BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

BattleTech Game Systems => Ground Combat => Topic started by: Jellico on 23 August 2020, 06:19:47

Title: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 23 August 2020, 06:19:47
In the red corner.
Streak LRM10
5 Tons
4 Heat with Streak
12 rounds per ton
10 damage.

In the blue corner
LRM15 + Artemis V
5 tons
5 heat
8 rounds per ton
12 damage with -1 to-hit or
9 damage under ECM.

The LRM is more damaging in a permissive environment. You could say 1/3 more damaging.  Weaker in ECM.
Little bit heavier because of the ammo. Little bit hotter. I would go as far as to say the Streak is effectively 2 or 3 heat.

So. Who wins?
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Empyrus on 23 August 2020, 06:43:50
Which one fits better. The latter takes 4 slots, not always an option.

Space aside, there's also another thing to consider: LRMs with Artemis still offer alternative munition and indirect fire options. Yes, you lose the Artemis bonus, but you do have greater flexibility if needed.

Hard to pick between these really. I dislike Artemis systems due to their extra mass, ECM weakness, and being deadweight if alternate munitions or indirect fire is wanted. The bonuses are good but... well, ECM is just a smidgen too common.
If Streak LRMs weren't as massive and maybe had extra range (like [Clan] Streak SRMs vs SRMs), they'd be an easy choice.

If i'm building a unit, i'm inclined to use standard LRMs without Artemis. But if i pick a canonical sheet, i can work with either, with no preference provided the unit in question otherwise fills my needs.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: SCC on 23 August 2020, 06:53:41
I'd say ditch the Artemis V and load anti-radiation rounds into the launcher.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Empyrus on 23 August 2020, 07:00:57
ARADs aren't good against everything, they have penalties if a target does not have electronics or isn't tagged with a Narc pod, +2 to hit and -2 to cluster hit roll.
EDIT In case someone hadn't noticed, errata increased communications equipment minimum tonnage to 3.5 tons (this was done after it was ruled all 'Mechs and combat vehicles had 1 ton of communications equipment-equivalent included already.)
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sartris on 23 August 2020, 18:55:29
I tend to favor accuracy above most other factors so Artemis V gets my provisional vote.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Col Toda on 24 August 2020, 02:59:50
Streak 10 . Had a jumping mech with 2 Streak 10s and ER PPC and er med lasers . I could jump fire the streaks every turn and miss and not fire  enough to keep a no penalty due to heat . Ammo is never wasted heat balance due to hit and miss odds is better . LRMs is only better  when you have ammo and excess heat sinks to burn .
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: StoneRhino on 24 August 2020, 06:34:27
if i'm picking one of the two then its the lrm15. I'd rather not bother with the artemis and use that tonnage for more ammo. The reason why is that the streaks cannot indirect fire, nor use special munitions, which are prime reasons to use lrms over other weapons, especially when HAGs are an option. Nothing sucks like being in short range of a lrm boat like a nova cat or kraken who is behind a hill and doesn't really need to roll very high to hit you.

streaks would be great for players that are just looking to do raw damage with their weapons.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 24 August 2020, 15:49:39
Streak loses absolutely every time. No IDF, no alternate ammo, just use an ER laser or PPC instead and get it over with.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Mohammed As`Zaman Bey on 24 August 2020, 15:54:20
  I use Streaks for one on one duels and regular LRMs for battle that allow IF.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 24 August 2020, 17:26:50
In the red corner.
Streak LRM10
5 Tons
4 Heat with Streak
12 rounds per ton
10 damage.

In the blue corner
LRM15 + Artemis V
5 tons
5 heat
8 rounds per ton
12 damage with -1 to-hit or
9 damage under ECM.

The LRM is more damaging in a permissive environment. You could say 1/3 more damaging.  Weaker in ECM.
Little bit heavier because of the ammo. Little bit hotter. I would go as far as to say the Streak is effectively 2 or 3 heat.

So. Who wins?

The L15.
The advantages of the Streak system are illusionary. Sure...you can try to hit at extreme TNs, but the launcher itself is so massive that you can easily carry extra ammo. Add in the extra flexibility, less impact from ECM, IDF, etc and there really is no contest.

If the Streak system had extra range, or a TN mod, it would justify the extra mass. But as it is, it is too heavy for what it offers. But...great for flavour and gaming the BV system.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Kojak on 24 August 2020, 17:36:12
Frankly, the only particularly worthwhile Streak LRM is the SLRM20, because it's an auto-PSR gun. I'll use the others, don't get me wrong, but not because they're particularly optimal. So my vote is for the blue team.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Orin J. on 24 August 2020, 20:16:36
the streak-L10's advantages really only bear it out in edge cases or situations where you somehow have advanced weapons bit need to nurse the ammo badly. in normal use, the LRM15 with or without artemis badly out performs it in a tactical sense.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 24 August 2020, 22:09:50
the streak-L10's advantages really only bear it out in edge cases or situations where you somehow have advanced weapons bit need to nurse the ammo badly.
...So any raiding or invasion fleet that lack an infinite supply of Dropships?
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: LastChanceCav on 24 August 2020, 23:29:35
I'd rather have the advantage to hit my opponent more often than maximize the damage at higher THN. Give me the Artemis.

Cheers,
LCC
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 25 August 2020, 10:18:17
While I agree with the IC RecGuide justification for the Griffin C to use Streak LRMs, and was projecting it out to the campaign for Terra while fending off the green (hey look, the color of jealousy) birds . . . just like with Streak vs SRMs, I prefer the basic launcher for the utility.

And that is the break- to me utility in a campaign environment will still edge out ammo conservation.  I want more tools and options for the tactical situation- on offense or defense- than just keeping my ammo counts high.

With that said, the design of the Griffin C makes a lot of sense for its expected purpose- equipping lower-skilled forces with a good punch.  Conserving ammo with a more marginal gunner (FWL or LC abathka) is a better idea than it is with a Clan vet or elite pilot.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: SCC on 25 August 2020, 20:39:28
ARADs aren't good against everything, they have penalties if a target does not have electronics or isn't tagged with a Narc pod, +2 to hit and -2 to cluster hit roll.
EDIT In case someone hadn't noticed, errata increased communications equipment minimum tonnage to 3.5 tons (this was done after it was ruled all 'Mechs and combat vehicles had 1 ton of communications equipment-equivalent included already.)
1. This is the post-Jihad era, everything seems to mount ECM or something else to attract ARAD missiles these days.

2. On the off chance your target doesn't mount such equipment, Narc beacons work just as well, and the Clan honor does allow you to plant them on vehicles.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Empyrus on 26 August 2020, 15:08:31
I don't think enough units mount ECM to make ARADs standard munition choice, but there's just enough units with ECM to make Artemis useless too often.
Good Narc carriers aren't common enough to rely on them to make ARADs work against units that don't carry ECM.
ARADs can be a good choice for units with deep enough ammo bins to be sure, but not good as primary ammo option.

This based on thinking my forces and variants within them as opponents.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 26 August 2020, 16:08:25
Its not just ECM- it follows NARC/iNARC beacons, enemy Artemis/Apollo, C3, BAP, and I think ComGear that is getting bonuses (init, sat, etc).  TAG?  Not sure how it acts with Stealth/Chameleon/Null-Sig since I do not have the books in front of me.

Which is 5 designs in the new Rec2, 3 in Rec4, and 1 in Rec5 . . . but considering the Classics in those RCs have the 3025 versions, its not the best measure of numbers.

I am not filling up my ammo bins with ARADs unless I have NARC/iNARC launchers in my company, but one something like a Catapult, Archer or anything with multiple bins its worth it in a company vs company battle.  You have good odds that 3 or 4 enemy mechs or vehicles will have some of those electronics.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Kovax on 31 August 2020, 11:32:28
If I'm putting the launcher on a fast platform to harass the enemy, I'll take the Streaks.  You can keep the THNs high, and not worry about ammo or heat except when you actually do damage.  That's especially useful against any ECM units the enemy decides to put in the backfield for protection against any Artemis-equipped units in your main force.

In other situations, the non-Streak launcher allows IDF, special munitions, additional targeting options, etc.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Col Toda on 03 September 2020, 19:31:36
It is true that streaks only do direct fire but LRM fire control systems lose the benefit doing indirect fire.  You have better heat management with streak permitting a jumping unit to get high ground or position for a direct fire shot . Only in Aerospace is the LRM with Artemis V a better choice . 
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 04 September 2020, 13:33:38
Incorrect. You can still use indirect fire, you just don't get the benefit of the Artemis at the same time. Same for alternate ammo.

With Streak racks, you lose the options that are the whole point of missiles.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: SCC on 06 September 2020, 05:57:50
I'll have to double check the rules, but I think Streak LRMs can still do IDF, they just don't function as Streak when doing so.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Brakiel on 06 September 2020, 09:52:43
I'll have to double check the rules, but I think Streak LRMs can still do IDF, they just don't function as Streak when doing so.

Nope, TacOps p327 explicitly denies using IDF. Only iATMs can do that.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 06 September 2020, 11:40:10
Hence the pointlessness of SLRMs. There's nothing they bring to the board that existing energy or ballistic weapons don't already do, unless you're *really* worried about reflective or anti-ballistic armor.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 06 September 2020, 13:37:28
I still have a standing challenge to beat my proof-of-concept Streak Bane in sheer long-range, sustainable firepower.  My table has brought forth no contenders.

For all the flak SLRMs tend to gather, nobody's been able to replicate it to any satisfying extent.  Not with regular LRMs, ballistics, or energy weapons.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 06 September 2020, 14:19:24
Hence the pointlessness of SLRMs. There's nothing they bring to the board that existing energy or ballistic weapons don't already do, unless you're *really* worried about reflective or anti-ballistic armor.

Ballistic-Reinforced halves damage from missiles, too.

Streaks are excellent for mercenaries or other supplied-by-the-c-bill units because it turns out a ton of LRM ammo is 30,000 for a ton and Streak LRM ammo is 60,000 for a ton but you can at least be sure none of it was wasted.  Considering how often I take LRM-20 shots on 8s or 9s I wouldn't be surprised if only 1-in-4 missiles actually hit a target.  Streaks appeal to the bean-counter while also still actually doing damage.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Iceweb on 06 September 2020, 15:42:24
Look the only reason I am looking to take a streak LMR means customs are in play and I want to exploit them.  If someone can get more use out a stock mech with streak LMRs I'm impressed, instead of something else. 

So if Streak LMRs are in play then we have access to cutting edge clan tech.  I see two reason to grab the Streaks.  Reason one I can only afford one piece of clan tech from the Foxes and I want every expensive piece of ordinance to land.  This is a bean counter issue and we aren't gonna touch more on it. 

Reason two I have lots of clan tech to play with of which ever types I want.  So I have decided to have a mech that wants to exploit the streak.  Lets look at what the streak can do.  Direct fire with clusters.  So why not just slap on an ERPPC?  The only reason is I have enough ERPPCs in my unit, which means I am working in a team and I'm not trying to get personal honor.  So I want the clusters to exploit holes and crit seek from range. 

So I want the biggest rack I can and as many of them as I can fit on my mech.  Still why not use an LBX with cluster ammo.  For some reason I don't want 1 point hit bonus, for some reason I want to shoot on bad numbers each round and not worry about heat.

The only way this makes sense is if I have skimped on heat sinks, and plan to jump every round.  It also helps if I have various missile SPAs to encourage me not use an energy weapon or an auto cannon.  Though those don't help me not choose the Art V instead.   

So that is my only reason to go with Streak LMRs.  Lots of 20s on a jump capable mechs, that skimped on heat sinks, not looking for honor, and where I have a bunch of teammates with hole punchers to make holes for me to exploit.     

The one interesting thing is that you can put AES on an arm with the LRMs to improve the accuracy.  Well yes this works with the Art V for a double bonus we hit some diminishing returns.  Also the system works better with heavy weapons because of the limited space in the arm.  While the streak system is much heavier than a regular launcher with Art V, with the 20, the Streak system is actually less bulky than a regular 20 with Art V attached.   

An edge case but an awesome one if you can exploit it.   
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 06 September 2020, 16:40:39
Realistically, if Streak LRMs were going to seriously compete with Clan LRMs for any kind of position other than the benefit of ammo/heat efficiency, they needed to have more advantages than just an automatic 11 on the cluster roll.  Increased range brackets from 7/14/21 to 8/16/24 would have been a good one.  Alternately, they could have been Enhanced weight (+1/+1/+2/+2) for Clan-weight launchers of 2/3.5/5.5/7 instead of double/IS tonnage, which at equivalent tonnages compete directly with unaugmented launchers in terms of damage.

One Streak LRM-5 versus two LRM-5s is 5 points versus 6.
One Streak LRM-10 versus one LRM-15 is 10 points versus 9.
One Streak LRM-15 versus one LRM-15 and two LRM-5s is 15 points versus 15.
One Streak LRM-20 versus two LRM-15s is 20 versus 18.

Instead we got this.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 06 September 2020, 17:48:45
I'd like to clarify to those convinced on the categorical inferiority of SLRMs, that my standing challenge is still active.  I can't offer anything material, but anyone that does manage to solidly beat it at its own role will win bragging rights.

After all, since the SLRM is so uncompetitive, it should be a cinch to find or make something that clobbers the proof-of-concept SLRM Bane.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 06 September 2020, 19:25:53
I'd like to clarify to those convinced on the categorical inferiority of SLRMs, that my standing challenge is still active.  I can't offer anything material, but anyone that does manage to solidly beat it at its own role will win bragging rights.

After all, since the SLRM is so uncompetitive, it should be a cinch to find or make something that clobbers the proof-of-concept SLRM Bane.

At a typical TN of 7, your Streak Bane would be averaging say 50 points of damage per round at a range of up to 21 hexes with a maximum of 100 damage when the TN falls low enough.
It's impressive but it also relies on a quirk on the Streak 5 - namely, that unlike the other versions it doesn't a critical which means that you CAN pack them in. The same trick onlyworks on Mechs where space is limited. The trick won't work on a superheavy Mech or vehicles or ASFs.

Even so, "clobbering" such a beast is very possible because the Streak LRM loses quite a bit of what makes missiles systems worthwhile. No indirect fire, no alternate mnunitions, increased cost of launcher and ammunition.

And the canon Bane 2 comes close to that level of firepower without relying on such quirks. Your challenge also lacks definition and constraints - a Supernova may only be able to output a typical 30 points but it outranges and out lasts your Bane Streak. Conversely, several other designs can outdamage your Bane but you might judge the design features inadequate. But yes - your Streak Bane is impressive in its firepower but at the same time relies on various design quirks no other streak system has. If you were to compare a Streak 10 vs an LRM10 for example, your argument wouldn't work.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 06 September 2020, 23:08:56
At a typical TN of 7, your Streak Bane would be averaging say 50 points of damage per round at a range of up to 21 hexes with a maximum of 100 damage when the TN falls low enough.
The average is ~58, actually.  Maximum is impractical due to heat sink issues (like most Clan design), but the machine can safely attempt to fire all guns at the to-hit numbers you see in practice, up to to-hit numbers as low as ~5-6.
Quote
It's impressive but it also relies on a quirk on the Streak 5 - namely, that unlike the other versions it doesn't a critical which means that you CAN pack them in. The same trick onlyworks on Mechs where space is limited.
Clan SLRMs (and Clan SSRMs) have identical weight and crits to the IS standard, non-streak missile launchers.  The SLRM-5 is no exception to that pattern.
Even so, "clobbering" such a beast is very possible because the Streak LRM loses quite a bit of what makes missiles systems worthwhile. No indirect fire, no alternate mnunitions, increased cost of launcher and ammunition.
I meant clobbering in its battlefield role, not literally blowing it up.  I will not claim the machine is invincible to airstrikes or artillery.
Quote
Your challenge also lacks definition and constraints
I'll provide the specifics in a new thread (Battlemech Fan Designs) soon-ish, since this thread isn't actually about the Bane 5 specifically.
Quote
a Supernova may only be able to output a typical 30 points but it outranges and out lasts your Bane Streak.
Base Supernova has a serious heat issue and can only sustainably fire 4 of the lasers (40 points) before hitting serious overheating issues.  At a to-hit of 7, that translates to ~23 points sustained, 40% that of the Bane proof-of-concept.
Quote
But yes - your Streak Bane is impressive in its firepower but at the same time relies on various design quirks no other streak system has.
As previously established, the SLRM-5 followed the exact same rules as all the other Clan Streak launchers.  There's no special "Streak-5" exception.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 06 September 2020, 23:27:43
Clan SLRMs (and Clan SSRMs) have identical weight and crits to the IS standard, non-streak missile launchers.

A meaningless distinction. The SLRM5 is unique in that it doesn't increase in size. In this, it lacks one of the weaknesses of the Streak system as a whole.

Quote
I meant clobbering in its battlefield role, not literally blowing it up.

Which is...? Thanks to the Streaks deficiencies, the S-LRM is not really equatable to other missile systems but is more akin to ballistic or energy weapons. Your Streak Bane is not a Juggernaut, or a Brawler or a Battler or a Missile Boat. It's a sniper...but as a sniper it can be outdone by the Clan ER Large Laser on Mechs such as the Supernova. Lighter, more mobile, longer ranged, greater endurance, lower damage, but damage that is more concentrated. A Warhawk or Hellstar is similar.

Quote
As previously established, the SLRM-5 followed the exact same rules as all the other Clan Streak launchers.  There's no special "Streak-5" exception.

Which again doesn't change that the Streak 5 lacks one of the factors which affect other Streak systems. Other Streak LRMs are larger than their Clan counterparts. That it is stronger than the S-10, S-15 or S-20 is to be expected. Your Streak Bane works because that weakness doesn't exist for the Streak-5. That's not to take away from the power of yor Streak Bane, but it is not something that can be replicated on vehicles, on superheavy mechs, or any unit where mass is a premium instead of space. It works only because it is on a high end assault where the limit is mass, not space. On a Superheavy mech or vehicle ...that limit wouldn't apply. On a lighter design, even a lighter assault, the restrictions due to mass becomes more relevant. That is not to take away from the power of the Streak Bane...but arguing that one of the four streak launch systems can get a degree of benefit which stacked en masse in a 100 ton Mechs is hardly a ringing endorsement.

Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 07 September 2020, 01:03:19
A meaningless distinction. The SLRM5 is unique in that it doesn't increase in size. In this, it lacks one of the weaknesses of the Streak system as a whole.
It's not unique.  The Streak series clearly has their weight and space specifications modeled off the IS standard missiles.

It would have been unique if the SLRM-5 had broken that mold increasing in size to a 2-crit weapon, as none of the other launchers (SSRM or SLRM) broke that pattern.
Quote
Which is...?
It's up now, see the Linebreaker challenge in battlemech designs.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: idea weenie on 07 September 2020, 02:50:41
Realistically, if Streak LRMs were going to seriously compete with Clan LRMs for any kind of position other than the benefit of ammo/heat efficiency, they needed to have more advantages than just an automatic 11 on the cluster roll.  Increased range brackets from 7/14/21 to 8/16/24 would have been a good one.  Alternately, they could have been Enhanced weight (+1/+1/+2/+2) for Clan-weight launchers of 2/3.5/5.5/7 instead of double/IS tonnage, which at equivalent tonnages compete directly with unaugmented launchers in terms of damage.

One Streak LRM-5 versus two LRM-5s is 5 points versus 6.
One Streak LRM-10 versus one LRM-15 is 10 points versus 9.
One Streak LRM-15 versus one LRM-15 and two LRM-5s is 15 points versus 15.
One Streak LRM-20 versus two LRM-15s is 20 versus 18.

Instead we got this.

Just the ammo efficiency is still a good reason to use them.

For example, the Streak LRM-5 vs 2 regular LRM-5 means you might only need to take 1 ton of ammo instead of 2 tons.  That extra ton could be more armor, another heat sink, a slightly faster engine, or another weapon.

For example, the Locust-1M (https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Locust) uses two LRM-5, and a ton of ammo.  A Locust with a single SLRM-5 would only need half a ton of ammo, freeing up half a ton of mass on the Mech.  If the Strek LRM-5 equipped Locust decided to keep the full ton of ammo, that would be a guaranteed 24 turns of fire with guaranteed hits of 5 points of damage each, instead of the regular Locust-1M getting up to 12 turns with maybe 1-2 hits per turn , and not all missiles hitting.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 07 September 2020, 03:04:13
ECM. It is quite competitive in a high ECM environment.

Hence the pointlessness of SLRMs. There's nothing they bring to the board that existing energy or ballistic weapons don't already do, unless you're *really* worried about reflective or anti-ballistic armor.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 07 September 2020, 11:10:31
It's not unique.

It is. It is the only streak lrm system which doesn't increase its size. That size increase is part of the pattern of matching the IS systems but whether you view it as a feature or not, it doesn't affect the ramifications.

Your Streak Bane works because the limiting factor is crit space. As you reduce the mass of the Mech, that limiting factor becomes less relevant, even allowing for the use of FF and ES. As you increase the mass, it again becomes irrelevant because of the SHM construction. Vehicles, etc also aren't subject to the same constraint.

It is a feature of the design that other Streak systems do not share. A Streak 10 takes up 2 crits, not 1. A Streak 15 3 crits rather than two.It means I can fit two LRM10s in the same space and mass as a Streak 10.

Because of this, the S5 is stronger than other systems, but its impact is noticeable only in edge cases, such as your Streak Bane. Once you start moving away from your ideal platform, this aspect becomes increasingly irrelevant.

It also says little about the Streak system as a whole nor does it really address the deficiencies of the system
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 07 September 2020, 13:02:27
ECM. It is quite competitive in a high ECM environment.

And direct guns aren't? Did I miss something? ???
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 07 September 2020, 14:02:55
True. Missed the guns. I was thinking in terms of LRMs.

Though the comparison with a CRAC5 is interesting and again close.
The HAGs would be interesting too, though it is a long time since I did the maths to work out if they justify their mass.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sabelkatten on 08 September 2020, 10:27:26
75-ton mech with 70 points damage output at long range, that's not too shabby. I'd say SLRM5s are pretty nice on lighter mechs too...

As a math comparison, how about this:

SLRM5 at long range: ~1 heat, 0.5 tons ammo totals 3 tons, 1.67 damage/ton

LPL at long range: TN-2 means about +100% damage, 1.82 damage/ton

Given that the LRM has a bit better range bands that's pretty close. And getting pretty close to arguably the best weapon in the game is not bad!

Btw; Never, ever, use a SLRM larger than the 5-rack. The same generally holds true for standard LRMs as well (Artemis excepted), but for the streaks the -5 is so much better it's not funny.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Empyrus on 08 September 2020, 10:47:55
Streak-20 can force a PSR at 21 hexes. Very nice weapon the Atlas III.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Starfury on 08 September 2020, 18:42:37
It depends on how much BV I have, the unit's available tonnage for mounting them, the terrain, tactical needs, and the presence of ECM and C3.  Angel ECM blocks both Streak and Artemis IV/V, and it's as easily available in the post Jihad as Streak LRMs are.  If ECCM rules aren't in effect, then I'll use LRMs without either.  If they are, then I'll go with Streaks to ensure all of my missiles hit, or if I need indirect fire I'll use Artemis IV/V.  C3 also is a great multiplier for direct fire LRMs, provided you can maintain it.  Lastly, if I need specialist ammo, I won't use either and just mount plan Clan missile batteries on a target. 

The second issue is BV.  If I'm designing a force and neither type of guidance is worth the BV, then stock LRMs it is.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 09 September 2020, 11:21:25
It would depend really.

1.  Logistically do I have access to both ammo in good quantity.

2.  What unit is it on?

Mechs that track heat are where I favor Streak launchers.

Meanwhile tanks that can pack in as many missiles as they can carry, & not worry about heat, I favor regular launchers so I'd say Artemis/LRM there.

Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sabelkatten on 10 September 2020, 09:20:31
Streak LRMs have a completely different use than standard LRMs. No IDF and no special ammo means they really compare to UACs/RACs, gauss and beams.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Charistoph on 10 September 2020, 11:39:28
Hence the pointlessness of SLRMs. There's nothing they bring to the board that existing energy or ballistic weapons don't already do, unless you're *really* worried about reflective or anti-ballistic armor.

I don't know about that.  They seems to be in a good middle ground of mass, damage, and heat build up.  While they wouldn't be great for a dedicated missile boat like an Archer or Mad Dog/Vulture Prime who often likes to fire from behind hills, they are good weapons for other units that have them as a side weapon like the Thunderbolt or Summoner/Thor Prime.  The LRM-15 has the same mass as an AC/5, but three times firepower at one third the heat of an ER PPC.  That's not nothing.

However, as others have pointed out, some would just add the second Clan Missile Launcher in its place for greater potential of firepower.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sabelkatten on 10 September 2020, 13:04:28
How to use SLRMs for high damage at (somewhat) lower weight. (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=70946.0)
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: MarauderD on 10 September 2020, 14:00:08
As others have said, LRM+ArtemisV is pretty flexible.  Streaks grab me on mechs like the Griffin C--great for ammo conservation when you are only carrying 12 rounds.  Every missile counts in that setup.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 10 September 2020, 14:55:29
As others have said, LRM+ArtemisV is pretty flexible.  Streaks grab me on mechs like the Griffin C--great for ammo conservation when you are only carrying 12 rounds.  Every missile counts in that setup.

Yes...but with a lighter launcher you can carry more ammo.
With a different launcher you can engage in indirect fire and use alternate ammunition.
The only advantage is psychological...doesn't really matter how poor a gunner you are, just keep mashing that trigger and eventually it'll fire
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 10 September 2020, 15:33:26
It is significantly more BV efficient for every missile in a ton of ammo to hit than it is to carry more tons of ammo; there's a very real advantage to be had there.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 10 September 2020, 15:41:43
It is significantly more BV efficient for every missile in a ton of ammo to hit than it is to carry more tons of ammo; there's a very real advantage to be had there.

Yeah...but gaming the BV system is, to me, a poor advantage. It is, however, about the only real advantage many of these new weapons have. It's an artificial advantage that reflects the board game, and its a strong one in that aspect, no doubt.

Don't get me wrong. I love the flavour and feel of many of these new systems. But I wish they simply had a place or role in the Clans arsenal that was valid.

And they don't. They might make excellent IS weapons but as a Clan system, they end up mediocre. Why? Because the existing systems were and are that good.

I've said it before...FASA made a mistake in trying to give the Clans new weapons. There should have been mention of such, but nothing added to the system. There was other stuff the Clans could have received.

There is little wrong with the weapons in theory, but in practise they are overbalanced with too many negatives outweighing too few positives. The heavy laser would be a great IS weapon as it offers a 100% damage increase. As a Clan system, it is only 50% increase and that isn't enough to offset its flaws. Great flavour, but it really needs a niche of its own...increased damage or reduced heat or a mix of both. The Streak system is overly heavy...what if it had increased range as the Streak SRMs, a TN modifier akin to A5 or if it only massed 50% more instead of 100%

But that is neither here nor there.

The HL and SLRM series are good for flavour and gaming the BV system. Little else
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 10 September 2020, 16:22:22
 Heavy Lasers would have been more interesting as an introductory Clan weapon system (In place of the classic ER/Pulse combo). Still, the +1 to hit is not really all that much a disadvantage against the IS, as it merely equals out the gunnery difference.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: grimlock1 on 11 September 2020, 11:39:42
I'm mildly surprised that I've never seen this particular debate crop up.  I've been around the forums for a few years and SLRMs have been around since at least Max Tech 1997.  It might be that I don't hang out in the fan build forums much and it's only the last decade or so that we've been seeing SLRMs in cannon designs.  But we've been seeing SSRMs since TRO 2750, in 1989.  A SSRM is twice the weight of the stock SRM. Just like SLRM v LRM.

Is it a scaling thing?  Going from 1.5 tons for an SRM 6 to 3 tons for Streak 6 just isn't as big a deal?

Or did I just kick a hornets nest?
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 11 September 2020, 12:05:59
No, the same arguments sort of apply . . . and I say sort of b/c Talen's point about Clan Streaks having longer range than Clan SRMs yet SLRMs did not get such a boost to explain the weight change.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 11 September 2020, 12:13:32
No, the same arguments sort of apply . . . and I say sort of b/c Talen's point about Clan Streaks having longer range than Clan SRMs yet SLRMs did not get such a boost to explain the weight change.

I could live with the weight change - I just think the weight went up too much for what the Streak LRMs offer. Again, the problem lies with the the fact the original weapons were just that good but realising that doesn't solve the issue. The new weapons are typically poor - good at gaming the BV system, but poor in comparison to the rest of the weaponry. They need some niche of their own. I would suggest heat efficiency for Heavy Lasers, but the obvious "fix" for the Streak LRMs would be to reduce their mass rather than mess with the ranges, but that also feels a bit boring. Maybe extending their ranges, lowering their mass BUT also reducing the ammo per ton?  I dunno.

As it is, we have what we have. Ain't much we can do except gripe and moan.
;)
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 11 September 2020, 15:13:44
Clan Streak SRMs have the very tangible difference of being longer range than Clan SRMs.  If the same was true of Streak LRMs (8/16/24) there would be a clear-cut, "here are the circumstances in which these weapons are inarguably superior" type argument to make.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 11 September 2020, 15:20:31
At most, I'd lengthen the Streak LRMs to 8/16/24 (similar to the SSRM's range buffs).  Maybe a capacity to IDF with similar restrictions to iATMs.  Maybe.

Definitely do not touch their weight.  Their raw Damage-to-weight ratio of the (clan) Streak systems should be lower than their standard counterparts.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 11 September 2020, 15:32:33
Yeah, which is why I said it was a valid point about the systems.

Now everyone is talking about mechs and vehicles . . . but what about ASF?  DS?
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 11 September 2020, 17:45:51
Artemis-IV, especially on older (Star League) designs, is a waste of time/space. You're much better served by adding another ton of ammo for specialty munitions. Much like the NARC Missile Beacon, Artemis-IV is something that would be better served being retconned to have the abilities of its more-advanced cousin (re.: iNARC & Artemis-V, respectively).

1 ton for a -1 to-hit and big bonus on the cluster table? Now we're talking.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 12 September 2020, 15:09:21
FYI.  Its 1.5 tons for the Artemis-V.

I disagree on the Art-IV being a waste, I think the Artemis-IV is fully usable on the LRM-20 rack & a solid option for the LRM15.

I don't happen to use it for the 5/10 racks myself & avoid designs that do for the most part.

Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Iceweb on 12 September 2020, 19:19:22
FYI.  Its 1.5 tons for the Artemis-V.
 

It is what it is, but I would have loved Art V to be one ton.  Clan tech Art IV weighs a ton like IS version.  I get that it is better and should weigh more to not invalidate older tech, but at the same time tech marches on.  Personal opinion they should have been 1 ton.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 12 September 2020, 19:42:46
ART IV increases damage by ~20%, but only in extremely ECM-permissive environments, and also only with only 1 ammo type compatability, and only when used during direct-fire.  A Clan LRM20 launcher effectively weighs 20% more to fit ART IV.  It's not dead weight, but  (as far as the Clans go) I can confidently say there's never been a time where I've thought "wow, I'm really glad I had this Artemis IV system attached and not something else."
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 12 September 2020, 19:51:42
FYI.  Its 1.5 tons for the Artemis-V.

I disagree on the Art-IV being a waste, I think the Artemis-IV is fully usable on the LRM-20 rack & a solid option for the LRM15.

I don't happen to use it for the 5/10 racks myself & avoid designs that do for the most part.
I know. I was suggesting that the abilities of the Artemis-V should be what -IV is. i.e.: Artemis-IV would be retconned to grant the -1.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 12 September 2020, 20:57:06
ART IV increases damage by ~20%, but only in extremely ECM-permissive environments, and also only with only 1 ammo type compatability, and only when used during direct-fire.  A Clan LRM20 launcher effectively weighs 20% more to fit ART IV.  It's not dead weight, but  (as far as the Clans go) I can confidently say there's never been a time where I've thought "wow, I'm really glad I had this Artemis IV system attached and not something else."
Pretty sure it increases damage by 33% on "average"
IE 7 roll becomes 9.   
So 12 > 16
9 > 12
6 > 8

I know I love having them attached to LRM20's myself.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 12 September 2020, 22:23:01
Pretty sure it increases damage by 33% on "average"
Incorrect, I've done the math for the LRM-20.  LRM-20 averages 12.6944 repeating w/o ART IV, and 15.3611 repeating w/ ART IV.  The ratio of the two is 15.3611/12.6944=1.2101...

So, the LRM-20 w/ ART IV increases damage by 21%, which is about 20% like I said earlier.  Just looking at the median roll isn't good enough to determine the average, you need to take the sum of the value * probability of said result...
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 13 September 2020, 00:23:47
Ok, I'll by the %, its still a 21% increase for only a 10% increase (IS) or 20% increase (Clan) for tonnage.   
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 13 September 2020, 01:23:07
Ok, I'll by the %, its still a 21% increase for only a 10% increase (IS) or 20% increase (Clan) for tonnage.
It's a ~20% increase in damage for a 20% increase in tonnage.  But only if you're direct-firing with the right type of munitions against a target with no ECM presence.  That is why I've never been thrilled with ART IV, even in the best of circumstances.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 13 September 2020, 03:14:09
Sometimes I wonder what tables other than mine look like because hearing things like "extremely ECM-permissive" is a turn of phrase that seems to imply that you're generally experiencing 50%+ ECM coverage.  Do you really not have enemy units outside of ECM umbrellas at any given time?  None of them are running ECCM?

Seeing 1/4 or 1/5 units with ECM in a normal game is probably a little bit on the high side in games played on my tables.  Artemis IV is effectively worth its weight in gold in those circumstances, because it more than triples the odds of a single LRM-20 forcing a PSR from 3/36 to 10/36, which is a fairly significant affect that is inadequately measured by a simple damage% increase.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Talen5000 on 13 September 2020, 03:45:03
 

It is what it is, but I would have loved Art V to be one ton.  Clan tech Art IV weighs a ton like IS version.  I get that it is better and should weigh more to not invalidate older tech, but at the same time tech marches on.  Personal opinion they should have been 1 ton.

What this highlights is that instead of the heavy laser or ATM, the Clans should have gotten something akin to an improved LRM system...built in Artemis IV. Better control links if you want it impacted by ECM, better internal targeting if you don't.

Then you could introduce the A5 at a 1 ton mass.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 13 September 2020, 13:11:08
"Clan LRMs should have been better" is not the blistering hot take I was expecting to read today.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 13 September 2020, 13:49:34
Sometimes I wonder what tables other than mine look like because hearing things like "extremely ECM-permissive" is a turn of phrase that seems to imply that you're generally experiencing 50%+ ECM coverage.  Do you really not have enemy units outside of ECM umbrellas at any given time?  None of them are running ECCM?

Ditto. Maybe it's because the sheer BV expense makes C3 stuff incredibly rare, but I don't think I've ever seen a game where ECM was a major factor. Usually it's more a case of having to remember which one is the single mech on the board with ECM, and the one or two mechs on the board that carry anything affected by such.

Best I can think of is a recent lance-sized game where the objectives had to be found by scanning, one side had a Probe and the other an ECM (both by coincidence, the mechs were chosen for their guns).

All the relevant objective hexes were detected before the ECM got anywhere near the probe...and the probe mech wasn't the one to do any of said detecting.

In retrospect, there might have been one or two Artemis shots that I forgot to jam, but that's about it.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 14 September 2020, 10:46:48
No Capellans with Stealth Armor?

If you are playing 3050s, yeah . . . its less likely simply b/c ECM was mounted on less stuff.  Playing Jihad?  More ECM was thrown on designs by that point along with other electronics.

ECM is something I will often try to incorporate in our 5k force games simply b/c we have players who like the Blakists and want the C3i (there are ways to get in 5k, especially if you just link 2), then we had a LRM lover, a few folks who will take Clan and use ATM- heck, I usually forget to add the Artemis effect on my ATMs.  We have also done scenario pick up games for scanning as described, but our scenario rules give a distinct advantage for bringing a real scout- IE probes or other specialized electronics.
 Basically, non-sensor equipped designs can scan but they have to stand still & not fire for 1 turn . . . vs BAP that can scan at a run . . . and ECM can block them. 

Our campaign uses the Chaos Campaign book, I run the scout . . . a Stealth Spector, which is the only ECM on the board at times and so I have to place my mech where its going to knock out Blakist C3i nets when we face them.

Really I do not see C3 as much as C3i . . . have not seen Boosted C3 yet.

Now, I never checked the BV calcs but one I remember was a 5k vs 5k- instead of group fights we did some paired off testing for a in store tournament.  I took a Society pair- Ceph spotter that had no armament (A?) & Osteon w/ 4 LPL vs a Blakist trio C3i linked . . . I want to say Guillotine 6WB2, another lighter 4/6 heavy and a 5/8 or slower med.  The WoB player could not keep the Ceph's Nova from cutting the link to 1 of the 3 units in the battle . . . and then had to deal with chewing through the Osteon's armor & internals.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: monbvol on 14 September 2020, 17:07:16
I also sometimes wonder if people forget to check if a hostile ECM bubble of an equipped unit gets between the Artemis using firer and a target that is actually outside the actual bubble because this will stop Artemis from working.

As well as C3 and C3i in such situations but personally I find C3 tends to be rather limited in functionality without ECM even largely in play simply because it doesn't apply to indirect fire and I've had too many games where terrain made that consideration prove C3 a mediocre investment.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 14 September 2020, 17:51:24
No, I play pretty exclusively Dark Age games, and even there players will typically have sub-25% of units with ECM.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 14 September 2020, 20:24:55
I also sometimes wonder if people forget to check if a hostile ECM bubble of an equipped unit gets between the Artemis using firer and a target that is actually outside the actual bubble because this will stop Artemis from working.

Happens quite a bit . . . the only time the Spector I run really got hammered, I kept asking another player who only showed occasionally if his Berserker had ECM.  It is not a mech I run or face often so I was not sure off the top of my head.  Got told no twice . . . so at the end of the turn, I shut off the Stealth Armor because the next turn I needed to break the C3i net for that Chaos Campaign story.  I jumped into the woods near the big guns SPA mech that was the shooter in the 3 mech net- just enough to cut it out of the net.  The Spector survived but you could see through that side torso even if the engine was still intact.

The next turn the Berserker player goes . . . "Oh . . . I have ECM . . . "

Scotty-  All I can say is it might be a factional thing . . . we play Jihad tech level in the pick ups and the campaign uses the Chaos Campaign book that has you facing Blakists quite a bit and he will put together a 2 or 3 unit C3i net since the BV on that is not bad.  Our LRM loving player who moved would take a Schil a lot of times and have something connected to the Master along with using Artemis IV equipped units.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: massey on 14 September 2020, 21:03:00
They are really very different weapons systems.  Streaks allow you to fire basically every turn, almost no matter what.  You generally don't have to worry about ammo supplies, to-hit numbers, or heat.  The LRM-15 is better damage/ton, as long as those other issues don't come up.

I almost always declare fire with Streaks as long as I'm in range.  I don't care how high my heat will go, extra damage to the other guy is worth losing movement points.  Obviously that's not always true (I don't want to risk bad ammo explosions, and sometimes you need to keep movement to get out of there next round), but it usually is.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 22 September 2020, 13:43:06
The next turn the Berserker player goes . . . "Oh . . . I have ECM . . . "
3055 had more ECM units than one would have expected. The Gunslinger also has that edge.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sartris on 22 September 2020, 13:47:53
3055 has a decent amount. the flood really starts after 3058
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 28 September 2020, 02:49:36
I always hear that there was a flood of ECM & every other unit gets it etc etc.

I just looked.

I'm not sure this qualifies as a Flood. 


Total Production in the Clan Invasion & Civil War Eras  (Not counting larger "support" naval/aero units)
Mechs - 1139
Vehicles - 195
Aero - 167
Infantry - 239
Protos - 40

Units w/ ECM:
Mechs - 146   (12.82%)
Vehicle - 30   (15.38%)
Aero - 2   (1.2%)
Infantry - 5   (2.1%)
Protos - 0   (0%)



So roughly 1 ECM for every...
8 mechs
6.5 Vees
83 Fighters
48 Infantry
No Protos w/ ECM


I think what we probably have is players that just gravitate towards those units.

But to have a mixed battalion on the field with a company each of Mechs, Vees, & Infantry & have a total of 3 ECM on average isn't a flood of them IMHO.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 28 September 2020, 06:25:39
ECM was relatively rare through to 3075. There was a huge explosion through 3100. In 3145 ECM saturation saw a reduction in all electronic systems except for intentional new toy syndrome.

Another factor is that ECM was very factional but not in a sensible way. EG The Cappies were ECM heavy because they were the Electronics faction despite ECM probably being most useful against the C3 loving Combine.

As a Ghost Bear living next to the DC, ComStar,  and assaulting WoB I had the front line options of a Firemoth or a Hellbringer well into the Jihad. I got some second line options like the Ursus and Zorya, but it took until the Karhu and NTNU to get ECM on the front line.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 28 September 2020, 10:22:56
ECM was relatively rare through to 3075. There was a huge explosion through 3100. In 3145 ECM saturation saw a reduction in all electronic systems except for intentional new toy syndrome.

Another factor is that ECM was very factional but not in a sensible way. EG The Cappies were ECM heavy because they were the Electronics faction despite ECM probably being most useful against the C3 loving Combine.

As a Ghost Bear living next to the DC, ComStar,  and assaulting WoB I had the front line options of a Firemoth or a Hellbringer well into the Jihad. I got some second line options like the Ursus and Zorya, but it took until the Karhu and NTNU to get ECM on the front line.
ECM was on the front line the entire time. OmniMechs are modular. If they came across C3-using opponents, any MechWarrior can have his tech mount an ECM suite before battle.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 28 September 2020, 15:26:47
ECM was relatively rare through to 3075. There was a huge explosion through 3100. In 3145 ECM saturation saw a reduction in all electronic systems except for intentional new toy syndrome.

This is very simply not true.  There are 330 designs with ECM prior to 3075 (just Guardian and Watchdog (which gets caught by searching ECM on the MUL), I didn't search for Angel too); between 3075 and 3100 there are 120 more.  Even including clear through to 3150 there are only 183, barely half of what existed before 3075.

BattleTech up to 3075 is actually the single most populous group I can measure, accounting for over 300 of those designs, which is over 60% of all ECM designs through 3150; Almost every single one of those (296) has an intro date between 3050 and 3075.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 28 September 2020, 15:29:44
How many were stealth armor?

And the other problem question, how common were the designs with ECM?
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 28 September 2020, 15:31:53
ECM was on the front line the entire time. OmniMechs are modular. If they came across C3-using opponents, any MechWarrior can have his tech mount an ECM suite before battle.

Never assume a group allows custom Omni configs.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 28 September 2020, 16:08:10
Never assume a group allows custom Omni configs.
In-universe, a MechWarrior is not restricted to pre-fabricated configurations. A group can disallow anything they wish at their table, obviously. Heck, you could say "no Clan pulse," but that doesn't change what's available in the fiction. And FYI, I wouldn't play a game vs C3(i) if my opponent is artificially playing keep-away from ECM by limiting configuration choice. That's a pretty scummy way to give yourself an advantage.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 28 September 2020, 16:19:24
How many were stealth armor?

And the other problem question, how common were the designs with ECM?
Of the common TROs, that is 3025-3067 (2750 included), the Sha Yu was the only conspicuous example. I guess that there is the forgettable Anubis. Then you had Project Phoenix. and record sheets, but still not too many.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 28 September 2020, 16:44:45
Of the common TROs, that is 3025-3067 (2750 included), the Sha Yu was the only conspicuous example. Then you had Project Phoenix. and record sheets, but still not too many.

Huh?  Sha Yu and . . .

Stealth-
Marauder
Archer
Crusader
Warhammer
Pillager
Spector
Raven
Phoenix Hawk
Wasp
Stinger
Thunder (x2)
Vindicator
Huron Warrior
Lao Hu (later, I grant)
Emperor
Cataphract
Jinggau (Jihad)
Victor
Snake
Shen Yi
Anubis
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 28 September 2020, 16:54:25
Huh?  Sha Yu and . . .

Stealth-
Marauder
Archer
Crusader
Warhammer
Pillager
Spector
Raven
Phoenix Hawk
Wasp
Stinger
Thunder (x2)
Vindicator
Huron Warrior
Lao Hu (later, I grant)
Emperor
Cataphract
Jinggau (Jihad)
Victor
Snake
Shen Yi
Anubis
Phoenix did add a good number, but I forgot to even consider the TRO upgrades. Still, not even a quarter of mech with ECM.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 28 September 2020, 17:30:44
This is very simply not true.  There are 330 designs with ECM prior to 3075 (just Guardian and Watchdog (which gets caught by searching ECM on the MUL), I didn't search for Angel too); between 3075 and 3100 there are 120 more.  Even including clear through to 3150 there are only 183, barely half of what existed before 3075.

BattleTech up to 3075 is actually the single most populous group I can measure, accounting for over 300 of those designs, which is over 60% of all ECM designs through 3150; Almost every single one of those (296) has an intro date between 3050 and 3075.
While I stand by 3075 as a generic year. It was hard to find ECM up to the end of the great FASA Freeze at the end of the Fed Com Civil War. Starting with TRO3067, to PP, it became more common as designers finally used electronics of all sorts (see C3 slaves. God I got sick of C3 Chargers.) with the flood gates opened in TRO3075.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 28 September 2020, 17:36:08
I just grabbed the Capellan ones I remembered with Stealth armor and the one little sneaker of the Spector.  Pretty sure that is not ALL the Capellan Stealth armor mechs, I might be able to check later with MM to complete it . . . but the other thing is the Capellan Stealth mechs were main line while some of the other ECM mechs are rare.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 28 September 2020, 17:50:28
While I stand by 3075 as a generic year. It was hard to find ECM up to the end of the great FASA Freeze at the end of the Fed Com Civil War. Starting with TRO3067, to PP, it became more common as designers finally used electronics of all sorts (see C3 slaves. God I got sick of C3 Chargers.) with the flood gates opened in TRO3075.
This is the old Diachrony vs Synchrony problem. Through a diachronic perspective, the backloaded mechs would not be immediately considered, because no one had access to them when they played that era. Synchronically, the mechs are there when you want to play that era. As a FWL player, I had adequate access to ECM capabilities before the backfilling.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Jellico on 28 September 2020, 18:14:51
Out of interest what was the FWL using ECM for? In my part of the Sphere it was all about C3 networks.  As a relative threat Artemis and NARC didn't register. You just wore the damage.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 28 September 2020, 18:26:18
Out of interest what was the FWL using ECM for? In my part of the Sphere it was all about C3 networks.  As a relative threat Artemis and NARC didn't register. You just wore the damage.
If I had to guess, it was probably more a preventative measure than a targeted one. When it was ruled that it worked against stealth armor, that was a game changer.

 Do keep in mind that there was always the chance that C3 might proliferate to the AFFC, and later the LCAF. Heck, a warship was gifted to the FedCom that contained secret weapons technology (A Screen Launcher).
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 29 September 2020, 03:20:25
Out of interest what was the FWL using ECM for? In my part of the Sphere it was all about C3 networks.  As a relative threat Artemis and NARC didn't register. You just wore the damage.

C3 networks are available anywhere in the Inner Sphere on common IS Omni configs, all of which are on the IS General availability list.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 29 September 2020, 11:47:42
And the FWL needed ECM to use ECCM mode for their NARC & Artemis loads . . . as well as counteracting Cappie scouts like Ravens & Men Shen.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sartris on 29 September 2020, 12:34:39
10-15% isn't a small number. it exceeds a number of weapon systems by a substantial margin. you start finding it at all factions, weight classes and speed profiles - which makes it much easier to plug into formations of all types, thus making it more deployable.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: massey on 29 September 2020, 15:53:07
You don't necessarily need an ECM suite in every lance, or even one in every company.  You simply need enough of them to make your enemy's C3/Artemis/whatever systems uneconomical.  They spend a lot of money and invest a lot of time and training, and then the damn things don't always work right.  One little mech with an ECM suite and everything goes haywire.

Realistically in the early stages, you'd want one or two in each battalion, just to give yourself some protection in case you ran into a well-equipped enemy.  Then your enemies have to decide if it's worth investing in advanced systems or not.  Once they make the decision to go all in, then you need to add a few more systems, but not until then.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sartris on 29 September 2020, 16:12:01
I’m talking about playing the game
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 29 September 2020, 16:22:21
 Having ECM in a trooper, like the Anvil, can prove handy at times.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 29 September 2020, 16:40:54
You don't necessarily need an ECM suite in every lance, or even one in every company.  You simply need enough of them to make your enemy's C3/Artemis/whatever systems uneconomical.  They spend a lot of money and invest a lot of time and training, and then the damn things don't always work right.  One little mech with an ECM suite and everything goes haywire.

Realistically in the early stages, you'd want one or two in each battalion, just to give yourself some protection in case you ran into a well-equipped enemy.  Then your enemies have to decide if it's worth investing in advanced systems or not.  Once they make the decision to go all in, then you need to add a few more systems, but not until then.

Which is why I wish they had ECCM in the standard rules- nearly everything else in the game has balance and is not a 'I Win' Button . . . but if someone pays the BV for C3, Artemis IV or NARC, then instead of it being rock/paper/scissors like most everything else in BT, ECM gives the carrying play a easy advantage.  ECCM is the counter to ECM which is the counter to . . .
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Crimson Dawn on 29 September 2020, 16:56:33
I kind of dislike that it is ECM that is needed to defeat ECM.  I kind of wish it somehow used the active probe instead to give it a real use in more situations. 
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 29 September 2020, 19:40:36
The Active Probe optional rule that reduces the penalty to-hit from woods if the target is within Probe range instantly makes Probes worth it on basically anything that wants to get within 3 hexes if its target for any reason.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 29 September 2020, 21:52:51
This is very simply not true.  There are 330 designs with ECM prior to 3075 (just Guardian and Watchdog (which gets caught by searching ECM on the MUL), I didn't search for Angel too); between 3075 and 3100 there are 120 more.  Even including clear through to 3150 there are only 183, barely half of what existed before 3075.

BattleTech up to 3075 is actually the single most populous group I can measure, accounting for over 300 of those designs, which is over 60% of all ECM designs through 3150; Almost every single one of those (296) has an intro date between 3050 and 3075.

How are you searching the MUL,  I searched it, I got no where near those #s.  See my #'s above, that is directly from MUL.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Crimson Dawn on 29 September 2020, 22:34:29
The Active Probe optional rule that reduces the penalty to-hit from woods if the target is within Probe range instantly makes Probes worth it on basically anything that wants to get within 3 hexes if its target for any reason.

Sadly that is a rule that my local group refuses to use for some odd reason but they do allow counter ECM so the poor active probe is more dead weight that an anything.  :'(
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 29 September 2020, 22:55:55
How are you searching the MUL,  I searched it, I got no where near those #s.  See my #'s above, that is directly from MUL.

Go to Units, in the Alpha Strike section type "ECM", narrow by year if you want.  Guardian ECM, Clan ECM, and Watchdog all convert to the ECM Special ability in Alpha Strike, so searching for it narrows to things that only have those.  "AECM" instead will get you everything with an Angel ECM.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: monbvol on 29 September 2020, 23:27:13
The Active Probe optional rule that reduces the penalty to-hit from woods if the target is within Probe range instantly makes Probes worth it on basically anything that wants to get within 3 hexes if its target for any reason.

Unfortunately that is kind of the problem of Active Probes, almost all the rules/situations that make it useful are technically optional rules/not found in Total Warfare.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 30 September 2020, 00:51:10
We're in a thread about Streak LRMs versus Artemis V, we crossed the optional rule threshold before the topic was even posted.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: monbvol on 30 September 2020, 01:51:39
To an extent fair enough.

Both rules are straight forward enough to have been included in the Battlemech Manual.

Active Probes just seem more like they should be the counters to ECM is all.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 30 September 2020, 18:51:32
Go to Units, in the Alpha Strike section type "ECM", narrow by year if you want. 

That is what I did. 

As I said above.  I'm showing 183 new ECM that entered production in the era of 3049-3067
146 Mechs, 30 vehicles, 2 ASF, & 5 Infantry

Admittedly prior to 3049 there were only 50 that had been in production.
31 Mechs, 14 Vees, 4 ASF, 1 Infantry

Meanwhile the Jihad alone added 364 new ECM.
237 Mechs, 88 Vee, 29 ASF,  6 Infantry, 1 Proto, & 3 Sup Vee.

Post Jihad eras only add another 91 Mechs, 42 Vees, 11 ASF, 13 Infantry & 2 Sup Vee

The flood, to me, appears to be the years of the Jihad through the formation of the Republic from 3068-3085.

At least its the heaviest concentration at roughly double the Clan Invasion/Civil War eras in a year less time span.


And Agreed Monbvol,  I wish AP was able to cut through ECM, that seems to me to be a logical use for it.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Scotty on 30 September 2020, 19:05:59
I'm showing 183 new ECM that entered production in the era of 3049-3067

I have identified the miscommunication: I said absolutely nothing about 3067, I was responding entirely to the 3075 assertion.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 03 October 2020, 12:36:34
Which is why I wish they had ECCM in the standard rules- nearly everything else in the game has balance and is not a 'I Win' Button . . . but if someone pays the BV for C3, Artemis IV or NARC, then instead of it being rock/paper/scissors like most everything else in BT, ECM gives the carrying play a easy advantage.  ECCM is the counter to ECM which is the counter to . . .
Either that or change the BV rules of ECM. If facing a C3 network, it should have a value mirroring that of the network size it's facing. That's a rule akin to something pre-existing (TAG and the presence of homing missiles affects its BV in the same manner), so it shouldn't be rocket science to implement.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 03 October 2020, 14:09:02
 
Either that or change the BV rules of ECM. If facing a C3 network, it should have a value mirroring that of the network size it's facing. That's a rule akin to something pre-existing (TAG and the presence of homing missiles affects its BV in the same manner), so it shouldn't be rocket science to implement.
That would make ECM unplayable in tournament games. ECM can be overrated, even against enemies that it is helpful against.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 03 October 2020, 14:55:10
  That would make ECM unplayable in tournament games. ECM can be overrated, even against enemies that it is helpful against.
"Unplayable?" Explain.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 03 October 2020, 15:14:25
"Unplayable?" Explain.
You would have to balance your BV for units that may never arrive.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 03 October 2020, 15:23:28
You would have to balance your BV for units that may never arrive.
"I have 5 units in a network. You'll need to add X BV to each ECM unit." Not hard. That's how TAG BV works right now.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Sabelkatten on 03 October 2020, 15:38:59
"I have 5 units in a network. You'll need to add X BV to each ECM unit." Not hard. That's how TAG BV works right now.
Changing the value of your force depending on what the ENEMY has is really unpractical. Having to modify pilot skills before every fight to make BV match up...? :P
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: TigerShark on 03 October 2020, 18:15:38
Changing the value of your force depending on what the ENEMY has is really unpractical. Having to modify pilot skills before every fight to make BV match up...? :P
People did it for years with Force Size Modifier. It was canon for... 8 years? Anyhow, the point is that ECM does have an effect on the value of an opponent's weapon systems. Less so with Artemis IV and V, but a tremendous amount with C3(i). The value of this ECM system changes depending on what you're facing.

Why have a BV value for ECM at all if no opponent has Artemis or C3? Shouldn't the unit get a discount if it has no effect in the game? That's a bit like having BV for Cargo Space on a warship. Conversely, why charge only 61 BV for an ECM unit which can negate 5% of an opponent's BV? A 15,000 BV network suddenly has 750 BV missing from its force for a cost of 61? That's horribly unbalanced.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 03 October 2020, 18:43:23
 I have no problem with ECM being a sunk cost. Free Worlds League players have been using mechs like the Anvil and Sirocco for years against players who were relatively unaffected by it.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 03 October 2020, 19:13:58
People did it for years with Force Size Modifier. It was canon for... 8 years?

There are multiple reasons why the FSM was universally hated, and(aside from occasionally getting mentioned by you or Cannonshop) the player base tries to pretend it never existed, having the BV of a force suddenly change just by arriving at the game store was one of them.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 09 October 2020, 00:35:58
I know its not going to ever happen but I always thought he best way to deal w/ ECM would be to have it be a "Reverse-TC",  make it give a unit a -1 to be hit so its got a value that we can associate with it in BV, & then leave all the "special weapons" alone.

ECM would have been more expensive, and possibly more popular, and nothing would mess with the C3/Art/Narc folks.

Or an alternative would be to have it apply a -1 to any enemy fire originating inside its bubble.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Weirdo on 09 October 2020, 09:11:28
That's almost exactly what the current Ghost Targets rule is.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 21 October 2020, 11:18:38
Is it?  Lol, I think I lightly scanned Ghost Targets one time ages ago & then promptly forgot about it since my GM doesn't use that rule.

In that case, yeah, it would be a solid alternative & give up the actual disruption qualities.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Retry on 21 October 2020, 15:14:29
Is it?  Lol, I think I lightly scanned Ghost Targets one time ages ago & then promptly forgot about it since my GM doesn't use that rule.

In that case, yeah, it would be a solid alternative & give up the actual disruption qualities.
Sort of, but it's limited.  First the ECM unit doing ghost targets has to specify a unit to afflict with the ghost targets within range (can be itself), so it's not a "all enemies in the bubble take a blanket malus" thing.  Then, there's the RNG check you have to pass (Piloting Skill +3), otherwise nothing happens at all.

Ghost target penalties do stack up to +3, so I guess if you had a ton of ECM units close but out of sight you could stack them to silly numbers on a frontline 'mech or 2.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 21 October 2020, 18:46:13
Yeah, I'm thinking the flat Ghost Targets w/ the Stacking penalties is a bit too complex for a regular pick up game & also a lot harder to balance by BV.

Something like a basic +1 to the max TMM on the other hand can be calculated quite easily into the BV of the mech.

Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Adastra on 22 October 2020, 05:32:55
Yeah, I'm thinking the flat Ghost Targets w/ the Stacking penalties is a bit too complex for a regular pick up game & also a lot harder to balance by BV.

Something like a basic +1 to the max TMM on the other hand can be calculated quite easily into the BV of the mech.

Perhaps if that's too strong one could use the other benefit of Stealth Armor instead? Not being able to be a secondary target is not a huge benefit, but it's also hardly insignificant.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 22 October 2020, 10:02:47
 Do not modify the Guardian just to protect C3, just accept that with great promise runs the risk of ruin. You can win with a C3 force against an enemy employing ECM.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Colt Ward on 22 October 2020, 12:07:58
Do not modify the Guardian just to protect C3, just accept that with great promise runs the risk of ruin. You can win with a C3 force against an enemy employing ECM.

It is not modifying . . . its that the ECCM rule should have been part of the standard of that equipment rather than a advanced optional rule.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Minemech on 22 October 2020, 12:26:24
It is not modifying . . . its that the ECCM rule should have been part of the standard of that equipment rather than a advanced optional rule.
I was not commenting on ECCM. That is a perfectly valid argument.
Title: Re: Streak LRM10 vs LRM15 + Artemis V
Post by: Hellraiser on 25 October 2020, 15:36:09
I think the issue is that either way you look at it, its not "balanced" or "simple" in BV.

Which is why a flat BV bonus for ECM & having ECM give a flat to hit mod change would have been simple & more balanced.