Should a weapon like a hatchet have better range?

[Crimson Dawn]

Talking with some friends about how we felt that weapons like the hatchet are not really worth the weight and crit spaces possibly even with TSM since kicks can be seen as better and are free and if you have TSM and punch and you are 60 tons or higher the punch that hits has a 1/6 chance of instantly killing any mech outside of niche designs (such as having hardened armor or the like).

So in trying to think of some qualities to improve a weapon like the hatchet I started off thinking of things like using the punch table but I thought back on Alpha Strike and how having a melee weapon gives a nice boost where it gives you extra range and I thought that would be an interesting idea for the classic game.

So how would you think of the hatchet giving a mech a two hex melee range?  That would make it very interesting and would allow you to actually use that weapon more often and give you a solid reason to have such a weapon even with the option for the strong kick.

[Retry]

A battletech hex is 30 meters across, so that'd be, what, a 60 meter long hatchet?

[Crimson Dawn]

A battletech hex is 30 meters across, so that'd be, what, a 60 meter long hatchet?

Sadly I had not known that specifically so that does give it some hilarity though granted the weapon would not have to be 60 meters long though it would need to be longer or something to make it work for versimilitude.

But if pretending we had a way to make it sound plausible in its insanity in terms of game play and balnce would the idea have merit?

Needs some ridiculous extending arms, rocket firing axes, or nifty giant chain craziness.

[dgorsman]

Hatchet has one big advantage over kicking: no stagger check if you miss.

[Crimson Dawn]

Hatchet has one big advantage over kicking: no stagger check if you miss.

Yes that is an advantage but you spend a fair bit of weight and crits to get this weapon so it should give you something but even so consider the kick is more accurate and is free.  Also the kick is easier to concentrate attacks because you can force the attack to hit a certain location if you can get to a side and even if attacked from the front you have a 50% chance of hitting the spot you want (left or right leg) compared to the hatchet which hits using the normal table.  Concentrating your attacks on the legs are very nasty because a legged mech is in serious trouble and many of the components in the legs if critted give an additional pilot check and also hand out penalties to those checks.

Lastly the kick also forces a PSR if you hit and with its enhanced accuracy I feel that makes it superior even with the potential for a flub. 

Considering the weight and crit costs the hatchet just feels like it is not worth it.  In addition you can get the club bonus by picking something up if you can afford to not use both arms for ranged weapon fire for the same bonus with no weight and crit cost.

[Hellraiser]

A kick will hit in the leg,  so probably the 2nd most heavily armored location on a mech.

A hatchet can hit anywhere, specifically, the rear torso, and while a punch might not go internal, a hatchet most likely will.

I'm not saying a hatchet is a great idea.

I'm just saying its got points going for it, and, you know, the "OMFG that Mech has an AXE" factor from fiction that doesn't translate to the table top well.

[garhkal]

I can see where the OP is coming from.  As it stands, a hatchet has drawbacks, punches and kicks don't, such as the Cost factor, the if it is criticaled, its useless, AND the fact it makes folks target you.  And you get what for it??  Scaryness??  Does kind of seem not worth it..
Maybe if they made it as easy to pull off AS a kick attack, i could see it being usable.

[Crimson Dawn]

A kick will hit in the leg,  so probably the 2nd most heavily armored location on a mech.

A hatchet can hit anywhere, specifically, the rear torso, and while a punch might not go internal, a hatchet most likely will.

I'm not saying a hatchet is a great idea.

I'm just saying its got points going for it, and, you know, the "OMFG that Mech has an AXE" factor from fiction that doesn't translate to the table top well.

The leg is heavily armored for sure and that is a negative but I do feel that is counteracted quite a bit by how good of a location it is to crit and to destroy. 

I also kind of feel the punch is underrated due to hitting on the punch table and if you consider that any mech that is using a hatchet really should have TSM if that mech punches and is 60 tons or more it will remove a head 1/6 times he hits with a punch and could have 2 chances.

I want the hatchet to be as good as it sounds like it should be.

Perhaps allowing you to punch with the other arm if you use a hatchet?  Then it would be clearly better in potential than kicking or punching alone and may make it worth the cost but would that be too much?  Even to take advantage of that you would need to not use any weapons in both arms which is sometimes tricky.  That is another general boost to kicking which is that you very rarely use weapons in the legs but weapons in the arms are very common and if you are punching or using a hatchet you may have the issue of choosing between melee or missing out on ranged weapons (hatchetman mechs have this problem often sadly). 

[Hellraiser]

I think the real problem here isn't the Hatchet.

Its the Kick.

Its broken compared to EVERY other Physical attack option.

Its basically free since short of the Crusader no one has real firepower in the legs.

Its also a PULSE physical with its -2.

The reality is, the Hatchet should be the PULSE weapon getting a -2.

The Kick should be the 0, not the Punches.

Try kicking someone while wearing armor, good luck.

A punch should be a -1 so its easier then a kick.

As it stands, the only reason NOT to kick is if the target # is so high (9+) than your likely to miss & force a PSR.

And yes, as suggested, if you can SHOOT with the off hand while giving someone the AXE, you should be able to punch as well.  (Its called a combo, left/right, hehe)

At that point the Axe is on equal footing & the Punch is probably preferred but since you more likely have weapons in the arms the punch is still a trade off.

Finally Axe w/o the -2 allows for called shots to use the Upper/Lower table if the player wants.

Sword does Axe Damage -1, instead of Punch+1.   But is the same to hit mods as the Axe.

[Crimson Dawn]

Now that I can agree with to an extent.  Certainly kicks are so ubiquitous due to those reasons and more and I do wonder if they really intended for that to happen or did they not realize what they had done.

That free kick is so good so it makes it hard to beat when designing melee weapons and hatchets I think are considered one of the better ones but yet it is difficult to justify its weight and crit cost when the kick is so good.

[monbvol]

Yeah if it were up to me I'd completely redo the physical combat weapons wholesale.  Only a few are really worth using at all.  Claws and Talons in particular are really nasty.

I've had two ideas.

The first is making the combat and construction rules more generic but make it so you can scale up the physical combat weapons.

One ton one critical 3 damage that you can stack up/combine into one massive physical combat weapon.  The only thing that makes it an axe is that it is stylized as an axe.  Or if you want it to be a sword it's a sword instead.  If less than 10% of the mechs mass -1 to hit.  10%-15% no modifier.  +1 to hit for every 5% or fraction thereof beyond that.

So you could have a Commando with a giant K-bar that does 24 damage when it hits, weights 8 tons, takes up 8 critical slots, and would be +4 to hit because it is so massively over-sized for the mech.

Dial it back down to a more reasonable 1 ton 3 damage affair for said Commando and it'd be -1 to hit.  Heck you could take it up to 2 tons 2 critical slots and 6 damage and keep that -1 on said Commando.

Trade off would be ditching all those other special effects like generating critical chances and I'd definately strip the -2 from kicks and probably cut punch and kick damage in half rounding down on top of that.

My other idea was you'd reserve movement points for physical combat.  Needing one to engage and you can also reserve them to avoid physical combat.  Dedicated physical combat weapons essentially give a free movement point to represent the added reach.  In cases of ties in reserved movement points opposed pilot skill rolls where if one mech has a physical combat weapon but the other doesn't the one that does gets a bonus to their roll.

[Intermittent_Coherence]

Hatchet attacks should have the same hit locations as DFA.

[dgorsman]

My other idea was you'd reserve movement points for physical combat.  Needing one to engage and you can also reserve them to avoid physical combat.  Dedicated physical combat weapons essentially give a free movement point to represent the added reach.  In cases of ties in reserved movement points opposed pilot skill rolls where if one mech has a physical combat weapon but the other doesn't the one that does gets a bonus to their roll.

Like that idea, at least for ground movement.  Not sure it works well with jumping though.  Thoughts?

[monbvol]

Death From Above would be easy enough to keep within those rules but landing so you can punch/kick/physical combat weapon them does seem to be a bit tricky to keep from being too complicated.  Best Idea I have for that is the inbuilt free MP of physical combat weapons and maybe count jumping as walking for the purposes of how many MPs you can reserve for physical combat.

[garhkal]

Perhaps allowing you to punch with the other arm if you use a hatchet?  Then it would be clearly better in potential than kicking or punching alone and may make it worth the cost but would that be too much? 

A while back for a home game, i was part of a group which had 7 other players (met once every other weekend).  WE often paired up to play, and rotated who we'd play against.  We all agreed to do that, for a HR..  Even then, there were few of us, who bothered taking mechs with hatchets... 

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Still only a kick with activated TSM can remove almost all armor on the leg of a mech with same tonnage and top end armor. Also it always aims for the leg(unless elevation matters), which means you are guaranteed to dismantle enemy leg and can neutralize quite easily with some kicks. With ridiculous slots and weight hatchet requires, you can have some more guns to do something even before the melee begins. Else, some punches are even better than hatchet, for it have very high change to hit the enemy head and destroy it outright, if you have activated TSM. Hatchet can't mimic this.

Anyway it is not possible to increase the range of hatchet - as noted above, a hex is defined as 30m. You will need at least a weapon with 30m long.

[garhkal]

True, the size of the hatchet wouldn't give it better range, but imo either Increase the TN for kicks, to make up for it being so much better than every other physical, OR let hatchets hit on the same chart punches do...

[Fear Factory]

1 - Successful hits from a physical attack weapon forces a PSR
2 - Physical attack weapons are resolved during the weapon attack phase, and still counts as a physical attack for the round.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

1 - Successful hits from a physical attack weapon forces a PSR
2 - Physical attack weapons are resolved during the weapon attack phase, and still counts as a physical attack for the round.

Brilliant! I never thought that. It would represent 'better range' without change the rules much.

[Crimson Dawn]

Hmm and allow you to punch in the actual physical phase as well as discussed previously?  Certainly would make it feel much more worth it.  Or perhaps that would be added to the sword?

[Fear Factory]

Hmm and allow you to punch in the actual physical phase as well as discussed previously?  Certainly would make it feel much more worth it.  Or perhaps that would be added to the sword?

No. Only one physical attack per round (not phase).

The idea is you can force a PSR with a hatchet attack before the opponent can react with a kick or punch.

[garhkal]

1 - Successful hits from a physical attack weapon forces a PSR
2 - Physical attack weapons are resolved during the weapon attack phase, and still counts as a physical attack for the round.

That's a pair of good rules..  Would that include punches though, for #1??

[Fear Factory]

That's a pair of good rules..  Would that include punches though, for #1??

No. Only for physical attack weapons (including clubbing attacks).

[Fear Factory]

All of the other physical attacks are fine. They don't change.

Physical attack weapons always come up in discussion because they are often compared with a kick or punch(es). If you allow physical attack weapons use in the weapon phase, and allow them to force a PSR, it gives them an edge against normal physical attacks. You can essentially ruin someone's plan for any physical attack. You pay for the tonnage, make it worth it.

[Daryk]

That's not a bad idea at all...

[garhkal]

No it's not..  If we the fans could vote a rule change into play, that would get MY vote.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Punch and kick are the only viable melee option right now, so we don't have to make it better as well. The problem is melee weapons are sucks, NOT the physical attack. The melee weapons are sucks just because basic melee options - punch and kick - are simply superior to the weapons, while weapons also requires slots and tonnage to wield but punch and kick just requires functional actuators.

The only exception is Talons which makes kick to insta-kill button against most similar to lighter mechs on sight(with TSM, only one kick can melt all the armor and barely leave the internal leg structure against fully armored mech with same tonnage, so if it was somewhat damaged it is sure that the leg would be gone to history by only one kick attack), but hey, that's clans exclusive option. Although it is silly that it is clans only - can't we just make a bigger claws and put it on the foot?

Honestly, what if a mech with functional hand actuator can wield a melee weapon for free, as if a handheld weapon but no needs to spend two hands and do not interfere weapons on torso, arms(still you can't shoot and physical with the same arm on the same turn, though) and head. Sword needs more love to be functional though. But perhaps it would be somewhat out of topic.

[Fear Factory]

No it's not..  If we the fans could vote a rule change into play, that would get MY vote.

Good luck convincing anyone. Total Warfare is gospel.

[Calimehter]

When I saw the thread title, I was *really, really* hoping for a discussion of hatchet-throwing rules for Mechs.   ;D

How about this:  An Hatchet-equipped Mech can throw (or "launch" it if the art doesn't support it as hand-held) its Hatchet as a weapon attack.  Does the same damage as a regular hatchet attack, call it 1 heat and range brackets of 2/4/6.  The hatchet is then laying on the field in the same hex as the target (hit or miss) and can be picked up again just like a club and used later in the combat as a club by Mech with functioning hand actuators . . . with the original Mech being allowed to 'reattach' it (and even relaunch it later!) after picking it up instead of being forced to use the club rules since it still has the "hard point" for attaching it.  The hatchet can always be used normally if the player does not desire to launch it.

Barring that sort of insanity, I also like Fear Factory's rule suggestion.

[Edit to fix spelling issue]

[Daryk]

Well, there ARE throwing rules (TacOps pages 92-99)…  :D

[garhkal]

Well, there ARE throwing rules (TacOps pages 92-99)…  :D

PIctures a TSM equipped, hot running Atlas tossing a locust!

[monbvol]

Add the Heavy Lifter SPA and you can up that to a Valkyrie.

[Daryk]

Heh...  >:D

[TigerTiger74]

When I saw the thread title, I was *really, really* hoping for a discussion of hatchet-throwing rules for Mechs.   ;D

How about this:  An Hatchet-equipped Mech can throw (or "launch" it if the art doesn't support it as hand-held) its Hatchet as a weapon attack.  Does the same damage as a regular hatchet attack, call it 1 heat and range brackets of 2/4/6.  The hatchet is then laying on the field in the same hex as the target (hit or miss) and can be picked up again just like a club and used later in the combat as a club by Mech with functioning hand actuators . . . with the original Mech being allowed to 'reattach' it (and even relaunch it later!) after picking it up instead of being forced to use the club rules since it still has the "hard point" for attaching it.  The hatchet can always be used normally if the player does not desire to launch it.

Barring that sort of insanity, I also like Fear Factory's rule suggestion.

[Edit to fix spelling issue]

in one of the novels about Camacho's Caballeros (Close Quarters i believe) a Hatchetman does throw its hatchet.

[Calimehter]

Well, there ARE throwing rules (TacOps pages 92-99)…  :D

The more you know!  I'll have to check those out next time I have access to TacOps. :)

Its probably a bridge too far even using 31st century tech handwavium . . .but now I'm very amused by the image of something like a hatchet upgrade (say, built-in jump jets paired with an internal gyroscope and simple flight computer) that you can throw at an enemy, do damage, and have it come back to you for reuse (or at least have a percent chance of having it successfully come back, like a PSR to catch it).  Half the reason would be to have a Mech named the STB-1X Stormbreaker to drop into the middle of a beer and chips pickup game.

Maybe even a PPC-style discharge for extra damage when it hits the enemy, which can be recharged from the fusion reactor system after it is re-equipped by the throwing Mech.

I'll just show myself to the door now . . .

[well, after editing for spelling anyway]

[RifleMech]

Mech scale boomerang?

Rocket Fists?

[GRUD]

That's not a bad idea at all...

So far, I've seen nothing BUT Bad Ideas in this thread.   ;D


Throw your hatchet at me, and when it misses, I pick it up and play "Keep Away" with it!  I'd run to the edge of the map, then drop it off the edge!   ;D   IF it hits, then the 'Mech it hits now can use it right?  Maybe with Bonuses or Penalties, if the 'Mech is a different weight class than the one that threw it?


Granted, April 1st IS coming up soon.  Most people wait until that day to post stuff like this though. 

[Daryk]

The idea I as referring to was allowing physical weapons to attack in the weapons phase vice physical.  That's a relatively minor tweak that's already accounted for balance-wise by forcing the attacker to forgo certain ranged weapon attacks.

[Cannonshop]

Raise your hand if you remember when Axes hit on the punch table.

Yeah, that was a thing, guys.  It was changed between Compendium and BMR rulesets because the balance was too far the OTHER way, as in allowing one-shot-kills in melee.  (at the time, TSM worked a bit differently as well- at heat 9, you only had weapons targeting penalties and a movement bonus, you didn't have movement penalties at all, making it THE better option over MASC for boosting your 'mech's movement.)

[monbvol]

That does give me a bit of an idea to build off that.

If you delay your physical attack weapon until the typical physical attack phase you can use any other weapons in that location in the weapons attack phase and to keep Fist Fire a valid SPA it allows one weapon to be fired from the location in the weapons attack phase when using your physical combat weapon in the weapons attack phase.

Maybe apply a +1 to hit penalty to the physical attacks delayed in this fashion with punching and kicking being denied as normal.

Makes certain Hatchetman and Axman variants be a lot more interesting.

[Daryk]

:raises hand:

You're forgiven for making me feel old...

[Cannonshop]

That does give me a bit of an idea to build off that.

If you delay your physical attack weapon until the typical physical attack phase you can use any other weapons in that location in the weapons attack phase and to keep Fist Fire a valid SPA it allows one weapon to be fired from the location in the weapons attack phase when using your physical combat weapon in the weapons attack phase.

Maybe apply a +1 to hit penalty to the physical attacks delayed in this fashion with punching and kicking being denied as normal.

Makes certain Hatchetman and Axman variants be a lot more interesting.

alternately, reversing the numbers between kick and axe as mentioned up-thread (instead of -2 to kicks and 0 for Axes, -2 for axes/swords and 0 for kicks) might be an option, or adjusting the THN's to bring the kick down and the axe up along a sweep.

OR, you can just accept that some weapons aren't great, some attacks don't work so well, and some concepts that look nifty can, while being possible, also be less than a great idea outside of a Solaris match.

[monbvol]

I would not be opposed to a few relatively simple changes.

As you mention moving that -2 from kicks to physical attack weapons(making the sword go to -3) is something I'd be all for.

I'd also cut punch and kick damage in half round down on top of that.

Then Daryk's weapons attack phase with my delay option, well that'd make them about right for me to be a specialist Solaris weapon.

Though I'd probably make it a stacking +1 per weapon fired in my delyaed option going that far.

[Daryk]

Credit where it's due: that was Fear Factory's idea... I just thought it was a good one...  8)

[Cannonshop]

I would not be opposed to a few relatively simple changes.

As you mention moving that -2 from kicks to physical attack weapons(making the sword go to -3) is something I'd be all for.

I'd also cut punch and kick damage in half round down on top of that.

Then Daryk's weapons attack phase with my delay option, well that'd make them about right for me to be a specialist Solaris weapon.

Though I'd probably make it a stacking +1 per weapon fired in my delyaed option going that far.

I don't see any reason to halve the damage from punches or kicks, if you adjust the hit probabilities.

Mace: +3
Kick, Claws: 0
Axe: -1
Sword, Punch: -2

(Grouped by proposed TH mod)  Punching is pretty much direct line, you're not angling up or down, you aren't risking your stability, it SHOULD be easier than swinging a large percentage of mass around.  Missed kicks impose a PSR, that's the thing that makes up for the guaranteed short table, and the very high damage, since this is an attack by your motive system and stability systems, rather than a weapons platform.

Punches also hit on a reduced table, but are executed by systems INTENDED to be used in such a fashion.  I"m hesitant with the Claws thing, since they're a Solaris item like the Mace is, and really shouldn't be that useful outside of staged fights in the ring, but they're still smaller than an axe or mace.  the sword would HAVE to be installed on a unit designed for sword work, and manipulated by arms designed to use it, therefore...effectively it allows punching type damage across the whole body instead of on the punch table, so it's balanced against Axes or kicks with the assigned value.

likewise, since you give up the ability to use arm-mount weapons, punches are balanced at the value listed, since it's a design FEATURE of combat units like the Hunchback, etc.  "Battle Fists"-making it a reliable, non-desperation system.  aka it SHOULD be better, esp. with the lower base damage.

[monbvol]

Punches are still very difficult to land though and are easier to dodge.

As far as halving damage of punching kicking, I think it does have to be or even with those modifiers it is still better to wait for the physical attack phase and go for a punch or kick.  Even with Hatchets/Swords/Whatnot being able to attack in the Weapons Attack phase.

[Cannonshop]

Punches are still very difficult to land though and are easier to dodge.

As far as halving damage of punching kicking, I think it does have to be or even with those modifiers it is still better to wait for the physical attack phase and go for a punch or kick.  Even with Hatchets/Swords/Whatnot being able to attack in the Weapons Attack phase.

think about what you just said.  "punches are difficult to land..."  but when they DO land, it's 1 in 6 going to be on the head-a one-shot kill for anything over a certain weight class, and pretty close to that with good dice, or 2 in 6 vs. most 'mechs medium or lighter from the rear if you're running TSM on something 55 tons or heavier.

IOW a very powerful weapon-when it hits, but not AS powerful as a hatchet or kick.

it's all about balancing things out-melee weapons give more damage, and in my suggested arrangement, the smaller ones fall between a punch, and a kick, while the more powerful weapons (that can shear through massive amounts of armor and structure with relative ease) are more difficult to hit with than a kick.

the rest ends up being about tactical use.  a Hatchet weilding 'mech with TSM has, effectively, three kick attacks, one of which hits on the general table.  A sword hits more often, but you lose a punching attack and it does less damage (so slightly better to-hit probability than a hatchet)

[monbvol]

1 in 6 chances of pilot hits, once mass gets high enough(especially with TSM in the mix) crit checks/outright removal of the head, and no mass required?

Sign me the hell up if those get -2 even if I have to wait until physical attack phase if damage stays unmodified.

That makes something that was already far too good without the -2 and makes it even better.

Physical combat weapons should be easier to connect with, even hatchets, and should do more damage than kicks.  It's both more realistic and better game balance.

[Cannonshop]

1 in 6 chances of pilot hits, once mass gets high enough(especially with TSM in the mix) crit checks/outright removal of the head, and no mass required?

Sign me the hell up if those get -2 even if I have to wait until physical attack phase if damage stays unmodified.

That makes something that was already far too good without the -2 and makes it even better.

Physical combat weapons should be easier to connect with, even hatchets, and should do more damage than kicks.  It's both more realistic and better game balance.

Physical combat weapons aren't integral to the design for the most part-a hatchet is just a club you can weild one-handed, and a mace is just a BIGGER club.  Manipulators/hands however, ARE integral to the design and the unit is balanced for having them.  the trade off should probably be more of a damage increase for melee weapons over limbs, and I wouldn't object to a modest increase using the table I've proposed.

but the fact is, melee weapons are pretty shoddy as a concept from the start, and only not-totally-ridiculous because we're already accepting man-shaped walkers as ultimate ground combat platforms in spite of square-cube law and engineering ridiculousness.

oh, and japanese animation movies, which were the origin of the whole genre.

it's like how the authors insist on everyone using their warships as battering rams when, quite honestly, it makes zero sense to do that (or have it work!) but there has to be a limit on 'rule of kewl' here.  YES, you can (at high risk) try to punch someone's cockpit in.  They are naturally not going to want to let you.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Well, isn't it a simple truth that punch and kick are simply superior to almost all physical weapons? I remember that the only exception is Talons, but it is not the standalone weapon and is a buffer for kick attack. Two attempts to kick can have moderate chance to dismantle the enemy leg, and punch have 1/6 chance to destroy the enemy head(with TSM of course, but you WILL take it if you ever think about melee games, isn't?) and ALSO have innate two attacks, which is the only way to make more than one physical attack in a turn unless you get the melee master ability.

And, with melee master, you can choose to kick twice instead and you have 50% chance to simply neutralize the enemy mech by dismantle a leg. I don't think that two hatchet attacks can neutralize an enemy mech so easily as that.

That said, although I do think that punch is too powerful, but its problem is it can crack the head too easily. Only if it is not that easy to do, then it is not so broken.

Also the physical weapons are too weak as well. They must either costs no slots and tonnage or powerful than the physical weapon. For now they are even weaker than basic punch and kick, but costs tonnage and slots. WTH?

In battletech universe, there are inferior weapons and superior weapons out there. But even having a light rifle is better than having no weapon at all. And you will be penalized to equip a weapon and you are even weaker. Again, WTH?

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

It is also true that punch and kick have some drawbacks, though. Kick have some chance to knockdown if you failed to hit it. Fully utilizing punch requires you to have two functional hand actuator and also don't have any weapons on both of your arm, for if you have a gun on the arm and fired it already on the same turn you can't use the arm to make the punch attack. But... it have 1/6 chance to simply kill the enemy per an attack, and with two attacks you can neutralize it by about 30.55% if you hit both attacks. It is not that easy to hit both attacks but it is also not that easy to land the another physicals as well.

[monbvol]

Physical combat weapons aren't integral to the design for the most part-a hatchet is just a club you can weild one-handed, and a mace is just a BIGGER club.  Manipulators/hands however, ARE integral to the design and the unit is balanced for having them.  the trade off should probably be more of a damage increase for melee weapons over limbs, and I wouldn't object to a modest increase using the table I've proposed.

but the fact is, melee weapons are pretty shoddy as a concept from the start, and only not-totally-ridiculous because we're already accepting man-shaped walkers as ultimate ground combat platforms in spite of square-cube law and engineering ridiculousness.

oh, and japanese animation movies, which were the origin of the whole genre.

it's like how the authors insist on everyone using their warships as battering rams when, quite honestly, it makes zero sense to do that (or have it work!) but there has to be a limit on 'rule of kewl' here.  YES, you can (at high risk) try to punch someone's cockpit in.  They are naturally not going to want to let you.

Physical combat weapons for mechs should still follow certain trends that they provide people with.

In other words I cannot be okay with the idea that a mech that can punch twice simply is more effective than something that has a physical combat weapon and giving punches a -2 only makes that worse.

[Fear Factory]

Just keep things simple: move physical attack weapons into the weapon attack phase and have them force a PSR like a kick. Being able to essentially cause kick damage anywhere, without having to roll a PSR for missing, is very appealing.

EDIT: This would not apply to clubbing attacks, FYI. So you can't use the Slugger SPA to get a free hatchet.

[Cannonshop]

Physical combat weapons for mechs should still follow certain trends that they provide people with.

In other words I cannot be okay with the idea that a mech that can punch twice simply is more effective than something that has a physical combat weapon and giving punches a -2 only makes that worse.

except that trading damage for accuracy IS the paradigm in this game, and has been since the start.  the weapon provides a massive damage increase, naturally it should be less accurate.

[garhkal]

Just keep things simple: move physical attack weapons into the weapon attack phase and have them force a PSR like a kick. Being able to essentially cause kick damage anywhere, without having to roll a PSR for missing, is very appealing.

EDIT: This would not apply to clubbing attacks, FYI. So you can't use the Slugger SPA to get a free hatchet.

I second this.  That alone, makes physical weapons, somewhat more appealing.  IF i hit you and knock you down in the weapons phase with a hatchet, i don't have to then worry about your kicking or punching me.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

I think that sword deserves more love, though.

[monbvol]

except that trading damage for accuracy IS the paradigm in this game, and has been since the start.  the weapon provides a massive damage increase, naturally it should be less accurate.

If that were true then kicks never would have been given -2 nor would Pulse Lasers get -2.  Nor would Swords as current rules exist have a -1.

In fact the list of weapons that do more damage than their standard counterparts but get a to hit bonus would seem to out number the list of weapons that do more damage than their standard counterparts that have to hit penalties.

[Cannonshop]

If that were true then kicks never would have been given -2 nor would Pulse Lasers get -2.  Nor would Swords as current rules exist have a -1.

In fact the list of weapons that do more damage than their standard counterparts but get a to hit bonus would seem to out number the list of weapons that do more damage than their standard counterparts that have to hit penalties.

you forget that Kicks trade off something for that -2.

also, pulse lasers do more damage-within their effective range, but again it's a trade-you get great numbers only by getting into easy range of the other guy's weapons that do EVEN MORE damage.

within grouping:

Autocannon: 20 has shortest range, 2 longest.
Gauss: Light Gauss has a wider 'medium' than Gauss, which has a longer 'medium' than Heavy Gauss.
Missiles: SRMs have bigger warheads than LRMs.

and so on.  The only real break with that pattern are energy weapons, which originally paid for it with heat, until someone decided to favor icebox energy boats with the rules, and of course, Clantech, which does everything better than you do, including things Clanners don't want to do.

for physicals now...

Maces do the most damage, along with Talons, because someone wanted Solaris to look cooler-but they're hard to hit with.
Kicks trade a PSR and leg damage for high damage output.

what does an Axe/hatchet/sword trade?  You're not going to fall over if you miss with those, you're not going to take damage to them in usage, they do large amounts of damage pretty reliably within their effective range.

The only thing you've REALLY convinced me of, is that none of the physical attacks should get a bonus to hit, but that melee weapons should have a slight penalty to use-because they don't have any other drawback.

[monbvol]

Sorry but that is moving the goal posts to me as the statement was

except that trading damage for accuracy IS the paradigm in this game, and has been since the start.  the weapon provides a massive damage increase, naturally it should be less accurate.

Which isn't true.

To be clear I'm not advocating, never have, for physical combat weapons to get a hex range boost.

So comparing range band reductions as a measure of accuracy isn't going to fly as there may be other factors in play to explain that.

If that fails I could go for the X-Pulse branch of the family and still prove my point as the Large X-Pulse does more damage and is more accurate than a standard Large Laser but still has the same range.  Sure it pays for it with more mass and heat but a Hatchet requires paying for it's increased damage with mass and critical slots.

All I'm advocating for is you get a return on investment that frankly is not there if punches and kicks do not have their damage reduced and modifiers adjusted as there is no mass trade off for them.  With my proposal they are still inferior to ranged weapons simply because of the range part granting them more utility and more potential return on investment and punches and kicks still retain some edge case usefulness as opportunity attacks.

[Cannonshop]

Sorry but that is moving the goal posts to me as the statement was
Which isn't true.

To be clear I'm not advocating, never have, for physical combat weapons to get a hex range boost.

So comparing range band reductions as a measure of accuracy isn't going to fly as there may be other factors in play to explain that.

If that fails I could go for the X-Pulse branch of the family and still prove my point as the Large X-Pulse does more damage and is more accurate than a standard Large Laser but still has the same range.  Sure it pays for it with more mass and heat but a Hatchet requires paying for it's increased damage with mass and critical slots.

All I'm advocating for is you get a return on investment that frankly is not there if punches and kicks do not have their damage reduced and modifiers adjusted as there is no mass trade off for them.  With my proposal they are still inferior to ranged weapons simply because of the range part granting them more utility and more potential return on investment and punches and kicks still retain some edge case usefulness as opportunity attacks.

X-pulse is one of the changes I felt was a bad idea along with the other crap from Unbound that made it into MWDA-for exactly that reason; the cost it carries is miniscule and it breaks the basic patterns even worse than Clantech did. (there were actually quite a FEW things suddenly mainstreamed thanks to Wizkids that fit that category-they weren't balanced well before the klikky, and still aren't after it.)

but let's stick to the topic instead of me grognarding, which isn't fun for anyone but me and my arguing partners.

Melee weapons are FINE as they are.  In this case, we've got decades of test data we can look at in the form of experience, including a look at what the rules-changes have been with them-they're actually (aside from the Solaris stuff) pretty well developed and balanced as they are.  same for physical attacks that are, well...not melee weapons but physical attacks. 

Kicks risk tossing you on your ass and damaging yourself, much as DFA does.  Punches as they are right now, have a pretty good chance of not landing, and risk (again) self-damage, and you can't punch with arm mounted weapons-and most 'mechs with arms, mount their primary ranged attacks on the arms (It's a very popular place to put those weapons) while the ones who don't, have to cope with narrow arcs of fire.

it's a pretty narrow selection of situations where you're going to have the opportunity to throw, much less land, a physical attack in the first place, and there's a weight/equipment requirement if you want the 'decapitate in a single blow with your fist' ability (TSM, active, on a unit with 55 or more tons mass).  as for Melee weapons-they're mostly tonnage sinks and damage sinks to keep arm criticals from nailing something genuinely useful most of the time, or they're 'solaris specials', weapons that are really only useful in an arena to please crowds.

The rules are fine as they are, unless you're min/maxing, in which case, why are you playing Inner Sphere to begin with, there's a whole selection of factions made for minmaxing-the Clans (Which are also really an 'easy mode' for play, having with the whole scientist caste thing, proven they do everything better than the Inner Sphere does, even things they are fluffed as being opposed to doing, CEWS is a much, much, better C3i, even.)

I suppose when the devs decide to give the Clans Melee weapons, they'll have something like a -5 on their numbers and deliver twice the damage of a kick for half the mass and a quarter the crits or something.

[monbvol]

X-pulse is one of the changes I felt was a bad idea along with the other crap from Unbound that made it into MWDA-for exactly that reason; the cost it carries is miniscule and it breaks the basic patterns even worse than Clantech did. (there were actually quite a FEW things suddenly mainstreamed thanks to Wizkids that fit that category-they weren't balanced well before the klikky, and still aren't after it.)

but let's stick to the topic instead of me grognarding, which isn't fun for anyone but me and my arguing partners.

Melee weapons are FINE as they are.  In this case, we've got decades of test data we can look at in the form of experience, including a look at what the rules-changes have been with them-they're actually (aside from the Solaris stuff) pretty well developed and balanced as they are.  same for physical attacks that are, well...not melee weapons but physical attacks. 

Kicks risk tossing you on your ass and damaging yourself, much as DFA does.  Punches as they are right now, have a pretty good chance of not landing, and risk (again) self-damage, and you can't punch with arm mounted weapons-and most 'mechs with arms, mount their primary ranged attacks on the arms (It's a very popular place to put those weapons) while the ones who don't, have to cope with narrow arcs of fire.

it's a pretty narrow selection of situations where you're going to have the opportunity to throw, much less land, a physical attack in the first place, and there's a weight/equipment requirement if you want the 'decapitate in a single blow with your fist' ability (TSM, active, on a unit with 55 or more tons mass).  as for Melee weapons-they're mostly tonnage sinks and damage sinks to keep arm criticals from nailing something genuinely useful most of the time, or they're 'solaris specials', weapons that are really only useful in an arena to please crowds.

The rules are fine as they are, unless you're min/maxing, in which case, why are you playing Inner Sphere to begin with, there's a whole selection of factions made for minmaxing-the Clans (Which are also really an 'easy mode' for play, having with the whole scientist caste thing, proven they do everything better than the Inner Sphere does, even things they are fluffed as being opposed to doing, CEWS is a much, much, better C3i, even.)

I suppose when the devs decide to give the Clans Melee weapons, they'll have something like a -5 on their numbers and deliver twice the damage of a kick for half the mass and a quarter the crits or something.

Part of my point is that there are trade offs that exist for doing increased damage and have since I started playing the game 25-26 years ago and almost certainly pre-date that.  Which is fine.  The game would be boring if it didn't have multiple options for trade offs.

Also punches have no chance of self damage.  It isn't punching when trying to remove narc pods or when trying to deal with swarming infantry.

Kicks are absolutely free.  Sure they risk a PSR, which may in turn result in a fall, but that is such a negligble trade off versus what you have to invest to get a hatchet that does the same damage, isn't as likely to hit, and will not concentrate damage in the same way repeated kicks can without serious luck.  Talons have some hope here just because they do enhance kicks and Death From Above damage but that again just highlights how good kicking is as an option versus anything that isn't kicking or punching.

Punches to get full effect from yeah you have to invest two criticals as it is technically optional to mount two arm actuators.  No mass, no heat, and no to hit modifier either direction.  Hatchets as currently exist can't be used without Fist Fire if a weapon in the same arm is used and there are a few mechs that do mount ranged weapons in the same arm as a hatchet so that restriction is a wash.  So again hatchets come out really poor in comparison.  Claws and Retractable Blade optional rules help some but unfortunately those both just help highlight how good punching and kicking are on their own.

As far as things being unchanged as evidence of things being fine/accepted, well we both know that isn't always because something works fine as is under current rules.

So yeah for me the trade offs are too much for most physical combat weapons versus what you can get for free, or at least close enough to free.

[garhkal]

The only thing you've REALLY convinced me of, is that none of the physical attacks should get a bonus to hit, but that melee weapons should have a slight penalty to use-because they don't have any other drawback.

So you don't think paying 1 ton, and 1 crit for it, is a 'penalty'??

[Daryk]

I've seen way too many missed kicks result in falls to count that risk as "negligible".  And I haven't even played a game against Hellbie yet!

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

As I said above, we all know that there are inferior and superior weapons in the battletech universe, but no one cause serious penalty for having some weaponry except for physical weapons.

For example, if you have a LRM-20 but swap it to four LRM-5 and spend the spare 2 ton and 1 critical, it is only the matter of min-maxing.

Swap the large pulse laser to clans large pulse laser is, again, only the matter of min-maxing.

But the physical weapons are different. Think about you have an Atlas and:

With a hatchet
-You need to spend 7 tons and 7 slots.
-Hatchet attack uses normal location table, thus only able to hit the head by 2.7% which is same as the other weapons.
-Hatchet's damage is a twofold compared by punch.

Without a hatchet
-You have 7 tons and 7 slots to spend any other device.
-You are still use the punch, which comes with
--Two attacks
--upper location table, which strikes the head by only 1/6(around 16.66%) per an attack.
--A half of damage compared by hatchet.

Sure, 'the other weapons' by spend 7 tons/slots would be some kind of min-maxing. But, even if hatchet comes for 0 tons and 0 slot, I doubt that it is better than punch - or even compared by it. A weapon can be better than an another weapon, but why no weapons at all is need to be the better choice than picking a weapon? Even have a light rifle would be an advantage over no ranged weapon at all, but only have limbs is better than also have a hatchet.

The weapons are meant to neutralize the enemy. Some of them are not but many of them, especially for weapons that can't do anything but damage stuffs does.

You know, one 20 point of damage is actually better than two 10 point of damages, for one 20 can have the better chance to punch through one location. But, what if two damages have much better insta-kill chance?

Even without the very high insta-kill chance I do think that punches are still powerful, though, but without that then it would be a fair game with hatchet - one can simply ignore the leg and one can have better chance to pierce the armor. However too high insta-kill chance(or at least damage the enemy pilot even without TSM) makes punch too valueable over the melee weapons. Its total damage output is not less than hatchet either(although high one-shot do have the advantage over same sum but two or more of blows, as I said).

[Cannonshop]

So you don't think paying 1 ton, and 1 crit for it, is a 'penalty'??

nope, it's a choice.  Go with the atlas example for a second, 100 ton 'mech, with a headcapper/torso destroyer/limb remover weapon that costs zero heat, does not include explosive ammunition bomb in the torso, (Next to the engine) and does not inflict a risky PSR to remain standing.  for the weight of an AC/2 minus ammunition.

and that's at the TOP end of the mass/crit price.  since hatchets scale by 'mech size/weight, and do Tonnage/5 damage (Minus TSM which eats up a lot of critical spaces, to be sure, but doesn't weigh anything) and using standard Battletech rounding, let's see...a fairly significant amount of damage-dealing for anything bigger than a light 'mech, that doesn't cost heat to use, doesn't explode, and doesn't force the user to PSR.

is it a great weapon or even a resonable main weapon? hardly.  Unless you're doing a solaris duel, trotting in a Charger, or some other bizarre circumstance, physical attacks aren't a primary concern, they're an opportunity item, and specialist 'mechs probably shouldn't be looked at as something to emulate unless you're playing a theme.

again, arena fights or similar, or playing a faction that has more than the usual lack of common sense and strategic vision, in which case, you take the thing as structured because the rules WORK.

In a previous iteration of the rules, Hatchets hit on the punch table. this needs to be kept in mind, because that WAS a massive advantage, and it was also unbalanced as hell.  Very few of the suggestions in this thread don't further unbalance what's already a gimmick.  I think possibly the only ones thus far, would be moving melee weapons to the weapons fire phase of a given round, but that needs testing to make sure there aren't cheezeball ways to exploit the hell out of it that aren't immediately apparent.

[monbvol]

nope, it's a choice.  Go with the atlas example for a second, 100 ton 'mech, with a headcapper/torso destroyer/limb remover weapon that costs zero heat, does not include explosive ammunition bomb in the torso, (Next to the engine) and does not inflict a risky PSR to remain standing.  for the weight of an AC/2 minus ammunition.

and that's at the TOP end of the mass/crit price.  since hatchets scale by 'mech size/weight, and do Tonnage/5 damage (Minus TSM which eats up a lot of critical spaces, to be sure, but doesn't weigh anything) and using standard Battletech rounding, let's see...a fairly significant amount of damage-dealing for anything bigger than a light 'mech, that doesn't cost heat to use, doesn't explode, and doesn't force the user to PSR.

is it a great weapon or even a resonable main weapon? hardly.  Unless you're doing a solaris duel, trotting in a Charger, or some other bizarre circumstance, physical attacks aren't a primary concern, they're an opportunity item, and specialist 'mechs probably shouldn't be looked at as something to emulate unless you're playing a theme.

again, arena fights or similar, or playing a faction that has more than the usual lack of common sense and strategic vision, in which case, you take the thing as structured because the rules WORK.

In a previous iteration of the rules, Hatchets hit on the punch table. this needs to be kept in mind, because that WAS a massive advantage, and it was also unbalanced as hell.  Very few of the suggestions in this thread don't further unbalance what's already a gimmick.  I think possibly the only ones thus far, would be moving melee weapons to the weapons fire phase of a given round, but that needs testing to make sure there aren't cheezeball ways to exploit the hell out of it that aren't immediately apparent.

Correction a Hatchet for a 100 ton mech is 7 tons and 7 critical slots.  So the weight of an AC-2 and ammo but with more critical slots that any one of which gets damaged makes the Hatchet useless.

Compared to the zero heat, no mass, critical slots you are required to take anyway of a kick that is -2 to hit and that is not a good trade off.

Ultimately everything is a choice though.  It is just a question of if the trade offs are worth it.  For most physical combat weapons it just is not worth it versus what you can get for free.

[garhkal]

Which is why we're discussing shifting the melee weapons to being in the combat phase, to make that trade off, better.

[monbvol]

Which is a good start that I can get behind and I'm certainly willing to be flexible on the to hit modifiers in how they need to be shifted around but a sticking point for me is punches and kicks need their damage reduced on top of that.

[Cannonshop]

Which is a good start that I can get behind and I'm certainly willing to be flexible on the to hit modifiers in how they need to be shifted around but a sticking point for me is punches and kicks need their damage reduced on top of that.

Then you're dropping your melee weapons (the two are linked).

[monbvol]

I don't see why I'd have to lower melee weapon damage, except for Claws and Talons which wouldn't bother me, if punching and kicking damage were reduced.

The kind of extra force you can get from the combination of rotational force, concentrating force in the case of thrusting weapons such as lances, or the combination of the two factors is not insignificant and would seem very much in line for other choices you can make instead for the same tonnage.

Paying weight and critical slots is a well established and intrinsic part of the game for the trade off of doing more damage after all.

[Cannonshop]

I don't see why I'd have to lower melee weapon damage, except for Claws and Talons which wouldn't bother me, if punching and kicking damage were reduced.

The kind of extra force you can get from the combination of rotational force, concentrating force in the case of thrusting weapons such as lances, or the combination of the two factors is not insignificant and would seem very much in line for other choices you can make instead for the same tonnage.

Paying weight and critical slots is a well established and intrinsic part of the game for the trade off of doing more damage after all.

the equations governing your melee weapon damages are the same as the equations governing punches and kicks.  (Hatchets apply the same damage as a kick, but to a larger target zone, which set the pattern for the rest.)

in short, you have to change how the whole thing works for the purpose of nerfing a set of attacks you don't care for.  Melee weapons and physical attacks are the only systems in the game where your damage is contingent on your unit's mass, and they're based on multipliers.  IOW you're asking to add additional calculations for an asthetic reason.

[monbvol]

the equations governing your melee weapon damages are the same as the equations governing punches and kicks.  (Hatchets apply the same damage as a kick, but to a larger target zone, which set the pattern for the rest.)

in short, you have to change how the whole thing works for the purpose of nerfing a set of attacks you don't care for.  Melee weapons and physical attacks are the only systems in the game where your damage is contingent on your unit's mass, and they're based on multipliers.  IOW you're asking to add additional calculations for an asthetic reason.

Considering how few numbers would have to be changed I fail to see the problem.

To illustrate the problem more clearly I'll set out a question that will require you to set aside your well known bias and just based off the numbers if replacements were not an issue are you really saying that you'd take an Inner Sphere Gauss Rifle instead of a Clan Gauss Rifle?

I can come up with other examples if I really need to but I'll admit they'd be a lot more theoretical than that example.

That's my issue.  I'm being asked to pay a weight and critical slot penalty for something that I can get for less weight and fewer criticals that also better concentrates damage when it does hit.

[Retry]

If you want a quick fix (nerf) to punches and kicks might I suggest doing them by weight class?

Ultralight: 2 damage kicks, 1 damage punches
Light: 4 damage kicks, 2 damage punches
Medium: 6 damage kicks, 3 damage punches
Heavy: 8 damage kicks, 4 damage punches
Assault: 10 damage kicks, 5 damage punches
Superheavy: 12 damage kicks, 6 damage punches

Maybe a slight bonus for being a Quad for being stable mule-kicking platforms, and also because they don't have access to those fancy weapons and they usually get the short end of the stick?

All I could come up with in the span of 5 seconds.  Honestly, super CQC never really comes up in my games so I don't have much to say on the subject.

[Cannonshop]

Considering how few numbers would have to be changed I fail to see the problem.

To illustrate the problem more clearly I'll set out a question that will require you to set aside your well known bias and just based off the numbers if replacements were not an issue are you really saying that you'd take an Inner Sphere Gauss Rifle instead of a Clan Gauss Rifle?

I can come up with other examples if I really need to but I'll admit they'd be a lot more theoretical than that example.

That's my issue.  I'm being asked to pay a weight and critical slot penalty for something that I can get for less weight and fewer criticals that also better concentrates damage when it does hit.

and your issue is a preference issue, Monbvol.  it's the same argument of "Why would I be carrying this explosive ammunition and filling up all these crits and all this mass, when I can get infinite shots with better numbers on a lighter system that occupies less space using an ERPPC or Clan LPL or X-pulse laser and double heat sinks?"

[monbvol]

and your issue is a preference issue, Monbvol.  it's the same argument of "Why would I be carrying this explosive ammunition and filling up all these crits and all this mass, when I can get infinite shots with better numbers on a lighter system that occupies less space using an ERPPC or Clan LPL or X-pulse laser and double heat sinks?"

If only it were that simple.  I mean after all the Hatchet doesn't have explosive ammo so it's not even like I have that to complain about.

Also for the record yeah I wouldn't complain if the ACs went on a diet in terms of both mass and critical slots but I can at least appreciate the 2's unmatched reach for it's tech level, the 10's being almost close enough that it does at least make a reasonable choice as an ICE tank's main weapon, and the 20's unmatched for a long period of lore concentrated damage.  The 5 though, you may have me there as that is the posterchild of the ACs of something that you can replace with almost anything else and be better off.

Not always an energy weapon though just to be clear.

Liam's Ghost enlightened me pretty early on about the small not immediately obvious benefits of SRMs and LRMs too.

So yeah I can deal with subpar or live with trade offs if they are reasonable, especially in the form of things that can explode, as long as I am getting enough for them.

Since I can get everything a hatchet offer for close enough to free I do take extra exception to the current state of affairs.

Indeed what makes it so much worse is in all those other cases I'm still having to take on some weight, incur more heat more often than not, spend more C-Bills(at least in the near term), and will almost certainly wind up with a higher BV.

In this case if I were to design two mechs identical in every way, empty of all gear, same armor distribution, and possibly underweight but then gave one a hatchet and ran them through a bunch of fights where the one with the hatchet may only hatchet for attacks I would not be surprised if despite the one with the hatchet with it's higher BV failed to win more than 50% of the time.

[garhkal]

If you want a quick fix (nerf) to punches and kicks might I suggest doing them by weight class?

Ultralight: 2 damage kicks, 1 damage punches
Light: 4 damage kicks, 2 damage punches
Medium: 6 damage kicks, 3 damage punches
Heavy: 8 damage kicks, 4 damage punches
Assault: 10 damage kicks, 5 damage punches
Superheavy: 12 damage kicks, 6 damage punches

Maybe a slight bonus for being a Quad for being stable mule-kicking platforms, and also because they don't have access to those fancy weapons and they usually get the short end of the stick?

All I could come up with in the span of 5 seconds.  Honestly, super CQC never really comes up in my games so I don't have much to say on the subject.

What would count for each of those classes though?

[Retry]

What would count for each of those classes though?

You'd use the canonical weight brackets.

Ultralight: <20t
Light: 20-35t
Medium: 40-55t
Heavy: 60-75t
Assault: 80-100t
Superheavy: >100t

[Cannonshop]

If only it were that simple.  I mean after all the Hatchet doesn't have explosive ammo so it's not even like I have that to complain about.

Also for the record yeah I wouldn't complain if the ACs went on a diet in terms of both mass and critical slots but I can at least appreciate the 2's unmatched reach for it's tech level, the 10's being almost close enough that it does at least make a reasonable choice as an ICE tank's main weapon, and the 20's unmatched for a long period of lore concentrated damage.  The 5 though, you may have me there as that is the posterchild of the ACs of something that you can replace with almost anything else and be better off.

Not always an energy weapon though just to be clear.

Liam's Ghost enlightened me pretty early on about the small not immediately obvious benefits of SRMs and LRMs too.

So yeah I can deal with subpar or live with trade offs if they are reasonable, especially in the form of things that can explode, as long as I am getting enough for them.

Since I can get everything a hatchet offer for close enough to free I do take extra exception to the current state of affairs.

Indeed what makes it so much worse is in all those other cases I'm still having to take on some weight, incur more heat more often than not, spend more C-Bills(at least in the near term), and will almost certainly wind up with a higher BV.

In this case if I were to design two mechs identical in every way, empty of all gear, same armor distribution, and possibly underweight but then gave one a hatchet and ran them through a bunch of fights where the one with the hatchet may only hatchet for attacks I would not be surprised if despite the one with the hatchet with it's higher BV failed to win more than 50% of the time.

design two 'mechs with identical chassis, armor, engine, one gets energy weapons with enough cooling to maintain, the other gets autocannons and...you will never have enough ammo, or critical spaces.

some weapons are simply going to be sub-par, depending on where you set your limit this can be a broad range (autocannons vs. energy) or a narrow one (Melee attacks).

thing is, a Hatchet or sword doesn't require a psr if you miss, doesn't risk falling down, and so on, but DOES inflict a significant level of damage without going banana heels on a bad roll.

[Daryk]

*snip*
In this case if I were to design two mechs identical in every way, empty of all gear, same armor distribution, and possibly underweight but then gave one a hatchet and ran them through a bunch of fights where the one with the hatchet may only hatchet for attacks I would not be surprised if despite the one with the hatchet with it's higher BV failed to win more than 50% of the time.

If the non-hatchet 'mech is allowed to kick and the hatchet one isn't, the hatchet one would probably lose more often than 50% of the time.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

If the non-hatchet 'mech is allowed to kick and the hatchet one isn't, the hatchet one would probably lose more often than 50% of the time.

I seconded to it. I don't think that the mech with hatchet can beat its twin, without very good luck.

Even for the worst situation, and even without TSM, a mech with no hatchet can dismantle the enemy leg with up to seven hits. It is perfectly guaranteed, and it is actually the worst case and usually around 5~6 kicks can end the opponent. And remember that it only assumes that there is really no other weapon at all so you have to remove entire of armor by only the physical attack.

Hatchet? For a 100 ton mech, only head has lower armor than its damage(20). Hit the head means it is killed instantly, but that's only a 2.7%. I don't think that you can hit the head during up to seven kicks its leg without a pure luck.

Only for insta-kill? The opponent also opt to punch. Two punch attacks have around 30% chance to hit the head at least once. Even without TSM you can kill the enemy with two hits, and damaged head internal also means you have the chance to destroy the cockpit system before completely destroy head internal.

With TSM? Well, then hatchet can make some damage against its twin, for only Center Torso and Legs are able to withstand 40 damage once. But meanwhile its twin neutralize the hatchet sibling with only three leg attacks - Only two hits of TSM'd kick is need to destroy a leg so it is 50% chance to only destroy it by two attacks and even if it is failed the third hit inevitably destroys the leg and neutralize the twin.

The above are only think about the face-to-face situation. Then what about the backstab? On rear side, punch attacks are ignores leg, and it have 50% chance to hit either torso(rear). With head, which is a weak spot, it means a punch attack can attack good location by 2/3, while hatchet have 1/2.

In either way, I don't think that hatchet can win. Or win with enough instance to be viable. It's no more than a handicapped match.

So, what about to have a fight with a 100 ton mech with hatchet and a 75 ton mech with two functional hands instead? It would be better, if we consider fair play.

[monbvol]

design two 'mechs with identical chassis, armor, engine, one gets energy weapons with enough cooling to maintain, the other gets autocannons and...you will never have enough ammo, or critical spaces.

some weapons are simply going to be sub-par, depending on where you set your limit this can be a broad range (autocannons vs. energy) or a narrow one (Melee attacks).

thing is, a Hatchet or sword doesn't require a psr if you miss, doesn't risk falling down, and so on, but DOES inflict a significant level of damage without going banana heels on a bad roll.

I still consider energy versus ACs something of an Apples versus Oranges situation though because as I mentioned you are still making certain trades to do that and the AC armed mechs, well as much as the energy mechs would be at an advantage I wouldn't expect their chances of winning to be altered as much as the scenario I outlined.  It also introduces a lot of variables which my scenario explicitly eliminates.

Or to put it another way you cannot choose to make a mech unable to ever kick under any circumstance, sure you can make it unlikely by putting useful weapons in the legs but that option is there.

That PSR for failing you keep going on about is simply not a serious drawback to me because any thought put into when to kick does a lot to mitigate it.

For punching at best you can make a mech bad at it from the get go but if you do you remove any choice to mount a melee weapon as well.

If the non-hatchet 'mech is allowed to kick and the hatchet one isn't, the hatchet one would probably lose more often than 50% of the time.

To me if hatchets were fine and the PSR for failing kicks were a sufficient drawback that simply should not happen under my proposed scenario.

Victory should go to the hatchet armed mech more often than not and even if you changed the melee weapons to weapon attack phase and nothing else I don't think it would improve the win rate enough.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

And I can't think the way how hatchet would win. How it's ever possible if both of them are have the same tonnage?

Again, I suggest that make a match with a mech with hatchet and a mech with hand but have around 75 to 80% of the mass of the mech with hatchet. With the same tonnage it is too unfair for the hatchet mech.

[monbvol]

Which is at least part of my point, you shouldn't have to introduce such a handicap to get a win rate of 50-55% for the hatchet armed mech even when all it can use is the hatchet.

If I tossed in double blind and a redundant hatchet to improve durability and have a back up in case an arm is forced off I'd still not consider it likely for the hatchet armed mech to get to the 50-55% win rate I believe it should have in my proposed scenario.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Well, but I don't think that hatchet have much chance to win if it is not the handicapped match. Having a hatchet and can't use the other physical is already the serious handicap. Only the good luck will give its day, or it is surely an one-sided game.

By the way, will the mechs also have the other weapons? Such as lasers and ACs? Else they are only fight with the bare hands/legs or hatchet? What about the tonnage? And they are fully armored for their tonnage, isn't?

[monbvol]

I expressly set the conditions of the scenario and designs to avoid introducing the variables of ranged weapons and ranged combat and prove that punching and kicking are too good versus melee weapons.

If punch and kick damage were halved but melee weapons being left where they currently are, as I proposed, along with the move for everything but claws and talons to the weapons attack phase I think the odds would shift enough that we could start looking at adjusting to hit modifiers to fine tune to get the 50-55% win rate under my scenario that I believe such weapons should be able to deliver under the specified conditions.

[Hellraiser]

I don't think we should reduce Punch/Kick damage.

But I DO think that improving Hatchet (Melee Weapon) Damage might be an interesting idea.

Combine that with the altered To-Hit Numbers that were mentioned above & then you get some solid options.

For instance,  Change Axe to be Triple Punch so it actually hits Harder than a Kick & make it more accurate than a kick & NOW you get an some interesting choices.


Using Atlas 100 ton mech as example.

Punch = -0TH, 10Pts,  Upper Table
Kick = -2TH, 20 Pts,  Lower Table
Axe = -1 TH, 20 Pts,  Full Body.


New Options

Punch =  -1TH,  10 Pts,  Upper Table
Kick = -0TH,  20 Pts,  Lower Table
Axe = -1TH,  30 Pts,  Full Body
Sword = -2TH,  20 Ponts,  Full Body

Now investing the tonnage into a weapon makes some sense.
Its more accurate &/OR, it hits harder, and its full body still.

[Wrangler]

I always thought when people wanted to do more with the hatchet was to have a Myomer cord attach to a hatchet and have the ability of the pilot just throw the thing at an opponent and then either reel it back in or yanked out of whatever they struck its well in there good.

[Cannonshop]

I always thought when people wanted to do more with the hatchet was to have a Myomer cord attach to a hatchet and have the ability of the pilot just throw the thing at an opponent and then either reel it back in or yanked out of whatever they struck its well in there good.

That would end up needing to be an entirely new weapon.

[monbvol]

I don't think we should reduce Punch/Kick damage.

But I DO think that improving Hatchet (Melee Weapon) Damage might be an interesting idea.

Combine that with the altered To-Hit Numbers that were mentioned above & then you get some solid options.

For instance,  Change Axe to be Triple Punch so it actually hits Harder than a Kick & make it more accurate than a kick & NOW you get an some interesting choices.


Using Atlas 100 ton mech as example.

Punch = -0TH, 10Pts,  Upper Table
Kick = -2TH, 20 Pts,  Lower Table
Axe = -1 TH, 20 Pts,  Full Body.


New Options

Punch =  -1TH,  10 Pts,  Upper Table
Kick = -0TH,  20 Pts,  Lower Table
Axe = -1TH,  30 Pts,  Full Body
Sword = -2TH,  20 Ponts,  Full Body

Now investing the tonnage into a weapon makes some sense.
Its more accurate &/OR, it hits harder, and its full body still.

Trouble with increasing melee weapon damage is it threatens to go too far the other way very easily, and I'd say it would unless TSM rules were modified.

Because a Hatchet that hits for 60 damage is a very serious threat to even the most heavily armored mech.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

If you want to increase the damage of the physical weapon, I'd rather suggest to allow to use it with punch/kicks in the same turn. It would increase the overall damage output but it does not making it an one-hatchet mech.

Else, Melee Master is your friend, sir! You don't need to bend the rule, and what you need is just add a SPA on the pilot. Although you can also kick two times in a turn with the same SPA.

[Daryk]

*snip*
Because a Hatchet that hits for 60 damage is a very serious threat to even the most heavily armored mech.

Heck, the 40 point one possible now is bad enough...

[Hellraiser]

Its not as bad as the 40Pt kick however.

Which is the point.

Hatchets are no where near as good as the basic Punch/Kick & yet they cost tonnage.

[Hellraiser]

Trouble with increasing melee weapon damage is it threatens to go too far the other way very easily, and I'd say it would unless TSM rules were modified.

Because a Hatchet that hits for 60 damage is a very serious threat to even the most heavily armored mech.

You pay 7 tons for a weapon with 0 range that takes away your ability to Kick/Punch.............. damn right it should be a serious threat!

Look at everything your giving up for it.

For that same tonnage you can have a 40 point Kick with a better to hit # & two to 3x the # of PSR chances depending if you crit that leg too, AND a 7 Ton PPC/ERPPC that allows you to actually shoot something while closing
OR, a battery of 7 ML that allows you to crit seek multiple times after tearing something open with said Kick & also inflict 35 damage if you end up further away than Adjacent by chance.

Having the ability to cut open the chest of the biggest mech might actually make the increased BV & tonnage loss worth it.

[monbvol]

You pay 7 tons for a weapon with 0 range that takes away your ability to Kick/Punch.............. damn right it should be a serious threat!

Preaching to the choir but even so there is such a thing as too good.  It is why I think the better solution is to drop punch/kick damage instead of increase melee weapon damage.

Look at everything your giving up for it.

For that same tonnage you can have a 40 point Kick with a better to hit # & two to 3x the # of PSR chances depending if you crit that leg too, AND a 7 Ton PPC/ERPPC that allows you to actually shoot something while closing
OR, a battery of 7 ML that allows you to crit seek multiple times after tearing something open with said Kick & also inflict 35 damage if you end up further away than Adjacent by chance.

Having the ability to cut open the chest of the biggest mech might actually make the increased BV & tonnage loss worth it.

Well it's been long known ranged weapons are superior options to melee weapons and that actually does not bother me because that is a point I agree with Cannonshop on, melee weapons should be niche weapons.  Dangerous in that niche to be sure, better than punch/kick as well, but still inferior to ranged weapons.

So for me it's be a progression of punch/claw<kick/talon<remaining melee weapons<ranged weapons

[garhkal]

If you want to increase the damage of the physical weapon, I'd rather suggest to allow to use it with punch/kicks in the same turn. It would increase the overall damage output but it does not making it an one-hatchet mech.

Else, Melee Master is your friend, sir! You don't need to bend the rule, and what you need is just add a SPA on the pilot. Although you can also kick two times in a turn with the same SPA.

great idea.  Punches should be allowed in the round you try a hatchet.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Also, for increases +50% damage to a hatchet attack, it reminds me the talons. Although it is clans exclusive, but it increases +50% damage to the kick attack, means that a TSM'd kick with talons can almost dismantle the leg of the enemy mech with same tonnage, barely remains the internal structure. For example, an 100 tons mech with talons and TSM can make 60 damage on a kick attack, and if a fully armored 100 tons mech is hit by it one of its leg only have 3 point of internal remaining(remove 42/42 armor and damaging 18/21 internal). Only if the leg was suffered at least 3 point of damage before then the leg is broken instantly.

Talons requires same tonnage with hatchet, although it only requires 4 criticals.

[Hellraiser]

Also, for increases +50% damage to a hatchet attack, it reminds me the talons. Although it is clans exclusive, but it increases +50% damage to the kick attack, means that a TSM'd kick with talons can almost dismantle the leg of the enemy mech with same tonnage, barely remains the internal structure. For example, an 100 tons mech with talons and TSM can make 60 damage on a kick attack, and if a fully armored 100 tons mech is hit by it one of its leg only have 3 point of internal remaining(remove 42/42 armor and damaging 18/21 internal). Only if the leg was suffered at least 3 point of damage before then the leg is broken instantly.

Talons requires same tonnage with hatchet, although it only requires 4 criticals.

So we already have a weapon that does one I'm suggesting....... only Better.

Kicks already rock & then you add 50% to them.   Yeah, every mech should have them.

[Sockmonkey]

Mech scale boomerang?

Rocket Fists?

There was the boomfist. Worked like the bang sticks divers use to kill sharks.
A stubby barrel attached to the mech's arm that went off on impact. used ammo but was pretty light. I forget the specific stats though. Had a chance to punch right through to the internals like AP ammo.
As for axes, yes the weight should count but they shouldn't take up crit space if it's actually held in the hand. Otherwise why would you need intact hand actuators to use it?
Swords shouldn't even be a thing outside of Solaris matches unless it's a vibroblade, because edges are garbage against hard armor.
To un-nerf the axe, give the option to wield it with both hands for higher damage.

[dgorsman]

Not sure if it was mentioned yet, but one more thing that would help even out hatchets (and maybe other mounted physical weapons) is better physical durability i.e. able to take multiple critical hits instead of just one.  Say, up to half rounded down.