. It would probably match the odds in TW, and be a way to account for the lack of a piloting skill roll for a fall check. For repairs after the fact it should be pretty simple. All water does is shut down or disable things... unless it's the cockpit.

EDIT: It won't bog down gameplay since it's more of a special case rule. You're not rolling unless there is water on the board and if you're using it. If anything, it'll take a little less risk off of using a water hex since an auto-crit is already pretty strong. Wouldn't be any different than motive hit checks on vehicles. 8+ is enough of a risk that would keep heavily armored units from parking in it and smaller units from scooting around in it for too long. Heck, all of a sudden, hovercraft are a lot scarier.

If extra rolls are a concern... would the odds match if you roll 3d6 and discard the lowest die or a die of the attacker's/defender's choosing?
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Son of Kerenski on 20 May 2021, 19:41:36
Less time arguing what the rule is, more time offering opinions on how the game plays, is much more effective.
We have changed multiple rules because of player feedback.

Really? I thought once it had been ruled then it's cut and dry.

So you're telling me if there's enough of us to voice our displeasure of the ruling it can be changed?

And do you have examples of where rules got changed because of fan feedback?
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Fear Factory on 20 May 2021, 19:46:58
Really? I thought once it had been ruled then it's cut and dry.

So you're telling me if there's enough of us to voice our displeasure of the ruling it can be changed?

And do you have examples of where rules got changed because of fan feedback?

You used to have to roll a check for a motive hit first, then roll the motive hit. Abou and I suggested just doing a single roll on the motive hit chart that and it was changed. That was a very long time ago.

I mean, I'm fine with the water stuff as it stands, I won't lose sleep over it. I just like presenting ideas, good and bad, and discussing things.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 20 May 2021, 20:54:16
Hull down and sprinting were added to standard rules.
Multiple attacks were added as an option.
Occupied woods were added, in addition to intervening.
Those are a couple I recall off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Son of Kerenski on 20 May 2021, 23:06:57
Hull down and sprinting were added to standard rules.
Multiple attacks were added as an option.
Occupied woods were added, in addition to intervening.
Those are a couple I recall off the top of my head.

Nice that fans got those in, but they seem like they are more additions to standard rules as opposed to actual changes to official rules that players gave feedback on.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: Weirdo on 21 May 2021, 09:17:04
Really? I thought once it had been ruled then it's cut and dry.

So you're telling me if there's enough of us to voice our displeasure of the ruling it can be changed?

And do you have examples of where rules got changed because of fan feedback?
In regular Battletech, the Force Size Modifier and bizarre artillery drift rules were wildly unpopular, and the drift rules were altered and the FSM killed completely.

Similarly, there was a Randall-level ruling several years back saying that because all the ammo in a conventional vehicle was in one slot, it has to all be one type, no splitting the bins for alternate ammo. This caused a very large uproar, and was rescinded quickly.
Title: Re: Water Hull Breach
Post by: nckestrel on 21 May 2021, 09:23:09
Nice that fans got those in, but they seem like they are more additions to standard rules as opposed to actual changes to official rules that players gave feedback on.

Good point.  No point in me wasting any more of my time listening to this thread.