Why should I keep lower arm actuators on my Mech?

[Legion]

I don't claim to know every new rule (or old rule for that matter), but what I think I know is this:

Mechs without lower arm actuators or hands can flip their arms.  Bonus.
Mechs with lower arm actuators and hands do not suffer penalties to punches.  Bonus.
Mechs without hands, but with lower arm actuators suffer a penalty to punch, but cannot flip their arms. Oh, and can't pick things up.  No bonus.

Is there any way that getting rid of a Mech's hands but keeping the lower arm actuators is useful?

[Stormfury]

Lower arm actuators are a structural weakness. Geth do not use them.

***

From a purely mechanical standpoint, you either want lower arm actuators and hands or nothing below the upper arm actuator. The former provides some crit sinking that can save other equipment (even if it is harder to use afterwards, it's still there) and makes physical attacks easier. The latter allows for arm flipping.

From a non-mechanical standpoint, having hands allows a 'Mech to assist with construction, search and rescue, raiding and other such duties.

IIRC the new iteration of the rules does not hit those who do not have hands with a damage penalty for punching, but there are penalties for not having a lower arm actuator. I only ever kick, so I've never bothered learning the rules for punching, though.

[evilauthor]

Why lower arms and hands?

You can punch.

You can wield a melee weapon.

You can pick stuff up and run away with it (if the stuff is valuable), or bash someone else with it (if the it's NOT valuable).

You can use hands to manually reload another mech's ammo (there are rules for this).

Numerous non-combat functions that never show up in the non-tactical game.

You can use them to soak crits for free.

Because it looks way cool!  8)

[mutantmagnet]

In addition to what evilauthor said, lacking lower arm actuators will bite you in the posterior when you fall down and have hasher penalties in trying to stand up.

[Shatara]

It's worth reiterating that the OP has no issues with hands, rather is wondering what good lower arms are WITHOUT hands.

One houserule I've seen on the boards I liked, is that you need lower arms to fire into the arm arc. Makes sense, since mechs without lowers tend to have 'turret-arms'.

[Diablo48]

One small case you may run into is that you may want both hands for punching/utility but really need a crit so you would have to loose a hand on one side to make the design legal, but even then you would prefer to have both hands for melee combat.  The same case can sort of apply to the other arm as well, but if things have gotten to the point where you have to pull both hands you should probably be reevaluating your plan of action to leave kicks as your only melee attacks and pull the lower actuators for better fields of fire on your close ranged weapons.

Beyond that the only reason to leave them would be fluff because an upgrade of a design with LA actuators should really keep them for continuity.

Why lower arms and hands?

The question was "why lower arms but not hands", not "why lower arms and hands".  The lower arms get a lot harder to justify when you do not have the hands.

[TigerShark]

When playing pick-up games with certain opponents who consistently use arm-flipping 'Mechs, I generally elect to use the TacOps rule which makes standing more difficult for units missing their arm actuators. It's a lot more realistic and gives a nice trade-off to the arm-flipping bonus.

[Legion]

One houserule I've seen on the boards I liked, is that you need lower arms to fire into the arm arc. Makes sense, since mechs without lowers tend to have 'turret-arms'.

I like the sound of this.  However, removing the hands still does nothing but lessen your potential, unless your design is so crit-packed that you need the extra slots.

You can pick stuff up and run away with it (if the stuff is valuable), or bash someone else with it (if it's NOT valuable).

O0

[wundergoat]

Lacking a hand is +1 to a punch.  Lacking the lower arm actuator is +2 AND 1/2 damage.  So really, you don't start to suck at punching until you drop the lower arm actuators.

[Top Sergeant]

You need hands on your mechs to play Battletech football!

[evilauthor]

The question was "why lower arms but not hands", not "why lower arms and hands".  The lower arms get a lot harder to justify when you do not have the hands.

Ah okay.

Even so, I still think mechs with lower arm actuators look cooler than mechs without. Check out the Warhammer and Marauder and Mad Cat for examples.

BTW, isn't there a house rule about getting a targeting bonus or something for weapons mounted in arms lacking hands?

[Diablo48]

Ah okay.

Even so, I still think mechs with lower arm actuators look cooler than mechs without. Check out the Warhammer and Marauder and Mad Cat for examples....

Congratulations on providing a counterexample to your point. ;D  Of those three designs, only the Timber Wolf does not mount lower arm actuators and I am strongly of the opinion that it looks far cooler than the other two (and quite thoroughly kicks their asses, but that is more a function of the tech base and the Timber Wolf being one of the most optimal omnis in the game).

[A. Lurker]

When playing pick-up games with certain opponents who consistently use arm-flipping 'Mechs, I generally elect to use the TacOps rule which makes standing more difficult for units missing their arm actuators. It's a lot more realistic and gives a nice trade-off to the arm-flipping bonus.

Having lower arm actuators yet no hands doesn't help you under that rule either. If an arm is missing any actuators, it inflicts +1 to PSRs, so you get that already as soon as you go handless; after that, the penalty only goes up to +2 once the entire arm is destroyed or missing.

[Fnord]

You need hands on your mechs to play Battletech football!

Are you not supposed to mainly use your feet in football?
 ;)

[Jim1701]

It depends on whether BOTH arms have big guns in them.  It also depends on whether I want to give up the option of punching completely or not.  An arm with a lower arm actuator but no hand actuator can still punch for full damage IIRC just with a +1 penalty whereas an arm with no lower arm actuator and no hand actuator can only punch for half damage and at a +2. 

[beyond.wudge]

I thought there was a tac ops rule for this.

Y'know on the expanded heat scale. Where if you get to 19 you check to avoid damage on your lower arm actuators.

Like a 4+ right?

And if you don't have lower arm actuators your mech just explodes.

Yeah? ;)

[Lysenko]

These are the rules of Hutt Ball! Two teams, Frog-dogs and Rotworms, chosen by random draw! One ball, slippery as a greased Hutt! Grab the ball, throw the ball, get the ball over the opposing team’s line anyway you can and your team gets a point. Weapons, name-calling, and cheating are all encouraged! But, DO NOT KICK THE BALL!!! Hutts don’t have feet! Show our sponsor Giradda [the Hutt] the respect he deserves…
LET'S PLAY HUTTBALL!

[willydstyle]

When playing pick-up games with certain opponents who consistently use arm-flipping 'Mechs, I generally elect to use the TacOps rule which makes standing more difficult for units missing their arm actuators. It's a lot more realistic and gives a nice trade-off to the arm-flipping bonus.

And if your opponent doesn't want to use the optional rule?

[TigerShark]

And if your opponent doesn't want to use the optional rule?

Depends on the person. Some abuse it wildly. Some don't.

[Legion]

BTW, isn't there a house rule about getting a targeting bonus or something for weapons mounted in arms lacking hands?

Has anyone created or tried a rule for this? 

Personally, I could agree on principal with something like a -1 to hit for big weapons mounted on arms with lower actuators but no hands (sure, you can fit an AC/10 or a PPC completely in an arm with a hand, but maybe the balance is slightly off, and if you have only the upper and shoulder, maybe you don't have quite the same response time or something?).  I know that "whatever works in my games" is fine, but I'm sure I'm not the first person to find this situation unsatisfactory, so I'm wondering if someone has a tweak they have found to be appropriate.

[warden]

Congratulations on providing a counterexample to your point. ;D  Of those three designs, only the Timber Wolf does not mount lower arm actuators and I am strongly of the opinion that it looks far cooler than the other two (and quite thoroughly kicks their asses, but that is more a function of the tech base and the Timber Wolf being one of the most optimal omnis in the game).

Don't mechs that mount PPCs in the arms remove there lower arm actuators?

[A. Lurker]

Don't mechs that mount PPCs in the arms remove there lower arm actuators?

OmniMechs do, and for them the same applies to autocannons and Gauss weaponry.

Standard non-Omni BattleMechs can have the full actuator set and any of those weapons (subject to crit requirements, of course) in the same arm just fine. Classic examples are designs such as the BattleMaster and Griffin.

[pensiveswetness]

I don't claim to know every new rule (or old rule for that matter), but what I think I know is this:

Mechs without lower arm actuators or hands can flip their arms.  Bonus.
Mechs with lower arm actuators and hands do not suffer penalties to punches.  Bonus.
Mechs without hands, but with lower arm actuators suffer a penalty to punch, but cannot flip their arms. Oh, and can't pick things up.  No bonus.

Is there any way that getting rid of a Mech's hands but keeping the lower arm actuators is useful?

you will regret not having hand actuators in a circumstance where you had the opportunity to push a enemy mech into a #-level fall...

[A. Lurker]

you will regret not having hand actuators in a circumstance where you had the opportunity to push a enemy mech into a #-level fall...

Um...no, I won't, because the only arm actuators push attacks actually care about are the shoulders (+2 to hit for each damaged one). A Jenner can push just as well as a Banshee.

[pensiveswetness]

derp. well you can't GIVE THE OTHER GUY THE BIRD when you lack hand accutators then!  :-[ (when you're pushing him of course) but yeah... TU for making me recheck TW, good sir. don't know why i was associating the requirement for HA's for push attacks... could i be thinking older rules, maybe? oh well, only The Boy is going to complain... and i am learning to ignore him (its the Girl that i cant ignore. she uses her fist upon my shoulder to make her displeasure known. Diplo checks using Intimadation ranks LOL.)

 :-X

[Goose]

When playing pick-up games with certain opponents who consistently use arm-flipping 'Mechs, I generally elect to use the TacOps rule which makes standing more difficult for units missing their arm actuators. It's a lot more realistic and gives a nice trade-off to the arm-flipping bonus.

+1

[Jackmc]

Even so, I still think mechs with lower arm actuators look cooler than mechs without.

That's totally subjective though so you really can't count it.  Frex.  I don't want anime mecha I want walking tanks so I think the no arm act designs usually look better.

-Jackmc

[Hellraiser]

So, the question is, why have Lowers w/o Hands............


1.  C-Bills,  Actuators cost $$ IIRC and its a minor savings.
2.  Visuals,  seriously,  A WarHammer w/ Hands ??  No thanks.
3.  Optional Rules for variant hand type options, the Zeus used to get +2 Damage from Right Arm punches in one of the house rules Star Date Magazine issues IIRC.
4.  Variety, wouldn't it be boring if all mechs were identical ?

[Diablo48]

So, the question is, why have Lowers w/o Hands............


1.  C-Bills,  Actuators cost $$ IIRC and its a minor savings.
2.  Visuals,  seriously,  A WarHammer w/ Hands ??  No thanks.

The problem is both of these arguments also apply to the lower arm actuators as well.

3.  Optional Rules for variant hand type options, the Zeus used to get +2 Damage from Right Arm punches in one of the house rules Star Date Magazine issues IIRC.

That sounds like a 'Mech-specific rule which would not be generalizable so it does not really count.  Of course, if there is an actual optional rule that makes it advantageous to drop the hand but not lower arm that would be another story, but I would have expected it to come up by now if it existed.

4.  Variety, wouldn't it be boring if all mechs were identical ?

This is very subjective which is sort of problematic for this kind of discussion.  I am not saying variety is a bad thing, just that variety for the sake of variety is not really a good justification for doing something in a logical debate.

[A. Lurker]

Essentially, the one reason to keep lower arm actuators if the hand on that arm is already gone...is that you may foresee the need to occasionally throw a punch with it after all and would rather have just the +1 to-hit penalty than +2 and half damage. (There are also some 'Mech melee weapons that explicitly replace the hand and still need the lower arm, though that special case may be a bit outside the scope of this discussion.) That's kind of thin since in most cases you'll only punch if you haven't been able to fire any weapons on that arm that turn and the target isn't in your front arc where you can kick it instead, but, whatever. I'm sure having lower arm actuators has saved some Warhammer pilot's life in just that fashion somewhere at some time. It's a big Inner Sphere with a lot of history, after all. :D