Author Topic: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview  (Read 17312 times)

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3939
Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« on: 05 October 2011, 10:53:39 »
     As a fan of novels such as The Forever War, Starship Troopers and Armor, it was a happy day for me when I turned a page of Lethal Heritage and first read the now iconic fight scene between Shin Yodama in his Phoenix Hawk and a group of Clan Smoke Jaguar Elementals. That brief encounter highlighted some of the key features of Battle Armor that players would soon learn for themselves, with the Elementals all but immune to traditional anti-infantry weaponry and even light anti-armor weapons, while fighting back with 'Mech-scale firepower of their own and their fearsome melee attacks, tearing the horrified defenders' 'Mechs apart with their bare claws. Since that introduction, we have been provided with smaller and larger designs, Inner Sphere copies, flying and swimming Battle Armor, and even quadrupeds that are more like little legged vehicles than power armor, all making the battlefield a little more interesting for the treadheads and 'Mech jockeys.

     The first episode of a rebooted Battle Armor of the Week series by jymset and myself, this article will cover the basic capabilities, limits and usage of Battle Armor, while later articles will examine individual designs, starting with the Elemental and IS Standard and then working through the remaining models until every Battle Armor design, variant and experimental prototype has been covered. Where time allows, in some weeks we will hopefully be producing more than one article, either associated designs such as the Gray Death suits or a Clan design and an Inner Sphere model.
 
     jymset: sillybrit humbles me greatly by putting my name next to his; indeed, I practically requested him to reboot this series. I hope to be able to assist him in his efforts by adding some thoughts on the construction and in-universe aspects of various individual suits, as well as tracing publication history that may be interesting to some. Essentially, this new series will be sillybrit's show and I can already tell we will be in good hands.

     The publication history of Battle Armor starts in 1990 with the release of TRO 3050, which did not only feature the Clans' first set of OmniMechs, but rules for the Elemental Battle Armor (and its inferior IS Standard counterpart). Various publications, including ClanTroops, soon fleshed the concept out; soon variants started to appear, most noticeably in the Somerset Strikers and Blood of Heroes books, as well as all the Field Manuals (meaning that the Clan Battle Armor types were soon completely outnumbered if not outclassed by Inner Sphere counterparts).

     No construction rules were initially published, which meant that successive BT rulebooks also became catch-alls of previously published suits. Only in 2003's Classic BattleTech Companion did we finally get a rather ingenious rule set by David "MacAttack" McCulloch (based on work he previously created as a fan) which fantastically managed to consolidate all prior suits' special rules. An updated version of these rules is now an integral part of the TechManual and will give us much to talk about in future articles. Let us now rejoin sillybrit in his meta-evaluation of the function of these units.


     The easiest, and simplistic, way to look at Battle Armor is to consider them as more capable infantry that is deployed in squads instead of platoons, while retaining or even exceeding the performance of the larger unarmored unit. The typical Inner Sphere Battle Armor squad contains just four suits, although ComStar and the Blakists eventually opted for units of six to better fit in with their overall organization, while the Clans likewise field five Battle Armor per Point, their equivalent of the squad. The larger ComStar/Word and Clan units do greatly improve their combat capability, but you do pay for it with increased BV and higher transport requirements.

     When compared to conventional infantry it can perhaps be easy to look at Battle Armor and get carried away with their durability and firepower, but you should always be aware that first and foremost Battle Armor units are still infantry and that they cannot afford to simply stomp around the battlefield and blow fertilizer up like their larger, clumsier mechanical cousins. Like PBIs, Battle Armor works best on the defensive in most terrain, sticking to cover and preferably shooting their targets in the back while their attention is directed elsewhere. Although a Battle Armor trooper can ignore hits by anti-personnel weapons that would kill perhaps dozens of normal infantry, it should be remembered that the typical 'Mech or tank is mostly armed with anti-armor weapons that can shoot much further than machine guns and flamers, and can inflict a lot of damage, even one-shot killing the toughest of suits. So while Battle Armor might be better protected than conventional infantry, there are usually a lot more weapons being fielded in the average scenario that are well suited to killing Battle Armor.

     The ideal situation for any player using Battle Armor is a scenario that allows you to pre-position your units across the map, placing your troops in key buildings, woods and other cover. The terrain targeting penalty the Battle Armor will then enjoy can often mean the difference between a live suit or not, keeping the unit in the game longer, while they create little bubbles of doom that denies the enemy room to maneuver or access to advantageous firing positions. Best of all is a cluster or chain of such hexes that are close enough together that a Battle Armor unit can move from one to another in a single turn, so that they get the terrain advantage and also inflict a target movement modifier on any would be attacker. All units want to be harder to hit, but for relatively fragile units like Battle Armor (and infantry), this becomes of greater importance.

     But what about situations where you cannot pre-position your troops, such as attacks or meeting engagements? The majority of Battle Armor designs are slow, at best only capable of matching the walking or cruising speed of assault units, and the few exceptions are little better. This low mobility means that it can take Battle Armor a long time to make the potentially hazardous trip from a map edge to that all important cover in a position where they can do some good. That's when Battle Armor ideally has assistance from friendly 'Mechs, vehicles and even aerospace units to get them where they want to go.

     For the original Elementals and their OmniMech partners, the answer was the ability of bipedal Battle Armor with the appropriate manipulators to cling to OmniMechs (and OmniVehicles) with no loss of speed for the carrying unit, a tactic called Mechanized Battle Armor. Technological improvements by the Inner Sphere allow some Battle Armor to similarly mount non-Omni units (albeit with a small impact on speed) and there is always the option of an APC or VTOL transport with a large enough internal capacity that can simply carry suits as if they were normal infantry, with the latter being the only choice for quads and Assault suits or those lacking the proper manipulators.

     By pairing Battle Armor with transport, not only does it become easier to quickly deploy units to key defensive positions or to adjust to shifting battlefronts, but it also opens up offensive opportunities. A common tactic for combined arms forces with Battle Armor is to pin the enemy 'Mechs and tanks with similar armored units of your own, then to use a high-speed transport to flank the enemy and offload the Battle Armor in the opponent's rear. With the enemy unable to turn to face the Battle Armor due to the continuing threat to their front, this is one of the few times where Battle Armor can excuse their normal reliance upon cover and instead stand or even advance in the open, gutting the enemy before they can escape the situation.

     One key issue to remember when dropping off Battle Armor is that in the very first turn when they are placed on the map, they are considered to have not moved and thus have a Target Movement Modifier of +0, even if their transport had just travelled dozens of hexes. This does make the Battle Armor more vulnerable in that crucial moment, something that a canny opponent will seek to exploit, so the transport should always attempt to perform the drop off into cover or out of Line of Sight. The Inner Sphere does possess technology that can overcome this limitation: Camo systems and Mimetic armor actually provide their highest defensive bonus during turns when the unit does not move, so this even allows for Camo- or Mimetic-equipped Battle Armor to be dropped into the teeth of the enemy, although if cover is available it should still be used.

     That's a brief coverage of the defensive issues surrounding Battle Armor, but now the fun stuff that makes things go boom. Battle Armor have access to a variety of 'Mech-scale armament and equipment, ranging from light machine guns to LRM launchers, together with a few weapons only available to Battle Armor, although variants may be used by infantry. Typically, the heavier, longer-ranged firepower is provided by missile systems, that make up for their performance by having only a limited number of salvos, unlike non-missile weapons. Although powerful long-ranged guns such as the Clan ER medium laser can be fitted to Battle Armor, for the same mass as the gun a suit could inflict far more damage with missiles, at least while the ammunition lasts. That short-term, high-intensity firepower complements the defensive and glass-jaw nature of Battle Armor, allowing units to better exploit the few fleeting shots they might get and to provide a deterrent to enemy 'Mechs and tanks that might otherwise be tempted to close the distance.

     Just like the larger versions mounted on 'Mechs, vehicles and fighters, Clan Battle Armor weapons are generally far superior to their Inner Sphere counterparts, especially the missile launchers, and the amount of firepower a Point of Clan Assault suits can throw downrange can be truly terrifying for such light units. The Inner Sphere does have a few notable guns that the Clans lack, and Spheroid military culture means that you're more likely to encounter the fearsome Light TAG when fighting them than when in combat with the more hidebound Clans. With a few Arrow IV launchers on call, or even semi-guided LRMs, a TAG-equipped Battle Armor squad dug into cover can create a bubble that is not so much doom, but more like DOOM!

     In addition to the 'Mech-scale weaponry, the Total Warfare ruleset finally introduced the use of the infantry-grade weapons that had been carried by Battle Armor since we had seen the original Elemental. These weapons had been usable in the RPG and in the infantry-scaled BattleTroops/ClanTroops game, but had not previously been of any use in the main BattleTech game. Any Battle Armor equipped with at least one armored glove, Anti-Personnel Weapon Mount or all but the lead trooper with a Squad Support Weapon Mount, may be equipped with an infantry weapon and perform an Anti-Personnel attack that is equivilant to a generic Rifle Infantry platoon of the same size as the Battle Armor unit. The construction rules in the Tech Manual details what weapons may be used, but given how the attack works under the standard rules they are effectively all treated as Auto-Rifles. Tactical Operations also introduced Disposable Weapons, one-shot infantry weapons that may be mounted on an Anti-Personnel Weapon Mount or carried by Battle Armor with a pair of armored gloves. In contrast to the standard rules for Anti-Personnel attacks, Disposable Weapons attacks are always based upon the stats of the weapon being used rather than the Generic Rifle Platogn attack.

     Backing up the lasers, shells and missiles, bipedal Battle Armor up to the Medium class are also capable of what are called Anti-'Mech attacks, using their manipulators to climb and damage their target. The first method is called the Leg Attack and it does exactly what it says: the Battle Armor attempts to cripple or even destroy the target 'Mech's leg(s). The Swarm Attack can be used against 'Mechs, vehicles and even grounded aerospace units, and can potentially inflict a lot of damage, with all the Battle Armor's arm-mounted non-missile weapons automatically hitting. Swarming units only begin inflicting damage the Turn after the Swarm Attack succeeds, and this delay allows for the Battle Armor to be destroyed or dislodged beforehand, with 'Mechs having the option of falling prone to brush off their attackers, while bipedal 'Mechs with working arms can simply knock the Battle Armor off. Suits equipped with vibro-claws also have the capability to inflict melee attacks on infantry and other Battle Armor, although damage is relatively minor.

     With an affinity for defensive cover,low mobility and close quarters firepower, Battle Armor - like infantry - is well suited for ambushes using the Hidden Units rules. Unless using the Force Size Modifier, the low BV cost of Battle Armor means that you can afford to salt the earth with units laying in ambush in scenarios that allow you to pre-position your troops. They are not quite as good at remaining undetected as conventional infantry given the ability of Beagle Active Probes to reveal their location, but the prospect of being backdoored by a surprise attack from Battle Armor makes advancing through cities and heavy woodlands an unpleasant thought for 'Mech and armor commanders.

     Another area where Battle Armor excels on a man-for-man level is marine boarding actions. Although unaugmented marines wearing Marine Environment Suits are more effective on a per ton basis, when personnel numbers are limited nothing can match well equipped Battle Armor and a number of specialist marine suits are now being fielded, although the limits have yet to be reached by canon designs. The Clans have also produced Battle Armor adapted to underwater operations and even capable of VTOL movement, expanding upon the elemental theme of their Battle Armor. The former concept tends to be overly specialized for most scenarios, although a formidable threat in its own environment, while the flight-capable suits can be used on most battlefields, being particularly adept in areas where long range lines of sight are blocked and this protecting them from enemy AAA fire.

     So what Battle Armor works best in what role? The weapon configurations and other characteristics of the available designs are obviously a major influence on what Battle Armor you select, and the choice can also be influenced by what transport options you possess, but in general certain weight classes gravitate towards certain roles. Without going into specific designs at this stage, when setting up for a defensive battle a mix of Assault and Medium suits is a good combination. The Assault suits provide the heavily armed and armored anvil, with their relatively low mobility mitigated by their intended static role, while the Medium suits act as a mobile reserve and can threaten Anti-'Mech attacks if the enemy gets too close.

     In more fluid situations, the Assaults should generally be replaced by Heavy Battle Armor due to their ability to undertake Mechanized Battle Armor tactics, making it easier to transport them across the battlefield than the larger suits. Assuming that you will be using transports to quickly deploy your Battle Armor close to the enemy, you may wish to shift the ratio of suits to favor Medium designs to take advantage of their Anti-'Mech capability, with the Heavy designs providing fire support. Whether you use 'Mechs, VTOLs or any other form of vehicle transport, a good option is to use fast cheap designs that are little more than Battle Armor carriers, perhaps possessing no offensive capability of their own and instead using the suits that they transport as their main battery. While the Battle Armor fights, the transport can then dash back to the rear and pick up reinforcements, with the transport's temporary absence costing their side little if any firepower.

     When fighting Battle Armor, simply treating them like a 'Mech or tank and shooting them with large anti-armor weaponry works well, especially when using weapons that can inflict more damage than an individual suit can take. For heavily-armored Assault suits, that can potentially require an AC20 class weapon to kill with a single shot, Infernos make a better choice given that just 3 missiles can kill any Battle Armor suit unless it is equipped with fire resistant armor; somewhat ironically, this makes Inferno-equipped SRM infantry very dangerous Battle Armor hunters. Area Effect weapons also allow you to damage every suit in a squad or Point with a single attack, and the ability of such weapons to target the hex can overcome the defensive bonuses that the Battle Armor can build up. Artillery, artillery cannon, Mine Clearance Munitions, and air-dropped bombs all provide the player with weaponry that can wipe out entire squads while also being useful against other targets, helping avoid overspecialization during unit selection.

     Having grown from the humble beginnings of that one Clan suit and its cheap Spheroid imitation, we now have over fifty basic designs, plus more variants and experimental models, while within the universe increasing numbers of suits are being fielded by Inner Sphere militaries, with units up to regimental size. Whether you are a Battle Armor fanatic or just an occasional dabbler in their use, or even if they are just a pest that you have to swat with your giant stompy robot, Battle Armor now has a big role to play in the modern BattleTech battlefield.

Next up:
  • Elemental
  • IS Standard
  • Infiltrator Mk. I
  • Sloth
  • GD Scout
  • GD Standard
  • Raiden
  • Kage
  • Kanazuchi
  • Gnome

Pa Weasley

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5523
  • I am not this cute
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #1 on: 05 October 2011, 11:56:25 »
Excellent introduction. I'm looking forward to the rest of the series.  O0

Demos

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1602
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #2 on: 05 October 2011, 12:27:59 »
I'm also curious regarding the treatment of the 1st Gen suits.  :)
Keep up with the good work!  [applause]
"WoB - Seekers of Serenity, Protectors of Human Purity, Enforcers of Blake's Will!"

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #3 on: 05 October 2011, 14:24:33 »
Nice to see the articles getting resurrected. Good luck with them.

Though I think I would object to the suggestion that they're best on the defensive. With mechanized Battle Armor its much easier to put them on an offensive footing, throwing them into the teeth of your enemy right as your `Mechs hit them. They can act as quite a little force modifier.

Col.Hengist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9189
  • Konrad ' Hengist " Littman Highlander 732b
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #4 on: 05 October 2011, 15:10:17 »
Looking forward to this series
Lyran Commonwealth,6th Donegal Guards-Nightstar
Marian Hegemony, II Legio-Cataphract
Clan Hell's Horses, Gamma Galaxy-Summoner
Clan Grinch goat- gamma goat.

Fallen_Raven

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3720
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #5 on: 05 October 2011, 15:44:08 »
This should be interesting. I usually don't play with Battle Armor, what with having no idea what to do witht them, so hopefully I'll learn something!
Subtlety is for those who lack a bigger gun.

The Battletech Forums: The best friends you'll ever fire high-powered weaponry at.-JadeHellbringer


Ratwedge

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #6 on: 05 October 2011, 15:55:47 »
Good article but I have to agree with Maelwys, I also object to the suggestion they are best used on the defensive.

Greyhind

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 635
  • I'm Watching You
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #7 on: 05 October 2011, 16:01:29 »
I spotted a typo!

But more importantly, while you covered the basic roles of medium, heavy and assault BA, I'm left with no clue as to what you think a light BA does. Never mind the PA(L)s.

Still, a very good overview and you have crystallised some of my own thoughts on BA o it was definitely worth the read.

Thank you.

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25730
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #8 on: 05 October 2011, 16:56:58 »
Looking forward to this - although any chance to wedge the Longinus, Phalanx and Cavalier in there? The first two because I'm a League fan, and the latter because it's a game-changer IMHO.

W.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

Alex Keller

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2358
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #9 on: 05 October 2011, 18:38:29 »
Tagged for future awesomeness... (Hoping that you'll edit this and create links to each BA of the week)

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #10 on: 05 October 2011, 19:49:57 »
Looking forward to this - although any chance to wedge the Longinus, Phalanx and Cavalier in there? The first two because I'm a League fan, and the latter because it's a game-changer IMHO.

W.

Just out of curiosity, and not to start the debate before the Cavalier's BAotW, but how the heck is the Cavalier a game changer?

Dread Moores

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #11 on: 05 October 2011, 19:58:18 »
Grenadier, I could understand that moniker. Not so much on the Cavalier. :)

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3939
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #12 on: 05 October 2011, 20:07:36 »
Regarding the offensive/defensive issue: as already noted in the article, when used as part of a combined system of Battle Armor+transport  they can indeed be used offensively; however on their own, the low mobility of the majority of designs and their relative fragility ill prepares them for an offensive role in open field engagements. Again, the article does include the proviso of "most terrain", because any form of confined terrain will mitigate their weaknesses.

But more importantly, while you covered the basic roles of medium, heavy and assault BA, I'm left with no clue as to what you think a light BA does. Never mind the PA(L)s.

A good point and one that I had intended to cover in individual design articles. To preempt that now that you've asked, as a flavor choice I have nothing against PA(L)s and Lights, and if you're keeping to canon designs you have to use them to fill certain roles, plus they do potentially have some uses with the specialist movement methods available to the Clans, but overall I find them a poor substitute for a Medium.

Looking forward to this - although any chance to wedge the Longinus, Phalanx and Cavalier in there?

Those suits will indeed be covered, but we're going roughly in order of introduction date as per the MUL, with a couple of minor adjustments so far. The Longinus (and Achileus) is due after the Gnome, followed in turn by the Cavalier. The Phalanx isn't yet on the immediate list because we've only plotted out the articles up to ~3061.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #13 on: 05 October 2011, 21:17:20 »
Grenadier, I could understand that moniker. Not so much on the Cavalier. :)

Or the Infiltrator MkII or the Hauberk...

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25730
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #14 on: 05 October 2011, 21:40:52 »
Total brain fart (or elders moment, take your pick) - I should have said "Hauberk".

The Cavalier is mainly useful in my games as stock for creating DA-scale battlesuits that aren't Cavaliers ;)

W.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

Drasius

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 314
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #15 on: 06 October 2011, 00:07:04 »
Awesome article dude, greatly looking forward to learning more about all the various BA's I have underused.

jymset

  • Infinita Navitas & RecGuide Developer
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1532
  • the one and only
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #16 on: 06 October 2011, 05:31:44 »
Tagged for future awesomeness... (Hoping that you'll edit this and create links to each BA of the week)

Hopefully, these articles will qualify for the fan article directory ;)

Again, thanks very much for doing this and for having me along, sillybrit!
On CGL writing: Caught between a writer's block and a Herb place. (cray)

Nicest writing compliment ever: I know [redacted] doesn't like continuity porn, but I do, and you sir, write some great continuity porn! (MadCapellan)

3055 rocks! Did so when I was a n00b, does so now.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #17 on: 10 October 2013, 02:54:09 »
I often see people on the boards talking about how you can mount ANY infantry weapon on BA that gloves or Anti-Infantry mounts, where are the rules allowing you to do this?

And more importantly WHAT are the rules for doing this? Do BA worry about encumbrance? Can I use support weapons? If so, how many?

Diablo48

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #18 on: 10 October 2013, 04:27:03 »
A good point and one that I had intended to cover in individual design articles. To preempt that now that you've asked, as a flavor choice I have nothing against PA(L)s and Lights, and if you're keeping to canon designs you have to use them to fill certain roles, plus they do potentially have some uses with the specialist movement methods available to the Clans, but overall I find them a poor substitute for a Medium.

Have you ever experimented with using PA(L) suits as essentially super tough conventional infantry?  A basic suit with full armor and a pair of armored gloves for infantry weapons would be able to do everything an infantryman can do (especially with Stealth Armor), and you can throw huge numbers of suits onto the field to get comparable numbers of bodies in play.  After all, the change in how they take damage would make it so that a Machine Gun would fail to kill anyone (on the first hit at least) instead of mulching 2d6 troopers, and heavy weapons like Medium Lasers would still kill one trooper per hit so there is no change there.  Of course, transportation does get more difficult so it is not without drawbacks, but they would still work great on the defensive.

Doctrinally, this would work best for the Clans because they organize their conventional infantry into 5-man squads within the 25-man point so you could make a point with 5 PA(L) units and get the same firepower you would have with a conventional infantry point using squad deployment rules, but your units would be much harder for the enemy to kill.  Other factions would get a bit more tricky because of the 6-suit cap in the BA rules, but you could probably still work something out.


View my design musings or request your own custom ride here.

Martius

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1853
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #19 on: 10 October 2013, 05:13:59 »
Quote
...the defensive bonuses that the Battle Armor can build up. Artillery, artillery cannon, Mine Clearance Munitions, and air-dropped bombs...


 Mine Clearance Ammo was nerfed in the last errata.  :(

Quote
The typical Inner Sphere Battle Armor squad contains just four suits, although ComStar and the Blakists eventually opted for units of six to better fit in with their overall organization, while the Clans likewise field five Battle Armor per Point, their equivalent of the squad

 The Marian Hegemony uses 5 trooper squads, too.

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6128
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #20 on: 10 October 2013, 05:47:26 »
I often see people on the boards talking about how you can mount ANY infantry weapon on BA that gloves or Anti-Infantry mounts, where are the rules allowing you to do this?

And more importantly WHAT are the rules for doing this? Do BA worry about encumbrance? Can I use support weapons? If so, how many?

TW. P218

Have you ever experimented with using PA(L) suits as essentially super tough conventional infantry? 

So... you want an infantryman with 3 points of armour and a support weapon deployed in platoons of 28? Sounds more like an organisational issue.

Diablo48

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #21 on: 10 October 2013, 06:31:09 »
So... you want an infantryman with 3 points of armour and a support weapon deployed in platoons of 28? Sounds more like an organisational issue.

I am really not sure what the question/comment here is.


View my design musings or request your own custom ride here.

UnLimiTeD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2039
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #22 on: 10 October 2013, 11:17:12 »
Complete brainfart. Just seen this and thought it was new, didn't see the original date.
DAMN what a necro.
« Last Edit: 10 October 2013, 19:43:58 by UnLimiTeD »
Savannah Masters are the Pringles of Battletech.
Ooo! OOOOOOO! That was a bad one!...and I liked it.

Jim1701

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1916
  • "Don't Panic"
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #23 on: 10 October 2013, 16:49:49 »

 Mine Clearance Ammo was nerfed in the last errata.  :(

In what way?

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6128
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #24 on: 10 October 2013, 16:59:59 »
Ohh, I missed this *tingles with anticipation*.  :)
What happened to the old series then?
Did it die of old Age? Or choke on it's sheer awesomeness?
Or do you have to restart because of that fancy title?

Looking forward to a fresh take on the suits, and all the stuff missed out so far.
Kudos!

The run is still going. See the Fusilier on Sept 3rd.

I am really not sure what the question/comment here is.
I am just curious what you are hoping too achieve from your previous comment about PALs.

It sounds like you want to deploy PALs in infantry type numbers. Something you can do in game, simply by taking more squads.
The costs are a separate issue.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #25 on: 10 October 2013, 17:57:06 »
TW. P218
And if I want to use something other then the standard Auto-Rifle, like say a Federated-Barret M42B for it's burst damage?
TW. P218
So... you want an infantryman with 3 points of armour and a support weapon deployed in platoons of 28? Sounds more like an organisational issue.
[/quote]
Putting something like that on the field as a single platoon (Instead of several squads) would be VERY expensive

In what way?
It doesn't do AOE damage to BA anymore, but 'Mech Mortars still do when firing Anti-Personal rounds, in fact they have better damage per ton the LRM's firing MC ever did

It sounds like you want to deploy PALs in infantry type numbers. Something you can do in game, simply by taking more squads.
The costs are a separate issue.
No, he wants a single platoon

Diablo48

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #26 on: 10 October 2013, 20:36:46 »
I am just curious what you are hoping too achieve from your previous comment about PALs.

It sounds like you want to deploy PALs in infantry type numbers. Something you can do in game, simply by taking more squads.
The costs are a separate issue.

That was more or less the thought, I was just wondering if anyone had ever tried it because I feel like I keep seeing the really light suits disregarded as actual combat units because they cannot fight like their larger cousins, but they do still look good when compared to conventional infantry.


View my design musings or request your own custom ride here.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #27 on: 10 October 2013, 21:23:51 »
Only sometimes. By deploying the infantry in PA(L) you lose the vulnerability to burst fire damage that conventional infantry units have, but you also lose the protection from `Mech scale weaponry that they have.

Of course, since damage doesn't transfer inside a unit of BA, a PPC is still only going to kill 1 trooper.

So with various rounding issues and damage transfer, which works out better is probably up in the air.

And if I want to use something other then the standard Auto-Rifle, like say a Federated-Barret M42B for it's burst damage?

The rules for that are in TechManual, which details what the BA can carry, though its been errata'd a couple of times, so I'm not quite sure what the final results were off hand.

Diablo48

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #28 on: 10 October 2013, 22:49:42 »
Only sometimes. By deploying the infantry in PA(L) you lose the vulnerability to burst fire damage that conventional infantry units have, but you also lose the protection from `Mech scale weaponry that they have.

Of course, since damage doesn't transfer inside a unit of BA, a PPC is still only going to kill 1 trooper.

So with various rounding issues and damage transfer, which works out better is probably up in the air.

PBIs get no special protection from heavy weapons, they just come in big enough groups that killing them all that way is impractical, and huge mobs of cheap PA(L) troops can replicate that just fine.  A Medium Laser will kill one trooper regardless of which unit it hits, so the only difference is the handful of heavy weapons which can kill two PBIs but would only be able to kill one suit.


View my design musings or request your own custom ride here.

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4963
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Introduction and Overview
« Reply #29 on: 10 October 2013, 23:21:40 »
Actually....given that PA(L) can have a max of 2 points of armor + 1 for the suit...they have nearly the same survival rate as heavily armored infantry.  >:D

Granted, machine guns, flamers, and SPL are still more effective vs the infantry than the PA troopers, but missiles and LBX will be better against the PA(L) troops.