Author Topic: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?  (Read 2397 times)

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« on: 30 August 2018, 21:58:34 »
So NLRMs really aren't all that great a weapon system when compared to standard LRMs.  Standard LRMs have more utility based off the fact they can deliver special munitions.  The upside on the Heavy NLRM carrier would appear to be its use of hardened armor.

Is there a proper place for the Heavy NLRM carrier due to the sturdy nature of its armor or is it just one of those units that would be better to skip over and purchase a different missile boat tank due to the fact you can't use special munitions?

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19827
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #1 on: 30 August 2018, 22:04:53 »
NLRMs can use alternate munitions. ELRMs can’t

The fact that it doesn’t blow up in five seconds like the standard carrier makes it intriguing. I think the launchers are on a turret as well

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #2 on: 30 August 2018, 22:10:22 »
Yep, its all on a turret.  For some reason I thought they used their own distinct munitions and couldn't carry anything special.   That bumps their value up a bit.

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25570
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #3 on: 30 August 2018, 22:57:22 »
NRLMs aren't really that great IMHO. But a hardened turretted LRM carrier? Yes.
* 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"

RoundTop

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1372
  • In Takashi We Trust
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #4 on: 30 August 2018, 23:04:23 »
Norms weigh a bit more (2 more tons for an nlrm20), but take up +50% crit space. For a vehicle this is fine, for a mech, it means it is hard to mount different structure/armor. So on vehicles, nlrms are decent. They are a hot mess on a mech
No-Dachi has a counter-argument. Nothing further? Ok.
Demo team agent #772

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #5 on: 30 August 2018, 23:26:27 »
I'm weighing a use vs. a heavy LRM carrier.  The later is cheaper on BV, but far more fragile.    The other comparable designs include the old fashion Partivan or up-sizing to a JES II. 

lucho

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 782
  • say hello to my new friend!
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #6 on: 31 August 2018, 07:47:30 »
Norms weigh a bit more (2 more tons for an nlrm20), but take up +50% crit space. For a vehicle this is fine, for a mech, it means it is hard to mount different structure/armor. So on vehicles, nlrms are decent. They are a hot mess on a mech

Being able to use all of the alternate munitions is the NLRM's saving grace. In an AU without Clantech missile launchers they become a lot more interesting, as my group has recently discovered
If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #7 on: 31 August 2018, 13:54:34 »
Some of the effects can be demonstrated by the HBS game (once you get to 8 tactics or so).  LRMs become the missile launchers of choice under those rules.  NLRMs have the tonnage and crit penalty, but I can see circumstances where they'd make sense.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #8 on: 02 September 2018, 23:15:15 »
The problem with the Heavy NLRM Carrier, as I see it, is that while it might have Hardened Armor, it's still only got 10 tons of it, which doesn't make for terribly impressive protection on a unit its size.  It might get an extra round or two of life, and the added resistance to TACs is always nice for a vehicle, but it's still fairly fragile and not going to live long once enemies get close enough for the NLRMs' reduced minimum range to matter.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #9 on: 06 September 2018, 00:13:24 »
Ran a couple this past weekend and they were the next to last units in my force to kick the bucket.  The only issue I had with them was the inability to roll average on the number of missiles that hit.  Just the smallest amount of additional missiles hitting would have allowed for another kill or two before my tanks kicked the bucket.  I'll give it another run later on down the line, but I think for their BV, they are probably priced just right.

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #10 on: 09 September 2018, 15:59:33 »
I think the unit is fine as a vehicle.

The added protection helps & the lower throw weight means its less of a target so all around it should last quite a bit longer.

For me the far bigger issue is the place of the NLRM launcher in a world post 3067 where MML launchers exist & have really taken over that same role but do it better.

3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #11 on: 11 September 2018, 00:07:20 »
I got around to using 2 of them in a game a few weeks ago.  While the rest of the force didn't pan out at a whole the additional protection of the armor and the fact the weapons were in the turret came into play.  My position did eventually get overrun and the reduced minimum range of the NLRM kept them effective until their ultimate destruction.  Once which took a few turns, because after my opponent would shave off an armor on one side, I'd turn and have them shooting at another the next turn.  I didn't start taking motive hits until the next to last turn that each tank bit the dust.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28960
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #12 on: 18 September 2018, 12:52:17 »
Regular vehicle rules or TacOps Veh Survival rules?

What crit out your vehicle's movement?
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #13 on: 19 September 2018, 01:08:16 »
Regular vehicle rules or TacOps Veh Survival rules?
TW

Quote
What crit out your vehicle's movement?

Volume of fire eventually got a couple reduced MP hits.  My position was overrun by a couple of Sphinx 4 and a Man O' War.  I had some bad dice luck in that I couldn't manage to put enough damage on the same location to take them down and/or kept rolling low on my number of missiles that hit.

The force was roughly 15k BV.  I had 2 LGR Ontos, 2 NLRM carriers, a Galahad 2D, and a Eyleuka EYL-35A.  The later wasn't the first choice i had in mind, but I had to cut BV.  I probably should have taken an Anzu.  Well placed damage location rolls took out my Galahad far to early.  The rest of my stuff had to be pounded on before it died.  Once they mauled one side, I'd change facing the next turn and give them a fresh side to shoot at.  Once those Sphinx got on top of me, the number or Heavy Small Lasers took their toll.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28960
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #14 on: 19 September 2018, 09:36:16 »
Gargoyle?  Was it a Prime?  I just wonder if your carriers were laughing off LBX properly lol.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

Firesprocket

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2945
  • Broke the Bandwagon
Re: Heavy NLRM carrier, do or don't?
« Reply #15 on: 19 September 2018, 22:53:39 »
No LBX on the other side.  It was largely pulse lasers or heavy lasers.  The Gargoyle was a D.  There was a Stooping Hawk jumping around as well which was his last mech.  Really the issue was he kept spreading damage around or I'd turn a new side to him and they'd have to start blasting them all over again.

 

Register