Register Register

Author Topic: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih  (Read 16032 times)

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« on: 06 January 2012, 02:51:43 »
Fa Shih Battle Armor - Technical Readout 3058U page 21



     The last Great House to develop their own distinct Battle Armor design, the Capellan Confederation finally joined the club in 3062 with the introduction of the Fa Shih, or Master of Methods. Like most of the early suits that existed prior to the introduction of the construction rules, the Fa Shih brought some innovations to the Battle Armor world, adding mine warfare and enhancing the ability to conduct combined arms operations, and arguably has yet to be bettered by later designs.

     With less access to Clan Battle Armor technology than other states and initially lacking the outside assistance enjoyed by the Free Worlds League, it was no wonder that the Confederation would be the one to lag behind, although Field Manual: Capellan Confederation also notes that the ambitious nature of the Fa Shih's design added to the delays. Forcing the CCAF to rely upon the Inner Sphere Standard while development continued, the project limped along until 3060 when the Word of Blake offered to help, resulting in the first prototypes by June 3061, with production beginning on March 3062. As its name suggests, the Fa Shih is a product of the Xin Sheng movement, and not only did the CCAF apply a Chinese name to celebrate that aspect of Capellan culture, the appearance of the suit itself also reflects Chinese styling.

     Described in the Field Manual as a medium design, at a time when we lacked a construction system to put this into context, the initial write-up oddly makes the claim that the CCAF had emphasized the defensive features of the Fa Shih, and that the suit possessed above average armor. While it's true that the Fa Shih is armored above the mid point of the armor scale for Medium Battle Armor, it's actually less well protected than the Inner Sphere Standard and similar designs, mounting only seven points of armor. Unfortunately, the weight of other systems prevented the installation of Stealth armor, which could have compensated for this merely modest level of protection.

     As already noted, the CCAF have access to the Inner Sphere Standard to fill the role of mainline trooper, however the Fa Shih is likely to also find itself used in this role, especially with non-Omni forces, as will be discussed later. The level of armor protection means that the suit is vulnerable to one-shot kills by Large Lasers and similar strength weapons, which is too low for an Inner Sphere trooper design, in my opinion, especially for a non-stealthy suit. The design has been forced into this situation due to the trio of innovative features that provide greater flexibility in mobility and other combat roles, so in that respect the vulnerability can be forgiven. Like the Federated Suns' Infiltrator Mk II, the Fa Shih may be capable of acting as, and is even used as, a trooper design, but its extra abilities make it a specialist unit, and not one intended merely for fighting on the front line.

     The Mine Clearance modification to the pair of Basic Manipulators and the Mine Dispenser are perhaps what sets the Fa Shih apart the most from the other Inner Sphere Mediums produced in the 3050s and 3060s. No other Battle Armor design at the time possessed the capability to deploy minefields, while the enhanced ability to clear mines remains unique to the Fa Shih series. While reviewing the article, jymset made a good point that given the CCAF's fascination with minefields, it's surprising that the AFFS weren't the first to adopt Mine Clearance manipulators, or that they haven't subsequently fielded them on one of their many Battle Armor designs. One of the few types that need to be mounted in pairs, the Mine Clearance manipulators improve the odds of clearing mines, while decreasing the chance of accidental detonation. Tactical Operations doesn't currently provide rules for their function, so the player has the option of either using the older rules from BattleTech Master Rules and the Field Manual, or instead counting Battle Armor so-equipped as if they were Minesweeping Engineer infantry, although the latter have lesser chances of success.

     The Mine Dispenser is the offensive face of the Fa Shih's expression of the CCAF's near-obsession with mines. Under the current rules, the system was originally covered in the Tech Manual, but with the latest errata it has now been moved to Tactical Operations where the mine warfare rules are located. This change effectively makes the Fa Shih an Advanced design, thus making it ineligible for use in Tournament Level play; however most players would probably be willing to overlook this technicality, simply leaving the Dispenser unused. When first introduced in Field Manual: Capellan Confederation, the Mine Dispenser could be used to lay a single 10-point minefield, with up to two suits per squad able to deploy them per Turn, but the current rules in Tactical Operations provides the Dispenser with two "shots", while limiting the deployment to a single suit per Turn. It's currently unclear whether Battle Armor under the current rules retains the ability to load each Dispenser in a squad with a different type of mine, or even if a single Dispenser can be loaded with two different types.

     When originally introduced, the only types of mine that could be used were Conventional, Command Detonated and Vibrabombs, but later rules added some new possibilities, including the highly useful Active mine, which can present a formidable barrier to jumping units. The most unusual option is the EMP mine, which is even capable of causing a unit to shut down, including types not normally prone to that problem, such as Battle Armor. The Fa Shih's mine laying ability can be especially useful in urban combat, booby trapping potentially critical floors in a building to deny them to the enemy, although the requirement that Battle Armor must using jumping or VTOL Movement Points while laying mines means that the Fa Shih squads must jump into or out of the building, which can make the mines clumsy to dispense.

     The last innovation may only be an expansion of an ability shared by most Battle Armor, but it's the one that many players consider the most important. The Magnetic Clamp system simply allows Battle Armor to mount and ride upon non-Omni units, both BattleMechs and vehicles, although unlike Omnis both suffer a speed loss when used to transport Battle Armor in this way. With other Inner Sphere factions limited to using Mechanized Battle Armor tactics with their relatively rare Omnis, most were forced to use various Armored Personnel Carriers that had been modified to increase the size of the infantry bay to accommodate the heavier armored troops. This meant that the CCAF had a massive advantage when conducting combined arms operations involving Battle Armor, being able to attach squads to any unit, without also having to squeeze in APCs as well or assign the still scarce OmniMechs. Technically, the Fa Shih was also the only design that could ride OmniVehicles going by the exact wording of the Mechanized Battle Armor rules all the way up to the BattleTech Master Rules, but thankfully Total War cleared up that oddity.

     Mounted on the right forearm, the Fa Shih has the defacto standard 200kg and 2 slot capacity Modular Weapon Mount, which can be equipped with the equally ubiquitous trio of Small Laser, Flamer and Machine Gun. Given the Confederation's reinvention and widespread adoption of the Arrow IV artillery system, perhaps the most dangerous of the original configurations was the Light TAG. Initially operating in combination with Catapults and Demolishers, Fa Shih squads would later be used to provide targeting data for other Arrow IV-armed designs; while at closer ranges, LRM-armed units would be able to benefit from Semi-Guided missiles once they eventually entered CCAF service. When armed with the TAG, Fa Shih squads have only the left arm Anti-Personnel Weapon Mount for self-protection, together with the ability to conduct Leg Attacks on 'Mechs, although unlike the other configurations they would be unable to inflict damage while Swarming. As a side note, the original printing of Technical Readout 3058U accidentally placed the secondary mount on the right arm, which would have blocked bulkier primary weapon configurations, but this was later fixed.

     Those original four configurations were the only canon options until the publication of Record Sheets 3058Uu Clan & Star League, when The Light Recoilless Rifle - another Capellan Battle Armor innovation - was made available. First described in the Classic BattleTech Companion, the Light Recoilless Rifle actually would have been available when the Fa Shih was originally produced, having first been fielded by CCAF IS Standard squads during the St Ives Conflict. When eventually deployed by Warrior House units equipped with the Fa Shih, the Light Recoilless Rifle earned the nickname "ghetto blaster", and although for a time they would be a Capellan signature weapon, they eventually spread throughout the Inner Sphere.

     Even though the Fa Shih possesses the ability to clear mines, it unfortunately lacks any advanced sensors to locate them, forcing units to rely upon external help or to simply stumble into a minefield, where the standard detection method is to jump 200 feet into the air and scatter yourself over a wide area. The Modular Weapon Mount does have the capacity to mount Improved Sensors, which could fill the gap, but these are not available as an official configuration. Likewise, the Fa Shih lacks a missile option, meaning that the Light Recoilless Rifle is the longest ranged official configuration, although when well supported by units armed with Arrow IV or Semi-Guided LRMs, that claim could arguably be viewed as usurped by the TAG.

     Overall, the CCAF's IS Standards remained a better choice for general duties, at least for those units equipped with Omnis and APCs, due to its heavier armor. However, the Fa Shih's Magnetic Clamps made it the only viable choice for those units comprised of BattleMechs and tanks, guaranteeing that what is technically a mine warfare specialist would become a widespread design within the Capellan military. Mines apparently aren't as popular within foreign armies, so in that regard the Fa Shih's Mine Clearance manipulators could perhaps be considered wasteful, however there would be little to be gained by reallocating the 30kg they require. Of course, the Fa Shih could be used to clear minefields placed by Capellan forces, enabling them to pass through hexes previously denied to the enemy - and perhaps laying replacement mines once friendly forces have passed - so even against opponents that lack mine capability the Mine Clearance manipulators can be useful.

     As noted above, the Fa Shih's mines can prove incredibly effective in urban combat, particularly by denying enemy infantry access to key locations within buildings. The mines can also be used to interdict chokepoints or critical positions between buildings or on the non-urban battlefield. Bridges, gaps in rough terrain, and Light and Heavy Woods hexes with clear fields of fire are all examples of areas where a well-placed minefield can offer a significant advantage. Unlike those mines that can be delivered via Thunder missiles - another favorite of the CCAF - the need for the Fa Shih unit to physically move to the target hex can be a significant hindrance however. In general, the Fa Shih is best suited to laying defensive minefields, and even if provided with a transport to get around the problem, those same vehicles or 'Mechs may be able to lay the mines themselves if equipped with Thunders or Vehicular Mine Dispensers.

     Introduced in 3072, the Fa Shih (Support) from Technical Readout 3085 Old Is The New New appears to be an attempt to convert the design from a specialist and into a general trooper, but if this is so then the project was not completely successful. By removing the Mine Dispenser and Anti-Personnel Weapon Mount, then switching to standard Basic Manipulators, the designers freed up 85kg and 3 equipment slots. Combined with the change to Advanced armor composites, the variant could have been as heavily armored as the Clans' Elemental without the loss of any of the original Fa Shih's configurations, however the Fa Shih (Support) is no better protected than the original model, having used all the weight savings to increase the payload of the Modular Weapon Mount to a whopping 355kg.

     Currently only configured to mount either a Man-Portable Plasma Rifle or King David Light Gauss Rifle, the extra capacity hasn't been efficiently exploited, with both weapons not particularly stellar performers and both leaving unused mass. The lighter Support PPC and Medium Recoilless Rifle offer greater range and superior damage respectively when compared to the Plasma Rifle, and although the Fa Shih (Support) could mount an ER Small Laser, this is also outperformed by the Medium Recoilless Rifle. The design could have been as well armored as the IS Standard while still retaining a respectable payload that would have offered all the best weapon options, including the possibility of an Active Probe configuration for scouting and mine detection, but unfortunately the CCAF opted for the leave the protection unaltered.

     Overall, the Fa Shih (Support) is a poor upgrade, especially given its canon configurations, having only a single advantage over the Fa Shih thanks to the King David configuration, which provides a useful 9-hex range anti-vehicle attack. Unfortunately that could be nearly matched by the 8-hex range David Light Gauss Rifle, which could even be mounted on the standard Fa Shih, and for this token improvement plus a minor reduction in C-Bill price, the variant loses its Anti-Personnel capability as well as both mine warfare systems. If other configurations are other made canon, specifically the Medium Recoilless Rifle and Support PPC, this low evaluation would be somewhat improved, and I can only sit and hope. Obviously, custom configurations could be used, but as noted above that still leaves the Support variant as an inefficient design, with plenty of excess mass after mounting most weapon options.

     The only other Fa Shih variant is equally unimpressive, and even that low evaluation is somewhat generous. Introduced in Experimental Technical Readout: Liao, the Fa Shih 2 is one of those prototypes where an improvement in one or even two areas has resulted in another ability being reduced, that has subsequently made it all but worthless on the battlefield. The albatross around the Fa Shih 2's neck are the Battle Armor Myomer Boosters, the very system that was installed in an attempt to enhance the design. A then experimental Clantech system acquired in a stroke of good look after encountering Clan forces along the Tikonov and Liao Commonality borders during the crushing of the Protectorate, the hefty 250kg requirement forced the designers to halve the Modular Weapon Mount payload, while also reducing the armor protection to a frankly pathetic four points. The Fa Shih 2 now shares the ignominious distinction of having the joint worst armor rating for non-PA(L) Battle Armor, joining the long suffering Gray Death Scout Suit.

     With the Fa Shih 2 now unable to hide due to the high heat output of the Myomer Boosters, if the design ever went into production it would prove to be a laughably easy target for enemy troops equipped with LRM Mine Clearance Munitions, or indeed anybody armed with Medium Lasers or other types of LRM. What the suit does gain is a massively improved Anti-'Mech capability, together with a tripled ground speed, that together would greatly improve its urban combat performance in particular. However, with limited supplies of the Myomer Boosters and likely no way for the Capellan Confederation to construct more, the Fa Shih 2 is almost certain to remain nothing more than a theoretical test bed.

     The Fa Shih and IS Standard were eventually joined in CCAF service by the Ying Long. Best suited to urban combat due to its high ground speed, the newer suit is armored halfway between the two older designers, although it does include Mimetic technology, which can make it the toughest of the three in many situations. The Ying Long's lack of jump capability and Magnetic Clamps makes the Fa Shih a superior choice in non-urban combat and typical offensive operations, where the Fa Shih is better able to integrate with 'Mech forces. Sadly, the Support variant came so close to being arguably the perfect Inner Sphere Battle Armor, but then stumbled at the last step. Even so, with the exception of its experimental form, the Fa Shih is a capable and effective design that has produced some imitators of its more innovative features, but not one has completely bettered the whole package. For a faction that is viewed as the weakest in terms of Battle Armor, that is an impressive legacy.

Next up:
  • Kobold
  • Clan Medium
  • Afreet
  • Rottweiler

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #1 on: 06 January 2012, 13:40:30 »
Brilliant write up.  I remain a heavy Fa Shih user due to my CC and MOC leanings, and the mechanisation ability was just tremendously useful in getting BA to the fight.  Being able to mechanise a Wraith or a Regulator or Savannah Master is just incredibly useful and for a long time, overcame the weaker armour, and to some extent, still does for me.  I'm eager to try some of the newer minefield types sometime.  I am underwhelmed by the Fa Shih(Support) not improving the armour despite the plate type changing.  The ability to take a LL/LGR hit would be useful, or frankly just picking a single, multi-purpose weapon and upping the armour levels to those of other suits. 

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #2 on: 07 January 2012, 13:22:55 »
I wonder how often the mine-laying capabilities are actually used. Out of all the times I've used the Fa Shih, I can't ever remember actually using the minefields. probably the fault is mine with the lack of knowing how exactly they worked.

Especially since a brief look at the rules seems to indicate that mine-laying doesn't interfere with standard combat at all.

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #3 on: 07 January 2012, 14:27:07 »
Back in the day, when FM:CC first came out up to BMR, minelaying could be a death sentence. The squad couldn't move and couldn't attack during the turn that it laid mines, which made them a juicy target.

Thanks to the current rules, Fa Shihs aren't quite so vulnerable now, being able to lay a minefield at the start or end of jump movement. As noted in the article, that can sometimes a little annoying when trying to deploy inside a building. Normally, I'd drop the mines at the beginning of movement, jumping out of the building, but sometimes I'd risk the damage of jumping into a building (not the roof, one of the floors). The latter can be a way to squeeze out of the last drop of performance from a heavily depleted squad, such as one down to a single suit, which is otherwise certain to be killed soon. Jump in to the critical floor, perhaps take some damage, dropping a minefield as you land, then the second turn drop the second minefield if it hasn't yet been used and jump out.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #4 on: 08 January 2012, 05:31:09 »
Back in the day, when FM:CC first came out up to BMR, minelaying could be a death sentence. The squad couldn't move and couldn't attack during the turn that it laid mines, which made them a juicy target.

That definitely explains why I never used them. I'll have to remember the new rules next time I get a chance to field a few squads.

Liam's Ghost

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5528
  • Miss Chitty scoffs at your clan overlords
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #5 on: 09 January 2012, 04:46:24 »
I wonder how often the mine-laying capabilities are actually used. Out of all the times I've used the Fa Shih, I can't ever remember actually using the minefields. probably the fault is mine with the lack of knowing how exactly they worked.

Especially since a brief look at the rules seems to indicate that mine-laying doesn't interfere with standard combat at all.

I know I've never used the mine laying ability in game. I've used the fa shih and their mines against my players, but I've never had them dropping mines mid battle.
Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

ArkRoyalRavager

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2863
  • Ravaging the enemies of House Davion
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #6 on: 09 January 2012, 15:26:32 »
About the "Mine Clearance mod havent shown up in AFFS battlesuits" issue, the AFFS developed the Mine-Clearance Missile for that purpose to minimize mine-clearing infantry casualties, so it makes sense that they wouldn't want to mod their battlesuits that way given that there's still a risk.

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #7 on: 09 January 2012, 15:39:26 »
TacOps doesn't directly state that MCMs were intended to reduce casualties in mine clearance troops, although obviously that could be a result.

MCMs weren't available until 3069, long after the manipulators appeared, creating an obvious niche. Beyond that, there's also the issue that there may be times when you can't use MCMs, such as when you want to avoid the collateral damage they create.

ArkRoyalRavager

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2863
  • Ravaging the enemies of House Davion
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #8 on: 09 January 2012, 15:46:23 »
My bad, i did not consider the varied operational contexts for both equipment. But since the AFFS did develop them, the reason can be inferred...

StCptMara

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6010
  • Looking for new Adder skin boots
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #9 on: 25 January 2012, 05:52:48 »
What surprises me is that, aside from, what, an Infiltrator mk II variant? there are still so FEW mag-clamp equipped battle armour.
I really wonder at times why that is? Imagaine up armoured, wingless Kage with a mag clamps, or even variant of the IS STandard
with them!
"Victory or Debt!"- The Battlecry of Mercenaries everywhere

"Greetings, Mechwarrior! You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the frontier against---Oops, wrong universe" - Unknown SLDF Recruiter

Reality and Battletech go hand in hand like a drug induced hallucination and engineering a fusion reactor ;-)

Martius

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1754
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #10 on: 25 January 2012, 06:05:13 »
The Loginus  (magnetic) is good.

StCptMara

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6010
  • Looking for new Adder skin boots
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #11 on: 25 January 2012, 16:56:06 »
The Loginus  (magnetic) is good.

Missed that one...but, still..Mag Clamps have been out for how long? And we have only 3 suits with them? I am guessing
Steiner and Kurita field exclusively Omnis..or just do not value infantry as having any tactical use?
"Victory or Debt!"- The Battlecry of Mercenaries everywhere

"Greetings, Mechwarrior! You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the frontier against---Oops, wrong universe" - Unknown SLDF Recruiter

Reality and Battletech go hand in hand like a drug induced hallucination and engineering a fusion reactor ;-)

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 33421
  • Divided States of SMASH
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #12 on: 25 January 2012, 17:29:50 »
...or field large numbers of sufficiently large APCs, and thus can field them alongside regular mechs without sacrificing space for armor or firepower that magclamps would require.

In the Lyrans' case, most of their suits are fast enough to not really need clamps, and are quad designs, which cannot use them.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #13 on: 25 January 2012, 18:17:17 »
The AFFS prefers vehicular transport, in particular VTOLs, so internally within the universe they probably don't see a particular need for Magnetic Clamp designs. Few AFFS 'Mech units are going to be without plentiful conventional support, and in some ways the Infiltrator Mk II (Magnetic) could be considered a luxury, filling out a relatively narrow niche for the AFFS.

According to FM:U, the DCMS had a good supply of OmniMechs, which provides them with a lot of Mech BA transports alongside those vehicle APCs they field, so internally they perhaps see no need for Clamp-equipped designs at all. The general pro-'Mech snobbery of many in the officer corps perhaps might have also have an influence, with them maybe not particularly caring whether their 'Mechs have Battle Armor support or not

As noted by Weirdo, the Lyrans prefer quads, although they do have IS Standards and other bipedal designs, which presumably are either assigned to those few Omnis that they do have, or have to use conventional APCs, exploiting the holdover of the RCT model they inherited from the AFFS.

The FWLM had a relatively moderate number of Omnis, but like the AFFS they prefer APCs - mostly hovercraft - to transport their Battle Armor, again making the Longinus (Magnetic) something that wasn't a vital need.

Isanova

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1339
  • There you are!
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #14 on: 25 January 2012, 22:17:14 »
Don't forget, the Mag Clamps make sense on the Fa Shih like few others. Most BA units don't really have an advantage being mech-anized over being mechanized in transports... but the Fa Shih is a mine specialist. Cappy tactics being what they are, a lance breaking off to establish an ambush at a choke point, or pass thru enemy choke points and clear their potential minefield...

It hasn't proliferated much because it's not so worthwhile
Freeborn and proud~

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #15 on: 26 January 2012, 13:21:59 »
Don't forget, the Mag Clamps make sense on the Fa Shih like few others. Most BA units don't really have an advantage being mech-anized over being mechanized in transports... but the Fa Shih is a mine specialist. Cappy tactics being what they are, a lance breaking off to establish an ambush at a choke point, or pass thru enemy choke points and clear their potential minefield...

It hasn't proliferated much because it's not so worthwhile

Given the rush by the IS powers to develop and field their own battle armour, I somehow doubt the lesson of the Clan Wars was that mechanised BA is not worthwhile.  And since mag clamps can mechanise on tanks or hovers, not just Mechs, they make perfect sense to include on as many designs as possible from an IC perspective.  They get around the IS' inability to field enough OmniMechs to even consider 100% mechanisation.  But since even the Cappies don't seem to get their utility, its not a surprise that so few suits have them. 

Isanova

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1339
  • There you are!
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #16 on: 26 January 2012, 23:58:06 »
Given the rush by the IS powers to develop and field their own battle armour, I somehow doubt the lesson of the Clan Wars was that mechanised BA is not worthwhile.  And since mag clamps can mechanise on tanks or hovers, not just Mechs, they make perfect sense to include on as many designs as possible from an IC perspective.  They get around the IS' inability to field enough OmniMechs to even consider 100% mechanisation.  But since even the Cappies don't seem to get their utility, its not a surprise that so few suits have them.

But because the Inner Sphere, unlike the Clans, have no compulsion about fielding integrated transport vehicles in combat, they don't need mech-anization. I prefer to deploy BA via transport assets in 95% of times anyway, it's a lot better than tying them to my mechs.

The lesson is in BA use and making them mobile, not tying them to mechs for transport. IMO
Freeborn and proud~

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #17 on: 27 January 2012, 01:01:47 »
But because the Inner Sphere, unlike the Clans, have no compulsion about fielding integrated transport vehicles in combat, they don't need mech-anization. I prefer to deploy BA via transport assets in 95% of times anyway, it's a lot better than tying them to my mechs.

The lesson is in BA use and making them mobile, not tying them to mechs for transport. IMO

And mag clamp equipped BA can use any vehicle for transport, rather than them giving up 4 tons, a suit pays 30kg. 

StCptMara

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6010
  • Looking for new Adder skin boots
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #18 on: 27 January 2012, 02:58:17 »
And mag clamp equipped BA can use any vehicle for transport, rather than them giving up 4 tons, a suit pays 30kg.


This!
I always imagine the terror of Gabriels or Savies or Zephyrs or any FAST vehicles that are rushing around as battle taxis.
On top of that, Locust 6M running around as a battle taxi, or so many others....It honestly surprised me that the WoB
did not make a Purifier variant with Mag-Clamps...
"Victory or Debt!"- The Battlecry of Mercenaries everywhere

"Greetings, Mechwarrior! You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the frontier against---Oops, wrong universe" - Unknown SLDF Recruiter

Reality and Battletech go hand in hand like a drug induced hallucination and engineering a fusion reactor ;-)

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7626
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #19 on: 27 January 2012, 04:09:16 »
Savannah Master transporter anyone?

StCptMara

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6010
  • Looking for new Adder skin boots
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #20 on: 27 January 2012, 04:27:34 »
Savannah Master transporter anyone?

This, BTW, is why I am not allowed to let my Liao forces have Savies or Gabriels...
in fact, I was told that I had to paint all my Gabriels in Comstar or Marik colours...
and then, after the Loginus Magnetic was unveiled..I am restricted to just Com Guard :(
"Victory or Debt!"- The Battlecry of Mercenaries everywhere

"Greetings, Mechwarrior! You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the frontier against---Oops, wrong universe" - Unknown SLDF Recruiter

Reality and Battletech go hand in hand like a drug induced hallucination and engineering a fusion reactor ;-)

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7626
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #21 on: 27 January 2012, 05:55:19 »
Hover APC's then, why doesn't your force have them? I think the problem here is the Vee's we are mentioning, not the BA

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #22 on: 27 January 2012, 07:05:12 »
Hover APC's then, why doesn't your force have them? I think the problem here is the Vee's we are mentioning, not the BA

How much overhead does that add though? If you need a lance of vehicles to transport your platoon of Battle Armor, that's another 4-16 crew for the vehicles, you have to find someplace to transport them (and if you transport them as cargo, they have to be unloaded, AND you have to find places for the crew theoretically). If you're running a campaign, now you have an extra group of Techs that you have to cover as well.

And even if you're not running a campaign that's that detailed, you're still looking at an extra 150 to 200 BV per transport that has to be accounted for in your force (more if use something other than bare bones APCs).

Suddenly the ability to hitch rides on the `Mechs that are already there can begin to look pretty good.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7626
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #23 on: 27 January 2012, 16:54:55 »
I wasn't thinking of putting the BA on the inside, but rather having them hang on the outside using their mag clamps so the rules you are talking about don't apply, Hover APC's are 10/15 move which is even better then all but the fastest of 'Mech's and a lot cheaper to field

Isanova

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1339
  • There you are!
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #24 on: 27 January 2012, 17:10:49 »
Maybe it's the logistical thinking in me, but I wouldn't want to rely on Mag Clamps for transportation. In the field, even a few hours getting into position is one thing. Riding around for days in the field, not so much. I can't imagine spending 10 hours unable to flex your knees whilst moving on the strategic level. IDK if they have any advantages/disadvantages in the BattleForce game, but I sort of feel they should.
Freeborn and proud~

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #25 on: 27 January 2012, 19:18:46 »
Thankfully, the game doesn't cover that level of detail.  I acknowledge the usefulness of transports, but not needing dedicated combat transports, to be able to grab onto Mechs or vehicles is incredibly useful.  Dedicated transports are nice, but not always available or feasible, esp for supporting Mech forces, which are very mobile and have the fewest terrain restrictions.  BA being able to hop on and accompany them over gorges or into heavy woods is worth the 30KG per suit.  The CapCon accepts a substandard battle armour (7 points protection) in exchange for that utility. 


Its better to have decent battle armour around to support Mechs/vees instead of great armours that need special transports to move them.  It easy to find some room for a few squads of BA, it gets harder when we're talking multiple light vehicle bays. 
« Last Edit: 27 January 2012, 19:20:32 by Ian Sharpe »

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #26 on: 27 January 2012, 19:51:40 »
Its better to have decent battle armour around to support Mechs/vees instead of great armours that need special transports to move them.  It easy to find some room for a few squads of BA, it gets harder when we're talking multiple light vehicle bays. 

To which one answer is 5t OmniVehicles. You install maybe a lance of light vehicles bays to ease deployment, assuming you don't already have them on your DropShip, and then the rest of the vehicles get put into general cargo. Vehicles that light only require 1 crew, so your life support requirements would be low too.

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #27 on: 27 January 2012, 20:14:58 »
To which one answer is 5t OmniVehicles. You install maybe a lance of light vehicles bays to ease deployment, assuming you don't already have them on your DropShip, and then the rest of the vehicles get put into general cargo. Vehicles that light only require 1 crew, so your life support requirements would be low too.

Nice but improbable solution, with the short-sighted IS powers never fully buying into Omni technology.  I'd like lots of things, but I don't see an Omni Savannah Master happening.  Also left with the problem of vehicles not being able to keep up with Mechs in all terrain types. 

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10339
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #28 on: 28 January 2012, 02:48:52 »
5 ton Omni-VTOL?

Can VTOLs even be Omni?
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

sillybrit

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3923
Re: Battle Armor of the Week - Fa Shih
« Reply #29 on: 28 January 2012, 02:53:52 »
Also left with the problem of vehicles not being able to keep up with Mechs in all terrain types.

Although the same can also be true in reverse, see VTOLs and hovers.

And yes, Scotty, VTOLs can be Omnis, and technically, as the rules are written, those OmniVTOLs could have BA hanging off the outside. That does make me cringe though.

 

Register